Cited by 105Traumatic Brain Injury and Neurovascular DisturbancesTraumatic Brain Injury ResearchTrauma and Emergency Care Studies

Glial Fibrillary Acidic Protein and Ubiquitin C-Terminal Hydrolase-L1 as Outcome Predictors in Traumatic Brain Injury

Open access
Takala, Riikka S.K., Posti, Jussi P., Runtti, Hilkka, Newcombe, Virginia F., Outtrim, Joanne, Katila, Ari J., Frantzén, Janek, Ala-Seppälä, Henna +9 more·2016·World Neurosurgery

Abstract

Objective Biomarkers ubiquitin C-terminal hydrolase-L1 (UCH-L1) and glial fibrillary acidic protein (GFAP) may help detect brain injury, assess its severity, and improve outcome prediction. This study aimed to evaluate the prognostic value of these biomarkers during the first days after brain injury. Methods Serum UCH-L1 and GFAP were measured in 324 patients with traumatic brain injury (TBI) enrolled in a prospective study. The outcome was assessed using the Glasgow Outcome Scale (GOS) or the extended version, Glasgow Outcome Scale-Extended (GOSE). Results Patients with full recovery had lower UCH-L1 concentrations on the second day and patients with favorable outcome had lower UCH-L1 concentrations during the first 2 days compared with patients with incomplete recovery and unfavorable outcome. Patients with full recovery and favorable outcome had significantly lower GFAP concentrations in the first 2 days than patients with incomplete recovery or unfavorable outcome. There was a strong negative correlation between outcome and UCH-L1 in the first 3 days and GFAP levels in the first 2 days. On arrival, both UCH-L1 and GFAP distinguished patients with GOS score 1-3 from patients with GOS score 4-5, but not patients with GOSE score 8 from patients with GOSE score 1-7. For UCH-L1 and GFAP to predict unfavorable outcome (GOS score ≤ 3), the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve was 0.727, and 0.723, respectively. Neither UCHL-1 nor GFAP was independently able to predict the outcome when age, worst Glasgow Coma Scale score, pupil reactivity, Injury Severity Score, and Marshall score were added into the multivariate logistic regression model. Conclusions GFAP and UCH-L1 are significantly associated with outcome, but they do not add predictive power to commonly used prognostic variables in a population of patients with TBI of varying severities.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.wneu.2015.10.066

Cites

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet

References 40 · Cited by 105

Research works printed but not linked: 2

  1. Brain Trauma Foundation: Guidelines for the management of severe traumatic brain injury 3rd edition. J Neurotrauma 24:1-106, 2007
  2. Mercier E, Boutin A, Lauzier F, Fergusson DA, Simard JF, Zarychanski R, Moore L, McIntyre LA, Archambault P, Lamontagne F, Légaré F, Randell E, Nadeau L, Rosseau F, Turgeon AF: Predictive value of S-100 protein for prognosis in patients with moderate and severe traumatic brain injury: systematic review and meta-analysis. BMJ 346:f1757- f1757, 2013

Authors
Takala, R. S. K., Posti, J. P., Runtti, H., Newcombe, V. F., Outtrim, J., Katila, A. J., Frantzén, J., Ala-Seppälä, H., Kyllönen, A., Maanpää, H.-R., Tallus, J., Hossain, M. I., Coles, J. P., Hutchinson, P., van Gils, M., Menon, D. K., & Tenovuo, O.
Affiliations
  • University of Turku (FI)
  • University of Cambridge (GB)
Corresponding author
Takala, Riikka S.K.
Venue
World Neurosurgery
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2016-03
Volume
87
Pages
8-20
ISSN
1878-8750 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2286535726
Cited by
105
References
40
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 7 · 2024: 11 · 2023: 9 · 2022: 10 · 2021: 11 · 2020: 16 · 2019: 11 · 2018: 10 · 2017: 8 · 2016: 10
FWCI
6.59
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • World Neurosurgery (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Apollo (University of Cambridge) (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • Apollo
Funders
  • National Institute for Health and Care Research (NF-SI-0508-10327, ACF-2009-14-007, NF-SI-0512-10090, NIHR-RP-R3-12-013)
  • Academy of Medical Sciences (AMS-CSF4-Newcombe)
  • European Commission (270259)
  • NIHR Cambridge Biomedical Research Centre
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Neurology › Traumatic Brain Injury and Neurovascular Disturbances
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Epidemiology › Traumatic Brain Injury Research
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Emergency Medicine › Trauma and Emergency Care Studies
Keywords
traumatic brain injury, glial fibrillary acidic protein, UCHL1, serum biomarkers, prognostic factors, outcome prediction, Glasgow Outcome Scale, Glasgow Outcome Scale-Extended
MeSH terms
Adolescent, Adult, Aged, Brain Injuries, Female, Glial Fibrillary Acidic Protein, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Predictive Value of Tests, Prognosis, Prospective Studies, ROC Curve, Biomarkers, Glasgow Coma Scale, Injury Severity Score, Logistic Models, Area Under Curve, Ubiquitin Thiolesterase, Young Adult

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review