Skip to main content
PLOS One logoLink to PLOS One
. 2026 Apr 3;21(4):e0335877. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0335877

Upregulation of interleukin-1β and interleukin-18 in traumatic brain injury patients and their potential as biomarkers

Saiqa Nazeer 1, Ghulam Murtaza 1,*
Editor: Subhra Mohapatra2
PMCID: PMC13048433  PMID: 41931486

Abstract

Background

Traumatic brain injury (TBI) is diagnosed using radiological imaging and biomarker analysis, each with certain limitations. Accurate and accessible detection of TBI is essential for its treatment. Since interleukin (IL)-1β and IL-18 are key neuroinflammatory cytokines, we aim to investigate the regulation of IL-1β and IL-18 in TBI patients and assess their potential as biomarkers of TBI.

Methods

Forty TBI and 40 healthy subjects were recruited for this study. The Glasgow coma scale (GCS) was used to assess the clinical severity of TBI. Spearman’s rank-order correlation was employed to find the association between GCS scores and IL levels of TBI patients. An enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) with human IL-1β and IL-18 ELISA kits was conducted to measure the serum IL-1β and IL-18 levels. The area under the curve (AUC), sensitivity, and specificity were measured to assess the potential of IL-1β and IL-18 as biomarkers.

Results

The patients had mild-to-moderate TBI (mTBI) with a mean GCS score of 11.05 ± 1.67. A negative correlation was found between GCS scores and IL levels, while IL-1 β and IL-18 were positively correlated with each other. IL-1β levels in the TBI and healthy subjects were 1882.19 ± 796.72 pg/mL and 1473.50 ± 333.045 pg/mL, respectively, with a significant difference (p = 0.001). Moreover, the IL-18 levels in TBI subjects (25.92 ± 14.81 ng/L) were also significantly higher (p < 0.001) compared to those of the control group subjects (19.14 ± 2.99 ng/L). The IL-1β exhibited an AUC of 0.72 with 72.5% sensitivity and 70% specificity, at a cut-off point of 1527.25 (pg/mL), while IL-18 had an AUC of 0.78 with 77.5% sensitivity and 72.7% specificity, at a cut-off point of 19.645 (ng/L).

Conclusions

IL-1β and IL-18 levels were increased remarkably in mTBI patients and exhibited fair potential as biomarkers for the diagnosis and prognosis of TBI.

1 Introduction

Traumatic brain injury (TBI) is a disruption of brain functioning caused by different factors such as shock, collision, penetrating head injury, traffic accidents, falls, violence, participation in military activities, and contact sports such as boxing, hockey, and football [1,2]. It is considered a major socioeconomic and health problem worldwide, having the highest incidence of all commonly known neurological disorders [3]. Severity of TBI is measured in terms of mild, moderate, and severe, which is assessed by the Glasgow coma scale (GCS) [4]. Mild TBI (mTBI) causes changes in the molecular and structural composition of the brain [5], while moderate to severe TBI, in addition to these disturbances, may lead to profound and persistent deficits in cognitive functions [6]. This disease not only affects the daily life of people but also incurs a burden on health departments, particularly in low-income countries [7].

Neuroimaging techniques such as computed tomography (CT), imaging spectroscopy, magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), and diffusion tensor imaging (DTI) are being applied to diagnose TBI. However, they cannot detect the minute brain changes [8] and are expensive, with limited availability across clinics [9]. In addition to these advanced techniques, biomarkers (substances that help in the diagnosis, progression, prevention, understanding, and treatment of different diseases and the response to therapy), such as cytokines, are also employed for the detection and monitoring of TBI, based on analysis of both cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) and serum [10–13]. Various inflammatory cytokines have been demonstrated as potential biomarkers of TBI in both CSF and serum. CSF biomarkers have limitations as they face hindrance while moving through the blood-brain barrier (BBB) and are produced in very low concentrations [14]. In comparison, serum biomarkers can easily be obtained from blood and analysed immediately after trauma, thus can serve as a convenient tool for disease detection and monitoring [15]. However, many studies investigating molecules as biomarkers have not reported their area under the curve (AUC), sensitivity, and specificity values, which are crucial to determine their authenticity as biomarkers [16].

TBI shows biphasic pathology in which the initial traumatic effects cause persistent inflammation, and the innate immune system is activated [17,18]. The inflammatory process induces cytokine secretion [19], including interleukins (ILs) [20]. Upregulation of ILs following TBI has also been demonstrated in both human [21] and murine brains [22]. The immune response is influenced not only by environmental factors but also by the genetic makeup of the organisms. Consequently, responses to different diseases may vary among racial and ethnic groups in certain populations and regions of the world [23]. The pathology of TBI is highly complex and involves many mechanisms, such as oxidative stress, neuronal damage, neuronal excitotoxicity, and inflammatory responses [24]. Although an extensive literature is present on biomarkers to assess TBI, only a few, such as the Food and Drug Administration (FDA)-approved combined measurement of glial fibrillary acidic protein (GFAP) and ubiquitin C-terminal hydrolase-L1 (UCH-L1), are currently employed for the early diagnosis of intracranial lesions following closed head injury [25]. Despite this advancement, there is continued scientific effort to identify and validate additional biomarkers linked to neuroinflammation to improve prognostic assessment, rather than serving solely as diagnostic tools [26].

Based on these considerations, we aimed to investigate the link between the key inflammatory cytokines IL-1β and IL-18 and TBI in the Pakistani population by using serum to measure their levels. Moreover, their diagnostic and prognostic potential was assessed by evaluating their AUC, sensitivity, and specificity values. In this work, IL-1β and IL-18 are selected, as they are major upstream regulators of TBI-induced inflammation and secondary brain injury [27]. Unlike GFAP and UCH-L1, which are primarily upregulated as a result of neuronal and glial cell damage [28,29], these cytokines provide insight into the activation of the inflammatory pathway, aligning with the main focus of our study.

2 Methods

2.1 Selection of subjects

In this cross-sectional study, patients having road accident-caused TBI (N = 40) were voluntarily recruited from the Emergency Department of Major Aziz Bhatti Shaheed Teaching Hospital, Gujrat, Pakistan, between July 2022 and June 2023. The control group, comprising healthy individuals (N = 40), was recruited from the same city. Informed written permission was acquired from all subjects for their inclusion in this study, and a written questionnaire was used to record their demographic, social, economic, and health characteristics. The TBI and control groups were matched for demographic variables, including age, gender, marital status, education, and monthly income, to avoid confounding effects. Patients with pre-existing inflammatory, autoimmune, infectious, or neurological disorders, as well as those with a prior history of TBI or concussion, were excluded from this study to avoid confounding effects on circulating cytokine levels. Inclusion criteria were age between 18 and 65 years, trauma duration less than 24 hours, and consciousness. The GCS score was measured out of 15. Scores of 13–14, 9–12, and 3–8 denote mild, moderate, and severe TBI, respectively [30].

2.2 Serum extraction and enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA)

For the extraction of serum, 5 mL of venous blood was drawn from TBI patients at the time of hospital admission and from healthy subjects at recruitment under resting conditions. Blood samples were kept for clotting at room temperature for one hour. Later, centrifugation of the blood was done at 2000−3000 RPM for 20 minutes. The supernatant (serum) of the centrifuged material was moved to a separate tube and kept at −80°C until further processing.

