Serum antibodies to exotoxin A and type-specific lipopolysaccharide were measured by passive hemagglutination in 52 patients with Pseudomonas aeruginosa septicemia. Their comparative protective activities were evaluated by relating the titers of each at the onset of bacteremia to subsequent outcome. High acute serum antitoxin and antilipopolysaccharide titers (log2 reciprocal mean titers greater than 5) were associated with survival (76% of 17 with high vs. 46% of 24 with low antitoxin titers, P = 0.05; 85% of 13 with high vs. 48% of 29 with low antilipopolysaccharide titers, P = 0.03). In contrast, neither antibody titer was significantly associated (P less than or equal to 0.05) with patients' age or sex, severity of underlying disease, presence of leukopenia, steroid or immunosuppressive therapy. Despite a correlation between acute titers of the two antibodies (r = 0.33, P = 0.06), they appeared to protect independently and additively. Whereas 75% of 8 patients with high antitoxin titers and only 38% of 16 with low titers survived with low antilipopolysaccharide titers (P = 0.10), 100% (6/6), 73% (8/11), and 38% (6/16) survived, respectively, when both, one, or neither antibody was present in high titer (P = 0.01). Furthermore, the association between high acute serum antitoxin titers and survival was more pronounced in patients with rapidly fatal underlying disease (P = 0.06) and leukopenia (P = 0.12) than in more favorable prognostic and immune categories. These data indicate that serum antibodies to exotoxin A and lipopolysaccharide are found in most patients with P. aeruginosa septicemia and both are protective. Both antibodies may have therapeutic or prophylactic potential, whereas serum antiexotoxin A antibodies may be particularly beneficial in compromised hosts.
M Pollack, L S Young
Usage data is cumulative from October 2023 through October 2024.
Usage | JCI | PMC |
---|---|---|
Text version | 192 | 0 |
114 | 21 | |
Scanned page | 439 | 14 |
Citation downloads | 49 | 0 |
Totals | 794 | 35 |
Total Views | 829 |
Usage information is collected from two different sources: this site (JCI) and Pubmed Central (PMC). JCI information (compiled daily) shows human readership based on methods we employ to screen out robotic usage. PMC information (aggregated monthly) is also similarly screened of robotic usage.
Various methods are used to distinguish robotic usage. For example, Google automatically scans articles to add to its search index and identifies itself as robotic; other services might not clearly identify themselves as robotic, or they are new or unknown as robotic. Because this activity can be misinterpreted as human readership, data may be re-processed periodically to reflect an improved understanding of robotic activity. Because of these factors, readers should consider usage information illustrative but subject to change.