Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2025 Mar 12:2025:7206112.
doi: 10.1155/bmri/7206112. eCollection 2025.

The Role of Neutrophil CD11b Compared to Neutrophil CD64 as an Early Diagnostic, Monitoring, and Prognostic Sepsis Marker in Neonatal ICUs: Case-Control-Methodological Study

Heba E Hashem  1 , Wafaa O Ahmed  1 , Safeya H Hassan  1
Affiliations

The Role of Neutrophil CD11b Compared to Neutrophil CD64 as an Early Diagnostic, Monitoring, and Prognostic Sepsis Marker in Neonatal ICUs: Case-Control-Methodological Study

Heba E Hashem et al. Biomed Res Int. .

Abstract

Background: Early diagnosis and treatment of neonatal sepsis are crucial to cut off its major medical consequences: lifelong morbidities, neurodevelopmental disabilities, and a high number of neonatal mortalities. Aim of the Work: This study is aimed at determining the diagnostic and prognostic performance of CD11b as a sepsis biomarker for detecting neonatal sepsis at early stages compared to nCD64 and the other conventional sepsis parameters. Methods: Two hundred eleven neonates were enrolled from three Egyptian neonatal ICUs (NICUs), and they were classified into two main groups: the control group (n = 101) and the sepsis group (n = 110). Enrolled neonates were subjected to full sepsis screening, including complete blood count (CBC), C-reactive protein (CRP), blood cultures, and flow cytometry analysis for both CD64 and CD11b on the neutrophil surface (results represented as a percentage (percent) and mean fluorescent intensity (MFI) units for either biomarker). Results: nCD64% (median = 44.15%) was significantly enhanced in the sepsis group compared to the controls (median = 25%), achieving 90.8% specificity, 92.8% sensitivity, and AUC = 0.894, respectively. CD64 MFI and CD11b MFI could differentiate between sepsis and control groups but with low undesirable diagnostic performance (sensitivity: 72.5% and 59.1%; specificity: 54.4% and 69.4%; AUC: 0.634 and 0.144, respectively). CD11b% could not discriminate between sepsis and control neonates (sensitivity and specificity of 31.8% and 73.6%, respectively) with an AUC of 0.405. hs-CRP had moderate diagnostic performance, achieving sensitivity and specificity of 69% and 78.15%, respectively, and AUC = 0.586. ROC analysis showed that combined hs-CRP and CD64% results had the highest sensitivity and specificity in the current study, being 93.9% and 97.2%, with AUC = 0.938, respectively. Conclusion: CD64%, CD64 MFI, CD11b MFI, and hs-CRP are increased in neonates with sepsis comparable to the controls. CD64% has a superior diagnostic performance comparable to nCD11b and hs-CRP. Combined nCD64 with hs-CRP measurement can provide rapid and accurate diagnostic modality for sepsis diagnosis in correlation with the patient's clinical condition and context with the results of other hematological indices; neutrophil CD64 can be routinely applicable in NICUs for better sepsis management. It is statistically evident that nCD11b is less ideal compared to nCD64 as a diagnostic, prognostic, or monitoring sepsis marker.

Keywords: biomarkers; diagnostic; inflammatory; neonates; neutrophil CD11b; neutrophil CD64; sepsis.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Box plot of CD11b%, CD11b intensity, CD64%, CD64 intensity, and hs-CRP in the three studied groups.
Figure 2
Figure 2
ROC curve analysis of mentioned parameters for discriminating patients with sepsis from those without.
Figure 3
Figure 3
Blood culture results in sepsis patients.
Figure 4
Figure 4
ROC curve analysis for the studied biomarkers between clinically and documented sepsis subgroups.
See this image and copyright information in PMC

Similar articles

See all similar articles

References

    1. McGovern M., Giannoni E., Kuester H., et al. Challenges in developing a consensus definition of neonatal sepsis. Pediatric Research . 2020;88(1):14–26. doi: 10.1038/s41390-020-0785-x. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Fleischmann-Struzek C., Goldfarb D. M., Schlattmann P., Schlapbach L. J., Reinhart K., Kissoon N. The global burden of paediatric and neonatal sepsis: a systematic review. The Lancet Respiratory Medicine . 2018;6(3):223–230. doi: 10.1016/S2213-2600(18)30063-8. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Wynn J. L. Defining neonatal sepsis. Current Opinion in Pediatrics . 2016;28(2):135–140. doi: 10.1097/MOP.0000000000000315. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Chan G. J., Lee A. C. C., Baqui A. H., Tan J., Black R. E. Risk of early-onset neonatal infection with maternal infection or colonization: a global systematic review and meta-analysis. PLoS Medicine . 2013;10(8) doi: 10.1371/journal.pmed.1001502.e1001502 - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Sastry S. A., Deepashree R. Essentials of Hospital Infection Control . Jaypee Brothers Medical Publishers; 2019.