ELISA kits (Bioassay Technology Laboratory, Birmingham B15 3LB, United Kingdom) were used for the detection and quantification of ILs. The ELISA plates used were pre-coated with human IL-1β antibody and human IL-18 antibody, respectively. Fifty microliters of the standard solution for both ILs was added to the standard wells separately. Forty microliters of serum collected from TBI and healthy subjects containing IL-1β and IL-18 (antigens) were added to the respective wells, which bound to the antibodies. Then, added 10 μL of biotinylated human anti-IL-1β antibody and biotinylated human anti-IL-18 antibody separately to the respective wells. Fifty microliters of Streptavidin-HRP was added for both ILs and mixed thoroughly [31]. Plates were sealed and incubated for 60 minutes at 37°C. Then, after removing the sealer from the plates, the wash buffer was used to wash the plates. Decanted each well and washed 5 times with the wash buffer. Paper towels were used to blot the plates. Later, 50 μL of the substrate solution A was added to each well, after which 50 μL of substrate solution B was added to each well for both ILs. The plates were incubated for 10 minutes at 37°C under dark conditions. Then, 50 μL of the acidic stop solution was added to each well for both ILs. For both IL-1β and IL-18, the blue colour was changed to yellow immediately. Optical density (OD) was measured immediately with a microplate reader at 450 nm (model MB-580, Heales, Hitchin, UK) [32]. A standard curve was obtained by plotting the mean OD for each standard on the Y-axis versus concentrations on the X-axis. Computer-based curve-fitting software was employed to carry out calculations, with the best-fit line obtained by the regression analysis.

2.3 Ethical statement

All procedures were carried out following the standards of the Institutional Review Board (IRB), University of Gujrat, which approved the study before its commencement (Ref: UOG/ORIC/2022/204). Furthermore, the research work was carried out according to the Declaration of Helsinki.

2.4 Statistical analysis

The statistical package for the social sciences (SPSS, IBM, version 21) was used to analyse the results. Data were presented as mean ± standard deviation (SD). The Kolmogorov-Smirnov test exhibited a non-normal distribution of data (p < 0.05). Thus, a non-parametric Mann-Whitney U-test was employed for the comparison of IL levels between two independent groups; TBI patients and normal individuals. Statistical significance was set at p ≤ 0.05. The discriminatory ability of ILs as biomarkers was measured based on the AUC analysis. Higher values of AUC correspond to stronger predictive accuracy. Cut-off points were selected closer to the value of AUC, and sensitivity and specificity were measured. As the data were not normally distributed, the association between GCS scores and IL levels was evaluated by applying Spearman’s rank-order correlation.

3 Results

3.1 Demographic characteristics of TBI patients and normal individuals

Socio-demographic characteristics, including age (18–65 years), education (10–14 years), and monthly income (350–700 US Dollars), were the same between TBI and healthy subjects. TBI patients and healthy individuals had mean ages of 40.34 ± 11.18 years (mean ± standard deviation, SD) and 40.45 ± 11.23 years, respectively. Of 40 TBI and healthy subjects, 62.5% and 55% were males, and 37.5% and 45% were females, respectively. Likewise, 25% and 32.5% were single, and 75% and 67.5% were married, respectively (Table 1).

Table 1. Demographics of TBI patients and normal individuals.

Variables TBI patients

N = 40
Normal individuals

N = 40
Age Years (mean ± SD) 40.34 ± 11.18 40.45 ± 11.23
Gender Male, N (%) 25 (62.5) 22 (55)
Female, N (%) 15 (37.5) 18 (45)
Marital status Single, N (%) 10 (25) 13 (32.5)
Married, N (%) 30 (75) 27 (67.5)
Education Years 10-14 10-14
Monthly income US Dollars 350-700 350-700

Abbreviations: TBI, traumatic brain injury; SD, standard deviation.

3.2 Correlation between GCS score and IL levels

A significant negative correlation was found between GCS score and both IL-1β (ρ = –0.430, p = 0.006) and IL-18 (ρ = −0.410, p = 0.009), demonstrating that lower GCS scores were moderately associated with higher levels of cytokines. Moreover, a moderate positive correlation was observed between IL-1β and IL-18 levels (ρ = 0.436, p = 0.005), showing that both cytokines increased together following TBI (Table 2). The scatterplots in Fig 1A–C demonstrate these correlations. Most of the TBI patients exhibited IL-1β and IL-18 levels within or slightly above the range observed in healthy controls (IL-1β: 786.80–2250.70 pg/mL; IL-18: 13.78–27.91 ng/L). However, some TBI patients showed elevated cytokine levels, with IL-1β peaking at 5037.90 pg/mL and IL-18 at 85.69 ng/L. The GCS scores of TBI patients ranged from 6 to 14, with a mean of 11.05 ± 1.68, indicating that the cohort predominantly consisted of patients with mild-to-moderate TBI.

Table 2. Spearman’s rank-order correlation coefficients (ρ) for correlations between GCS score and IL-1β and IL-18 levels in TBI patients.

Association Spearman’s ρ (rho) P-value (two-tailed)
GCS versus IL-1β −0.430 0.006
GCS versus IL-18 −0.410 0.009
IL-1β versus IL-18 0.436 0.005

Positive and negative ρ values indicate positive and negative correlations, respectively. All correlations were statistically significant (p ≤ 0.05).

Abbreviations: GCS, Glasgow coma scale; IL, interleukin; TBI, traumatic brain injury.

Fig 1. Scatterplots exhibiting association between Glasgow coma scale (GCS) scores and serum interleukin (IL) levels.

Fig 1

GCS scores were significantly negatively correlated (Spearman’s ρ = –0.43, p = 0.006) with IL-1β (A) and IL-18 (B) in TBI patients.

3.3 Cytokines elevation in TBI patients and their gender-based comparison

Serum samples of TBI patients were analyzed to determine the levels of IL-1β and IL-18. The levels of IL-1β protein in TBI and healthy subjects were 1882.19 ± 796.72 pg/mL and 1473.50 ± 333.045 pg/mL, respectively. This difference was significant (p = 0.001) between the two groups (Fig 2A). Similarly, the level of IL-18 in the serum of TBI patients (25.92 ± 14.81 ng/L) was significantly higher (p < 0.001) compared to its level in the serum of control group subjects (19.14 ± 2.99 ng/L) (Fig 2B). Levels of cytokines were also analyzed to assess their distribution between male and female participants. IL-1β levels were not significantly different between males and females of normal (p = 0.15) and TBI groups (p = 0.352). On the contrary, in the normal group, females had slightly but significantly higher levels of IL-18 than males (19.93 ± 2.64 vs. 18.67 ± 3.14 ng/L; p = 0.043). In TBI subjects, this difference was significantly higher (p = 0.012) in females (28.91 ± 18.03) as compared to males (23.48 ± 11.41 ng/L) (Table 3, Fig 3).

Fig 2. Box plots exhibiting comparative analysis of interleukin (IL) levels in serum of traumatic brain injury (TBI) patients (n = 40) and normal individuals (n = 40), as assessed by enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA).

Fig 2

Levels of (A) IL-1β and (B) IL-18 are higher in TBI patients compared with normal individuals. Each box indicates interquartile range (IQR), the horizontal line inside the box exhibits the median, whiskers depict variability outside the upper and lower quartiles, circles (°) denote mild outliers (values between 1.5 and 3 times the IQR), and asterisks (*) indicate extreme outliers (values exceeding 3 times the IQR). Statistical significance was assessed using the Mann–Whitney U-test.

Table 3. Gender-based comparison of cytokines in normal and TBI subjects.

Cytokine Group Male (Mean ± SD) Female (Mean ± SD) P-value
IL-1β

Normal 1538.05 ± 279.87 1365.92 ± 393.54 0.15
TBI 1907.47 ± 760.48 1851.29 ± 860.21 0.352
IL-18 Normal 18.67 ± 3.14 19.93 ± 2.64 0.043
TBI 23.48 ± 11.41 28.91 ± 18.03 0.012

Abbreviations: IL, interleukin; TBI, traumatic brain injury; SD, standard deviation.

Fig 3. Gender-based comparison of IL-1β (A) and IL-18 (B) levels in normal and TBI participants.

Fig 3

Data are presented as mean ± standard deviation. Statistical significance was assessed using the Mann–Whitney U test. IL-1β levels did not differ significantly between sexes in either group (p > 0.05), whereas IL-18 levels were significantly higher in females than in males in both the normal and TBI groups.

3.4 ROC curve and predictive power analysis of IL-1β and IL-18

To evaluate the potential of ILs as reliable biomarkers, ROC curves for IL-1β and IL-18 were constructed. The ROC curve graphically represents sensitivity (true positive rate, TPR) plotted versus 1-specificity (false positive rate, FPR), calculated for all potential cut-off values between cases and controls. For IL-1β, the AUC value was 0.72 (95% CI: 61%−84%, p = 0.001). At the cut-off point of 1527.25 pg/mL, 72.5% sensitivity and 70% specificity were calculated. Moreover, IL-18 exhibited an AUC value of 0.78 (95% CI: 67%-88%, p < 0.001) with 77.5% sensitivity and 72.7% specificity at a cut-off point of 19.645 ng/L (Table 4; Fig 4). Since IL-1β and IL-18 have AUC values > 0.7, their potential as reliable biomarkers for detecting TBI is fair (acceptable).

Table 4. Diagnostic performance of interleukins for TBI: Area under the curve, 95% confidence interval, cut-off values, sensitivity, and specificity.

Interleukin Interleukin-1β Interleukin-18
Area under the curve 0.72 0.78
95% confidence interval (%) 61-84 67-88
Cut-off values 1527.25 (pg/mL) 19.645 (ng/L)
Sensitivity (%) 72.5 77.5
Specificity (%) 70 72.7

Fig 4. The area under the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve (AUC) and the discriminatory ability of IL-1β and IL-18.

Fig 4

The black line in the figure represents IL-1β, and the grey line denotes IL-18. The Y-axis shows the ability of ILs to correctly detect TBI patients, and the X-axis represents the proportion of healthy individuals wrongly classified as TBI. The higher AUC value of IL-18 (0.78) than that of IL-1β (0.72) demonstrates its better diagnostic power as a biomarker.

4 Discussion

Injury to the brain causes a sudden onset of an inflammatory response. Several pro-inflammatory biomarkers, including tumor necrosis factor (TNF)-α, apoptosis-associated speck-like protein containing a caspase recruitment domain (ASC), IL-1, IL-6, and IL-18, are described as clinically relevant biomarkers that may assist in the diagnosis and prognosis of brain trauma [33,34]. In this study, we observed high levels of cytokines (IL-1β and IL-18) in serum samples collected from TBI patients from the Pakistani population. The research analyzed IL-1β and IL-18 as biomarkers of TBI by comparing data from TBI patients with that of healthy individuals. Moreover, both groups were matched for demographic characteristics, as IL levels may vary with the age of the subjects [35].

A considerable body of literature is available in which different methods have been demonstrated for the diagnosis and clinical prognosis of TBI. For instance, CT scans are employed for the detection of hemorrhagic incidents [36]. MRI can evaluate changes at minute levels, such as bleeding and diffuse axonal injury, which are otherwise not detectable via CT scans. Magnetic resonance spectroscopy (MRS) can even detect biochemical and metabolic events happening in the brain [37], as evidenced by a previous study [38], in which cellular damage was demonstrated in white matter that looked normal. However, all these advanced techniques have limitations, including exposure to radiation, time-consuming, expensive, and not available in all clinical settings [39]. CSF biomarkers are also utilized for the diagnosis of brain trauma, but also offer limitations of difficulty in moving through the BBB and production in small quantities [14]. In our investigation, we have chosen serum for certain reasons, as it is easily available, easily collected, time-saving, cost-effective, and free of clotting factors. Moreover, in low-income countries like Pakistan, the aforementioned advanced techniques are not available in all health care systems. Thus, application of serum to diagnose TBI at the time of hospital admission can help clinicians early detect TBI and monitor its clinical prognosis.

AUC values demonstrate the reliability of biomarkers as a diagnostic tool. In this regard, AUC values of biomarkers ranging from 0.9–1.0, 0.8–0.9, 0.7–0.8, 0.6–0.7, and 0.5–0.6 classify them as excellent, good, fair, poor, and fail, respectively [40]. In a previous study carried out with serum samples [41], the AUC value of IL-1β was reported to be lower (0.63), with 70% sensitivity and 51% specificity. Kerr et al. demonstrated that in CSF, the concentration of IL-1β was below the detection level and its AUC values could not be analysed [42]. In our research work, the comparatively higher AUC (0.72), sensitivity (72.5%), and specificity (70%) values of IL-1β may be attributed to differences in sample type and disease conditions [43]. In our study, IL-18 had an AUC of 0.78, with 77.5% sensitivity and 72.5% specificity. As reported previously, IL-18 in CSF had an AUC of 0.84, with a sensitivity of 80% and a specificity of 68.42%, suggesting it as a reliable biomarker of TBI [42]. Similarly, IL-18 in blood serum exhibited an AUC of 0.81, with 83% sensitivity and 74% specificity [33]. Thus, our results of IL-18 are comparable and in line with the previous studies [33,42]. Moreover, in light of our findings, the potential of IL-1β and IL-18 as biomarkers for the diagnosis and prognosis of TBI can be graded as fair.

In this study, we found a significant difference in serum ILs between TBI and normal subjects. In a previous study [44], elevated levels of different cytokines, including IL-1β, were demonstrated in human brain tissues following acute brain injury. Peak concentrations of IL-1β were recorded within 24 hours in the CSF of severe TBI patients. However, the concentrations of IL-1β decreased gradually after that duration [45]. Another study reported high levels of IL-1β and IL-18 in CSF of aneurysmal subarachnoid hemorrhage patients and suggested them to be used to diagnose early brain injury and the progress of the treatment [46]. Similarly, levels of IL-18 protein were recorded as upregulated in CSF collected from patients of closed head injury (CHI) [22]. Thus, the above-cited literature evidences that under different conditions of TBI, levels of IL-1β and IL-18 are elevated. Our data exhibiting upregulated levels of IL-1β and IL-18 proteins in TBI patients are in concordance with the previous studies [22,44–46]. Our data exhibited relatively high values of IL-1β proteins in both TBI patients and controls, which could be attributed to the type of ELISA kit used and its detection range [47]. Moreover, in our investigation, since both patient and control samples were analysed on the same plate, the relative comparisons remain valid.

Our data demonstrate a differential post-TBI inflammatory response between male and female subjects, denoted by higher IL-1β levels in males and elevated IL-18 levels in females. Our results align with the previous research work that also demonstrates gender-specific inflammatory response following TBI. For instance, in an animal study [48], male mice exhibited a significant increase in IL-1β levels compared to females following experimental TBI. Conversely, gender-specific data on IL-18 levels in the context of TBI are sparse. However, our findings are supported by a previous study [49] in which higher serum levels of IL-8, another related inflammatory cytokine, were demonstrated in TBI females compared to males. Taken together, our data demonstrate that females may exhibit a more robust cytokine response following TBI, which highlights the importance of gender-specific considerations in TBI management and immune-targeted therapeutic strategies.

Levels of biomarkers (ILs) may vary under different conditions, such as sample type, organism type, severity and duration of injury, genetics, physical activity, and population characteristics. In serum samples of neonates with perinatal hypoxia (PNH), levels of IL-1β and IL-18 were higher than those of CSF samples [50]. In a study of more than 400 animal species, conservation and divergence of functional domains of IL-1 members were recognized with a suggestion of their diverse roles and patterns of expression among different groups of animals [51]. In mice having CHI, high levels of IL-18 proteins were detected between 4 and 24 hours and after 7 days of injury [22], whereas other cytokines, including IL-1β, were elevated within hours following CHI [52]. Similarly, a rise in the IL-1β levels was also reported in the TBI rat brain within the first 24 hours after injury [53]. The dynamic changes in IL-18 levels in response to injury in the rat brain were also evidenced previously [54]. Peake et al. demonstrated high levels of cytokines, including IL-1β, for several days after hard and prolonged exercise in humans [55]. The genetic variation and its association with the development of post-traumatic epilepsy (PTE) were investigated in 256 adults with TBI. The C/T (cytosine/thymine) heterozygous genotype was found to be associated with increased susceptibility to post-traumatic epilepsy. In the C/T genotype group, higher IL-1β CSF/serum ratios and lower serum IL-1β levels were observed [56]. In a review article, a comparison of biomarkers was performed among 7 ethnic groups. Remarkable differences in results for most of the markers were demonstrated among these groups [57]. Considering all the above-discussed literature, particularly variations of ILs in different populations, we investigated the levels of IL-1β and IL-18 in mTBI patients in the Pakistani population. Thus, our data might play an important role in defining the levels of the above-mentioned ILs in patients with accident-caused TBI and their differences from those of the healthy population.

This study also has some limitations that should be taken into account when the data are evaluated. Our data were not drawn from the general population, as they were collected from one small part of the country. The study lacks a comparison of investigated biomarkers among various ethnic groups, as only one ethnic group, Punjabi-speaking people, was recruited for this study. Moreover, the age distribution of the study sample may also have influenced the outcomes, further limiting the applicability of the findings. In addition, data were collected only at the time of admission and not at later stages, such as days and during/after recovery, which limited our ability to evaluate temporal changes or long-term outcomes. Another limitation of our study is the inability to determine the exact mean time of collection of blood, as the duration after the accident or admission to the hospital could not be recorded. This lack of exact timing of blood collection may have influenced the measurement of ILs.

5 Conclusions

IL-1β and IL-18 are upregulated in TBI patients injured in road accidents. Spearman’s correlation exhibits links between clinical severity and IL levels. These ILs have fair potential to be employed as biomarkers for diagnosis and prognosis of mTBI. However, their levels may vary with sample type, injury type and duration, and population differences. Thus, a careful evaluation of data from TBI subjects is recommended before employing IL-1β and IL-18 as reliable biomarkers for detecting TBI.

Supporting information

S1 File. Raw data.

(XLSX)

pone.0335877.s001.xlsx (12.6KB, xlsx)

Data Availability

All relevant data are within the paper and its Supporting information files.

Funding Statement

The author(s) received no specific funding for this work.

References

  • 1.Kamins J, Giza CC. Concussion-Mild Traumatic Brain Injury: Recoverable Injury with Potential for Serious Sequelae. Neurosurg Clin N Am. 2016;27(4):441–52. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 2.Ladak AA, Enam SA, Ibrahim MT. A Review of the Molecular Mechanisms of Traumatic Brain Injury. World Neurosurg. 2019;131:126–32. doi: 10.1016/j.wneu.2019.07.039 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 3.Maas AIR, Menon DK, Manley GT, Abrams M, Åkerlund C, Andelic N, et al. Traumatic brain injury: progress and challenges in prevention, clinical care, and research. Lancet Neurol. 2022;21(11):1004–60. doi: 10.1016/S1474-4422(22)00309-X [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 4.Teasdale G, Jennett B. Assessment of coma and impaired consciousness. A practical scale. Lancet. 1974;2(7872):81–4. doi: 10.1016/s0140-6736(74)91639-0 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 5.Wojnarowicz MW, Fisher AM, Minaeva O, Goldstein LE. Considerations for Experimental Animal Models of Concussion, Traumatic Brain Injury, and Chronic Traumatic Encephalopathy-These Matters Matter. Front Neurol. 2017;8:240. doi: 10.3389/fneur.2017.00240 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 6.Rabinowitz AR, Levin HS. Cognitive sequelae of traumatic brain injury. Psychiatr Clin North Am. 2014;37(1):1–11. doi: 10.1016/j.psc.2013.11.004 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 7.Ahmed S, Anwer A, Abdullah M, Ashraf M, Iqbal J, Siddiq J, et al. Trends in Traumatic Brain Injuries During the COVID-19 Pandemic: A Single-Center Review of Patient Charts From Pakistan. Cureus. 2024;16(4):e58745. doi: 10.7759/cureus.58745 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 8.Shin SS, Bales JW, Edward Dixon C, Hwang M. Structural imaging of mild traumatic brain injury may not be enough: overview of functional and metabolic imaging of mild traumatic brain injury. Brain Imaging Behav. 2017;11(2):591–610. doi: 10.1007/s11682-017-9684-0 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 9.Gill J, Latour L, Diaz-Arrastia R, Motamedi V, Turtzo C, Shahim P, et al. Glial fibrillary acidic protein elevations relate to neuroimaging abnormalities after mild TBI. Neurology. 2018;91(15):e1385–9. doi: 10.1212/WNL.0000000000006321 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 10.Clark AL, Sorg SF, Schiehser DM, Bigler ED, Bondi MW, Jacobson MW, et al. White Matter Associations With Performance Validity Testing in Veterans With Mild Traumatic Brain Injury: The Utility of Biomarkers in Complicated Assessment. J Head Trauma Rehabil. 2016;31(5):346–59. doi: 10.1097/HTR.0000000000000183 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 11.Huibregtse ME, Bazarian JJ, Shultz SR, Kawata K. The biological significance and clinical utility of emerging blood biomarkers for traumatic brain injury. Neurosci Biobehav Rev. 2021;130:433–47. doi: 10.1016/j.neubiorev.2021.08.029 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 12.Lewis LM, Schloemann DT, Papa L, Fucetola RP, Bazarian J, Lindburg M, et al. Utility of Serum Biomarkers in the Diagnosis and Stratification of Mild Traumatic Brain Injury. Acad Emerg Med. 2017;24(6):710–20. doi: 10.1111/acem.13174 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 13.Rodríguez-Rodríguez A, Egea-Guerrero JJ. The utility of biomarkers in traumatic brain injury clinical management. Crit Care. 2016;20(1):376. doi: 10.1186/s13054-016-1545-5 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 14.Neselius S, Brisby H, Theodorsson A, Blennow K, Zetterberg H, Marcusson J. CSF-biomarkers in Olympic boxing: diagnosis and effects of repetitive head trauma. PLoS One. 2012;7(4):e33606. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0033606 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 15.Gan ZS, Stein SC, Swanson R, Guan S, Garcia L, Mehta D, et al. Blood Biomarkers for Traumatic Brain Injury: A Quantitative Assessment of Diagnostic and Prognostic Accuracy. Front Neurol. 2019;10:446. doi: 10.3389/fneur.2019.00446 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 16.Keane RW, Dietrich WD, de Rivero Vaccari JP. Inflammasome Proteins As Biomarkers of Multiple Sclerosis. Front Neurol. 2018;9:135. doi: 10.3389/fneur.2018.00135 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 17.Risbrough VB, Vaughn MN, Friend SF. Role of Inflammation in Traumatic Brain Injury-Associated Risk for Neuropsychiatric Disorders: State of the Evidence and Where Do We Go From Here. Biol Psychiatry. 2022;91(5):438–48. doi: 10.1016/j.biopsych.2021.11.012 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 18.Visser K, Koggel M, Blaauw J, van der Horn HJ, Jacobs B, van der Naalt J. Blood-based biomarkers of inflammation in mild traumatic brain injury: A systematic review. Neurosci Biobehav Rev. 2022;132:154–68. doi: 10.1016/j.neubiorev.2021.11.036 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 19.Rodney T, Osier N, Gill J. Pro- and anti-inflammatory biomarkers and traumatic brain injury outcomes: A review. Cytokine. 2018;110:248–56. doi: 10.1016/j.cyto.2018.01.012 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 20.Ihim SA, Abubakar SD, Zian Z, Sasaki T, Saffarioun M, Maleknia S, et al. Interleukin-18 cytokine in immunity, inflammation, and autoimmunity: Biological role in induction, regulation, and treatment. Front Immunol. 2022;13:919973. doi: 10.3389/fimmu.2022.919973 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 21.Postolache TT, Wadhawan A, Can A, Lowry CA, Woodbury M, Makkar H, et al. Inflammation in Traumatic Brain Injury. J Alzheimers Dis. 2020;74(1):1–28. doi: 10.3233/JAD-191150 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 22.Yatsiv I, Morganti-Kossmann MC, Perez D, Dinarello CA, Novick D, Rubinstein M, et al. Elevated intracranial IL-18 in humans and mice after traumatic brain injury and evidence of neuroprotective effects of IL-18-binding protein after experimental closed head injury. J Cereb Blood Flow Metab. 2002;22(8):971–8. doi: 10.1097/00004647-200208000-00008 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 23.Hoang Nguyen KH, Le NV, Nguyen PH, Nguyen HHT, Hoang DM, Huynh CD. Human immune system: Exploring diversity across individuals and populations. Heliyon. 2025;11(2):e41836. doi: 10.1016/j.heliyon.2025.e41836 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 24.Ng SY, Lee AYW. Traumatic Brain Injuries: Pathophysiology and Potential Therapeutic Targets. Front Cell Neurosci. 2019;13:528. doi: 10.3389/fncel.2019.00528 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 25.Bazarian JJ, Biberthaler P, Welch RD, Lewis LM, Barzo P, Bogner-Flatz V, et al. Serum GFAP and UCH-L1 for prediction of absence of intracranial injuries on head CT (ALERT-TBI): a multicentre observational study. Lancet Neurol. 2018;17(9):782–9. doi: 10.1016/S1474-4422(18)30231-X [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 26.Yue JK, Kobeissy FH, Jain S, Sun X, Phelps RRL, Korley FK, et al. Neuroinflammatory Biomarkers for Traumatic Brain Injury Diagnosis and Prognosis: A TRACK-TBI Pilot Study. Neurotrauma Rep. 2023;4(1):171–83. doi: 10.1089/neur.2022.0060 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 27.Helmy A, De Simoni M-G, Guilfoyle MR, Carpenter KLH, Hutchinson PJ. Cytokines and innate inflammation in the pathogenesis of human traumatic brain injury. Prog Neurobiol. 2011;95(3):352–72. doi: 10.1016/j.pneurobio.2011.09.003 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 28.Bilgin Y, Sari FM, Gunay M, Hayme S, Kantar Y, Durmus U. Diagnostic accuracy of GFAP and UCH-L1 for intracranial hemorrhage in blunt head trauma: a prospective study. BMC Emerg Med. 2025;25(1):240. doi: 10.1186/s12873-025-01398-3 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 29.Papa L, Brophy GM, Welch RD, Lewis LM, Braga CF, Tan CN, et al. Time Course and Diagnostic Accuracy of Glial and Neuronal Blood Biomarkers GFAP and UCH-L1 in a Large Cohort of Trauma Patients With and Without Mild Traumatic Brain Injury. JAMA Neurol. 2016;73(5):551–60. doi: 10.1001/jamaneurol.2016.0039 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 30.Basak D, Chatterjee S, Attergrim J, Sharma MR, Soni KD, Verma S, et al. Glasgow coma scale compared to other trauma scores in discriminating in-hospital mortality of traumatic brain injury patients admitted to urban Indian hospitals: A multicentre prospective cohort study. Injury. 2023;54(1):93–9. doi: 10.1016/j.injury.2022.09.035 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 31.Kohl TO, Ascoli CA. Direct Competitive Enzyme-Linked Immunosorbent Assay (ELISA). Cold Spring Harb Protoc. 2017;2017(7):pdb.prot093740. doi: 10.1101/pdb.prot093740 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 32.Engvall E. The ELISA, enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay. Clin Chem. 2010;56(2):319–20. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 33.Johnson NH, Hadad R, Taylor RR, Rodríguez Pilar J, Salazar O, Llompart-Pou JA, et al. Inflammatory Biomarkers of Traumatic Brain Injury. Pharmaceuticals (Basel). 2022;15(6):660. doi: 10.3390/ph15060660 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 34.Woodcock T, Morganti-Kossmann MC. The role of markers of inflammation in traumatic brain injury. Front Neurol. 2013;4:18. doi: 10.3389/fneur.2013.00018 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 35.Taşçi A, Okay O, Gezici AR, Ergün R, Ergüngör F. Prognostic value of interleukin-1 beta levels after acute brain injury. Neurol Res. 2003;25(8):871–4. doi: 10.1179/016164103771953998 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 36.Amyot F, Arciniegas DB, Brazaitis MP, Curley KC, Diaz-Arrastia R, Gandjbakhche A, et al. A Review of the Effectiveness of Neuroimaging Modalities for the Detection of Traumatic Brain Injury. J Neurotrauma. 2015;32(22):1693–721. doi: 10.1089/neu.2013.3306 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 37.Desale P, Dhande R, Parihar P, Nimodia D, Bhangale PN, Shinde D. Navigating Neural Landscapes: A Comprehensive Review of Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI) and Magnetic Resonance Spectroscopy (MRS) Applications in Epilepsy. Cureus. 2024;16(3):e56927. doi: 10.7759/cureus.56927 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 38.Garnett MR, Blamire AM, Rajagopalan B, Styles P, Cadoux-Hudson TA. Evidence for cellular damage in normal-appearing white matter correlates with injury severity in patients following traumatic brain injury: A magnetic resonance spectroscopy study. Brain. 2000;123 (Pt 7):1403–9. doi: 10.1093/brain/123.7.1403 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 39.Lei J, Gao G, Feng J, Jin Y, Wang C, Mao Q, et al. Glial fibrillary acidic protein as a biomarker in severe traumatic brain injury patients: a prospective cohort study. Crit Care. 2015;19:362. doi: 10.1186/s13054-015-1081-8 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 40.Xia J, Broadhurst DI, Wilson M, Wishart DS. Translational biomarker discovery in clinical metabolomics: an introductory tutorial. Metabolomics. 2013;9(2):280–99. doi: 10.1007/s11306-012-0482-9 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 41.Muballe KD. Clinical and biochemical predictors of fatality in traumatic brain injury. East African Journal of Neurological Sciences. 2022;1(Supp 2):42–3. [Google Scholar]
  • 42.Kerr N, Lee SW, Perez-Barcena J, Crespi C, Ibañez J, Bullock MR, et al. Inflammasome proteins as biomarkers of traumatic brain injury. PLoS One. 2018;13(12):e0210128. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0210128 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 43.Di Iorio A, Ferrucci L, Sparvieri E, Cherubini A, Volpato S, Corsi A, et al. Serum IL-1beta levels in health and disease: a population-based study. “The InCHIANTI study”. Cytokine. 2003;22(6):198–205. doi: 10.1016/s1043-4666(03)00152-2 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 44.Frugier T, Morganti-Kossmann MC, O’Reilly D, McLean CA. In situ detection of inflammatory mediators in post mortem human brain tissue after traumatic injury. J Neurotrauma. 2010;27(3):497–507. doi: 10.1089/neu.2009.1120 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 45.Hayakata T, Shiozaki T, Tasaki O, Ikegawa H, Inoue Y, Toshiyuki F, et al. Changes in CSF S100B and cytokine concentrations in early-phase severe traumatic brain injury. Shock. 2004;22(2):102–7. doi: 10.1097/01.shk.0000131193.80038.f1 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 46.Lv S-Y, Wu Q, Liu J-P, Shao J, Wen L-L, Xue J, et al. Levels of Interleukin-1β, Interleukin-18, and Tumor Necrosis Factor-α in Cerebrospinal Fluid of Aneurysmal Subarachnoid Hemorrhage Patients May Be Predictors of Early Brain Injury and Clinical Prognosis. World Neurosurg. 2018;111:e362–73. doi: 10.1016/j.wneu.2017.12.076 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 47.Leng SX, McElhaney JE, Walston JD, Xie D, Fedarko NS, Kuchel GA. ELISA and multiplex technologies for cytokine measurement in inflammation and aging research. J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci. 2008;63(8):879–84. doi: 10.1093/gerona/63.8.879 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 48.Villapol S, Loane DJ, Burns MP. Sexual dimorphism in the inflammatory response to traumatic brain injury. Glia. 2017;65(9):1423–38. doi: 10.1002/glia.23171 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 49.Zhao P, Zhu P, Zhang D, Yin B, Wang Y, Hussein NM, et al. Sex Differences in Cerebral Blood Flow and Serum Inflammatory Cytokines and Their Relationships in Mild Traumatic Brain Injury. Front Neurol. 2022;12:755152. doi: 10.3389/fneur.2021.755152 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 50.Šumanović-Glamuzina D, Čulo F, Čulo MI, Konjevoda P, Jerković-Raguž M. A comparison of blood and cerebrospinal fluid cytokines (IL-1β, IL-6, IL-18, TNF-α) in neonates with perinatal hypoxia. Bosn J Basic Med Sci. 2017;17(3):203–10. doi: 10.17305/bjbms.2017.1381 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 51.Wang W, Li D, Luo K, Chen B, Hao T, Li X, et al. IL-1 superfamily across 400 species: therapeutic targets and disease implications. Biology (Basel). 2025;14(5). [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 52.Shohami E, Gallily R, Mechoulam R, Bass R, Ben-Hur T. Cytokine production in the brain following closed head injury: dexanabinol (HU-211) is a novel TNF-alpha inhibitor and an effective neuroprotectant. J Neuroimmunol. 1997;72(2):169–77. doi: 10.1016/s0165-5728(96)00181-6 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 53.Kamm K, Vanderkolk W, Lawrence C, Jonker M, Davis AT. The effect of traumatic brain injury upon the concentration and expression of interleukin-1beta and interleukin-10 in the rat. J Trauma. 2006;60(1):152–7. doi: 10.1097/01.ta.0000196345.81169.a1 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 54.Jander S, Schroeter M, Stoll G. Interleukin-18 expression after focal ischemia of the rat brain: association with the late-stage inflammatory response. J Cereb Blood Flow Metab. 2002;22(1):62–70. doi: 10.1097/00004647-200201000-00008 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 55.Peake J, Nosaka K, Suzuki K. Characterization of inflammatory responses to eccentric exercise in humans. Exerc Immunol Rev. 2005;11:64–85. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 56.Diamond ML, Ritter AC, Failla MD, Boles JA, Conley YP, Kochanek PM, et al. IL-1β associations with posttraumatic epilepsy development: a genetics and biomarker cohort study. Epilepsia. 2014;55(7):1109–19. doi: 10.1111/epi.12628 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 57.Tahmasebi H, Trajcevski K, Higgins V, Adeli K. Influence of ethnicity on population reference values for biochemical markers. Crit Rev Clin Lab Sci. 2018;55(5):359–75. doi: 10.1080/10408363.2018.1476455 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Decision Letter 0

Subhra Mohapatra

30 Dec 2025

Dear Dr. Murtaza,

Thank you for submitting your manuscript to PLOS ONE. After careful consideration, we feel that it has merit but does not fully meet PLOS ONE’s publication criteria as it currently stands. Therefore, we invite you to submit a revised version of the manuscript that addresses the points raised during the review process.

Please submit your revised manuscript by Feb 13 2026 11:59PM. If you will need more time than this to complete your revisions, please reply to this message or contact the journal office at plosone@plos.org . When you're ready to submit your revision, log on to https://www.editorialmanager.com/pone/ and select the 'Submissions Needing Revision' folder to locate your manuscript file.. When you're ready to submit your revision, log on to https://www.editorialmanager.com/pone/ and select the 'Submissions Needing Revision' folder to locate your manuscript file.

  • A letter that responds to each point raised by the academic editor and reviewer(s). You should upload this letter as a separate file labeled 'Response to Reviewers'.

  • A marked-up copy of your manuscript that highlights changes made to the original version. You should upload this as a separate file labeled 'Revised Manuscript with Track Changes'.

  • An unmarked version of your revised paper without tracked changes. You should upload this as a separate file labeled 'Manuscript'.

If applicable, we recommend that you deposit your laboratory protocols in protocols.io to enhance the reproducibility of your results. Protocols.io assigns your protocol its own identifier (DOI) so that it can be cited independently in the future. For instructions see: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/submission-guidelines#loc-laboratory-protocols . Additionally, PLOS ONE offers an option for publishing peer-reviewed Lab Protocol articles, which describe protocols hosted on protocols.io. Read more information on sharing protocols at . Additionally, PLOS ONE offers an option for publishing peer-reviewed Lab Protocol articles, which describe protocols hosted on protocols.io. Read more information on sharing protocols at https://plos.org/protocols?utm_medium=editorial-email&utm_source=authorletters&utm_campaign=protocols ..

We look forward to receiving your revised manuscript.

Kind regards,

Subhra Mohapatra, MS PhD

Academic Editor

PLOS One

Journal Requirements:

When submitting your revision, we need you to address these additional requirements.

1. Please ensure that your manuscript meets PLOS ONE's style requirements, including those for file naming. The PLOS ONE style templates can be found at

https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/file?id=wjVg/PLOSOne_formatting_sample_main_body.pdf and

https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/file?id=ba62/PLOSOne_formatting_sample_title_authors_affiliations.pdf ..

2. Please delete the separate files, leaving only the tables in the manuscript file.

3. Please include captions for your Supporting Information files at the end of your manuscript, and update any in-text citations to match accordingly. Please see our Supporting Information guidelines for more information: http://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/supporting-information.

4. If the reviewer comments include a recommendation to cite specific previously published works, please review and evaluate these publications to determine whether they are relevant and should be cited. There is no requirement to cite these works unless the editor has indicated otherwise.

5. Please review your reference list to ensure that it is complete and correct. If you have cited papers that have been retracted, please include the rationale for doing so in the manuscript text, or remove these references and replace them with relevant current references. Any changes to the reference list should be mentioned in the rebuttal letter that accompanies your revised manuscript. If you need to cite a retracted article, indicate the article’s retracted status in the References list and also include a citation and full reference for the retraction notice.

[Note: HTML markup is below. Please do not edit.]

Reviewers' comments:

Reviewer's Responses to Questions

Comments to the Author

1. Is the manuscript technically sound, and do the data support the conclusions?

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

2. Has the statistical analysis been performed appropriately and rigorously? -->?>

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

3. Have the authors made all data underlying the findings in their manuscript fully available??>

The PLOS Data policy requires authors to make all data underlying the findings described in their manuscript fully available without restriction, with rare exception (please refer to the Data Availability Statement in the manuscript PDF file). The data should be provided as part of the manuscript or its supporting information, or deposited to a public repository. For example, in addition to summary statistics, the data points behind means, medians and variance measures should be available. If there are restrictions on publicly sharing data—e.g. participant privacy or use of data from a third party—those must be specified.-->

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

4. Is the manuscript presented in an intelligible fashion and written in standard English??>

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

Reviewer #1: This manuscript reports the results of a cross-sectional study comparing TBI patients with normal healthy controls. The study is technically sound, but there are some minor, fixable concerns.

There is no justification for the choice of cytokines studied.

Lines 100-105. The authors state there is no FDA-backed biomarkers for TBI. This is no longer true. Combined use of GFAP & UCH-L1 from blood is a good diagnostic tool.

Inclusion criteria are clear. However, Table 1 shows that the TBI and control groups were matched according to their demographic characteristics, but that was not stated in the methods.

The reported methods for obtaining and processing blood are standard. While blood was obtained on hospital admission from the TBI group, there is no indication when normals gave blood.

The ELISA method was routine.

The statistics were appropriate for the study design.

The figures were not included in the submission. I got the figures from their posting to BioRxiv

Tables 2 & 3 are very repetitive with text and Figures.

Line 174. “negative trend”. No trend analysis was done. Negative tendency might be a better term.

Line 175. They should define what they consider a normal range.

Line 176. The authors appropriately define what the different GCS scores mean and state that their subjects have mild TBI. However, they report a mean score of 11.05, which is indicative of moderate severity TBI. Please clarify.

Table 2. The correlation and p values for IL-1 & IL-18 are exactly the same. Is this correct?

Line 186 & 197 is p= 0.000 a typo?

The authors provide context for their results without overstating them.

Line 206. The authors make a general statement about pro-inflammatory biomarkers being used for diagnosis/prognosis. Which ones.

Line 228 type. .8-9.0 should be .8-.9

Line 269 is the “CT” genotype the same CT used for imaging? Please clarify.

Line 279-280 Clarify sentence.

Reviewer #2: The manuscript by Nazeer et al., “Upregulation of interleukin 1β and interleukin 18 in traumatic brain injury patients and their potential as biomarkers,” examines the elevation of IL 1β and IL 18 in TBI patients and evaluates their potential as neuroinflammatory biomarkers. In this study, serum IL 1β and IL 18 levels were quantified in samples collected from TBI patients and healthy individuals using ELISA. The authors also applied Spearman’s rank order correlation to assess the relationship between Glasgow Coma Scale scores and cytokine levels, with the goal of evaluating IL 1β and IL 18 as reliable biomarkers. The results show a negative correlation between GCS scores and IL 1β/IL 18 levels, with markedly elevated cytokine concentrations in TBI patients, supporting their potential as diagnostic and prognostic biomarkers. However, there are a couple of concerns regarding the study population that should be addressed before this manuscript would be of significant interest to the PLOS ONE readership.

1. While the demographics of the selected subjects are described, the manuscript does not provide information on patients’ medical histories, including comorbidities or pre‑existing conditions or prior concussions. These factors could significantly influence circulating IL‑1β and IL‑18 levels and should be addressed.

2. The manuscript does not indicate whether IL 1β and IL 18 levels differed between male and female TBI participants.

**********

what does this mean? ). If published, this will include your full peer review and any attached files.). If published, this will include your full peer review and any attached files.

If you choose “no”, your identity will remain anonymous but your review may still be made public.

Do you want your identity to be public for this peer review? For information about this choice, including consent withdrawal, please see our For information about this choice, including consent withdrawal, please see our Privacy Policy .-->

Reviewer #1: No

Reviewer #2: No

**********

[NOTE: If reviewer comments were submitted as an attachment file, they will be attached to this email and accessible via the submission site. Please log into your account, locate the manuscript record, and check for the action link "View Attachments". If this link does not appear, there are no attachment files.]

To ensure your figures meet our technical requirements, please review our figure guidelines: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/figures

You may also use PLOS’s free figure tool, NAAS, to help you prepare publication quality figures: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/figures#loc-tools-for-figure-preparation.

NAAS will assess whether your figures meet our technical requirements by comparing each figure against our figure specifications.

PLoS One. 2026 Apr 3;21(4):e0335877. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0335877.r002

Author response to Decision Letter 1


9 Feb 2026

We thank and appreciate the reviewers for their valuable comments. It will definitely help us to improve our manuscript. We have tried to address all the points raised by them.

Reviewer #1:

Comment: There is no justification for the choice of cytokines studied.

Response:

We thank the reviewer for this comment. IL-1β and IL-18 were specifically selected because they are key upstream mediators of post-traumatic neuroinflammation. We have added the statement to the revised manuscript, which reads as “In this work, IL-1 β and IL-18 are selected, as they are major upstream regulators of TBI-induced inflammation and secondary brain injury [27]. Unlike GFAP and UCH-L1, which are primarily upregulated as a result of neuronal and glial cell damage [28,29], these cytokines provide insight into the activation of the inflammatory pathway, aligning with the main focus of our study.”

Comment: Lines 100-105. The authors state there is no FDA-backed biomarkers for TBI. This is no longer true. Combined use of GFAP & UCH-L1 from blood is a good diagnostic tool.

Response: We thank the reviewers for highlighting this important update. We agree that our original statement was inaccurate. The combined measurement of glial fibrillary acidic protein (GFAP) and ubiquitin C-terminal hydrolase-L1 (UCH-L1) from blood has now received FDA clearance and represents a validated diagnostic tool for early assessment of traumatic brain injury, including detection of intracranial lesions after blunt head trauma. In response to this comment, we have revised the manuscript to acknowledge the FDA-approved status and clinical utility of these biomarkers. The relevant sentence has been corrected in the Introduction to show the current evidence. The modified text reads as “The pathology of traumatic brain injury is highly complex and involves many mechanisms, such as oxidative stress, neuronal damage, neuronal excitotoxicity, and inflammatory responses [24]. Although an extensive literature is present on biomarkers to assess TBI, only a few, such as the Food and Drug Administration (FDA)-approved combined measurement of glial fibrillary acidic protein (GFAP) and ubiquitin C-terminal hydrolase-L1 (UCH-L1), are currently employed for the early diagnosis of intracranial lesions following closed head injury [25]. Despite this advancement, there is continued scientific effort to identify and validate additional biomarkers linked to neuroinflammation to improve prognostic assessment, rather than serving solely as diagnostic tools [26].

Based on these considerations, we aimed to investigate the link between the key inflammatory cytokines IL-1β and IL-18 and TBI in the Pakistani population by using serum to measure their levels. Moreover, their diagnostic and prognostic potential was assessed by evaluating their AUC, sensitivity, and specificity values. In this work, IL-1 β and IL-18 are selected, as they are major upstream regulators of TBI-induced inflammation and secondary brain injury [27]. Unlike GFAP and UCH-L1, which are primarily upregulated as a result of neuronal and glial cell damage [28,29], these cytokines provide insight into the activation of the inflammatory pathway, aligning with the main focus of our study.”

Comment: Inclusion criteria are clear. However, Table 1 shows that the TBI and control groups were matched according to their demographic characteristics, but that was not stated in the methods.

Response: We thank the reviewer for this important observation. We agree that the matching of TBI and control groups should be stated in the Methods section. We have added the text. It reads now “The TBI and control groups were matched for demographic variables, including age, gender, marital status, education, and monthly income, to avoid confounding effects.”

Comment: The reported methods for obtaining and processing blood are standard. While blood was obtained on hospital admission from the TBI group, there is no indication when normals gave blood.

Response:

We thank the reviewer for this important comment. We agree that the timing of blood sampling in the control (normal) group should be clearly stated. We have modified the text in the Methods section. It reads as “For the extraction of serum, 5 mL of venous blood was drawn from TBI patients at the time of hospital admission and from healthy subjects at recruitment under resting conditions.”

Comment: The figures were not included in the submission. I got the figures from their posting to BioRxiv

Response: We apologize for this; it is possible that the figures were not opened due to a formatting issue. The figures have now been uploaded as separate files and are also included at the end of this response letter for your convenience.

Comment: Tables 2 & 3 are very repetitive with text and Figures.

Response: We appreciate the reviewer’s comment. Tables 2 and 3 provide detailed numerical and statistical data, while the figures illustrate overall trends. To avoid redundancy, the Results section has been revised and repetitive numerical descriptions have been removed. The text now focuses only on key findings.

Comment: Line 174. “negative trend”. No trend analysis was done. Negative tendency might be a better term.

Response: We agree with the reviewer. We have deleted the following sentence “A negative trend was observed in both plots, describing lower GCS scores correspond to higher IL levels.” to avoid redundancy, as it is already in (Table 2) description.

We have also analyzed the correlation between IL-1β levels and IL-18 levels. We have added results in (Table 2) and described in the Results section. The text reads as “A significant negative correlation was found between GCS score and both IL-1β (ρ = –0.430, p = 0.006) and IL-18 (ρ = -0.410, p = 0.009), demonstrating that lower GCS scores were moderately associated with higher levels of cytokines. Moreover, a moderate positive correlation was observed between IL-1β and IL-18 levels (ρ = 0.436, p = 0.005), showing that both cytokines increased together following TBI (Table 2). The scatterplots in Fig 1A-C demonstrate these correlations.”

Comment: Line 175. They should define what they consider a normal range.

Response: We thank the reviewer for this important observation. We have clarified the Results section to objectively define the normal range using values observed in healthy controls. We have modified the statement. The new text reads as “Most of the TBI patients exhibited IL-1β levels and IL-18 levels within or slightly above the range observed in healthy controls (IL-1β: 786.80–2250.70 pg/mL; IL-18: 13.78–27.91 ng/L). However, some TBI patients showed elevated cytokine levels, with IL-1β peaking at 5037.90 pg/mL and IL-18 at 85.69 ng/L.”

Comment: Line 176. The authors appropriately define what the different GCS scores mean and state that their subjects have mild TBI. However, they report a mean score of 11.05, which is indicative of moderate severity TBI. Please clarify.

Response:

We thank the reviewer for pointing this out. Our GCS data indicate that the cohort includes predominantly moderate TBI, with some patients in the mild and severe ranges. We have revised the manuscript. The modified text reads as “The GCS scores of TBI patients ranged from 6 to 14, with a mean of 11.05 ± 1.68, indicating that the cohort predominantly consisted of patients with mild-to-moderate TBI.”

Comment: Table 2. The correlation and p values for IL-1β & IL-18 are exactly the same. Is this correct?

Response: We appreciate the reviewer for his keen observations. We have analyzed the data once again and corrected the mistake. Moreover, we have added a comparison between IL-1β and IL-18. The new table appears as with modified title and legend:

“Table 2. Spearman’s rank-order correlation coefficients (ρ) for correlations between GCS score and IL-1β and IL-18 levels in TBI patients.

Association Spearman’s ρ (rho) P-value (two-tailed)

GCS versus IL-1β -0.430 0.006

GCS versus IL-18 -0.410 0.009

IL-1β versus IL-18 0.436 0.005

Positive and negative ρ values indicate positive and negative correlations, respectively. All correlations were statistically significant (p ≤ 0.05).

Abbreviations: GCS, Glasgow coma scale; IL, interleukin; TBI, traumatic brain injury.”

Comment: Line 186 & 197 is p= 0.000 a typo?

Response: Thank you for highlighting this point. The p-values reported as p = 0.000 in Lines 186 and 197 were due to statistical software rounding. These have been corrected to “p < 0.001” in the manuscript.

Comment: Line 206. The authors make a general statement about pro-inflammatory biomarkers being used for diagnosis/prognosis. Which ones.

Response:

We thank the reviewer for this important comment. In the revised manuscript, we have specified representative pro-inflammatory biomarkers that have been reported to aid in the diagnosis and prognosis of traumatic brain injury. The revised text reads as “Several pro-inflammatory biomarkers, including tumor necrosis factor (TNF)-α, apoptosis-associated speck-like protein containing a caspase recruitment domain (ASC), IL-1, IL-6, and IL-18, are described as clinically relevant biomarkers that may assist in the diagnosis and prognosis of brain trauma [33,34].”

Comment: Line 228 type. .8-9.0 should be .8-.9

Response: We have corrected it. It reads now “0.8-0.9”.

Comment: Line 269 is the “CT” genotype the same CT used for imaging? Please clarify.

Response: The CT genotype was found to be associated with an increased PTE susceptibility. In the CT genotype group

We appreciate the reviewer for pointing out this ambiguity. In the present study, the term “CT genotype” refers to the heterozygous cytosine/thymine (C/T) genotype of the analyzed single nucleotide polymorphism and is not related to computed tomography imaging or Chlamydia trachomatis. To avoid confusion, this has been clarified in the revised manuscript by defining the genotype and using “C/T”. The new text reads as “The C/T (cytosine/thymine) heterozygous genotype was found to be associated with increased susceptibility to post-traumatic epilepsy.”

Comment: Line 279-280 Clarify sentence.

Response: We have corrected the sentence. Now it reads as “as they were collected from one small part of the country.”

Reviewer #2:

Comment: 1. While the demographics of the selected subjects are described, the manuscript does not provide information on patients’ medical histories, including comorbidities or pre existing conditions or prior concussions. These factors could significantly influence circulating IL 1β and IL 18 levels and should be addressed.

Response: We thank the reviewer for raising this important concern. Potential confounding factors, including comorbidities and prior concussions, were addressed during subject enrollment. Subjects with pre-existing inflammatory, autoimmune, infectious, or neurological disorders, as well as those with a prior history of TBI or concussion, were not recruited for this study. We have now stated this exclusion criterion in the Methods section, which reads as “Patients with pre-existing inflammatory, autoimmune, infectious, or neurological disorders, as well as those with a prior history of TBI or concussion, were excluded from this study to avoid confounding effects on circulating cytokine levels.”

Comment: 2. The manuscript does not indicate whether IL 1β and IL 18 levels differed between male and female TBI participants.

Response: We thank the reviewer for this valuable comment. We have analyzed IL-1β and IL-18 levels according to gender. These results are added to the Results section with (Table 3) and (Fig 4). The text reads as “Levels of cytokines were also analyzed to assess their distribution between male and female participants. IL-1β levels were not significantly different between males and females of normal (p = 0.15) and TBI groups (p = 0.352). On the contrary, in the normal group, females had slightly but significantly higher levels of IL-18 than males (19.93 ± 2.64 vs. 18.67 ± 3.14 ng/L; p = 0.043). In TBI subjects, this difference was significantly higher (p = 0.012) in females (28.91 ± 18.03) as compared to males (23.48 ± 11.41 ng/L) (Table 3, Fig 3).”

Table 3. Gender-based comparison of cytokines in normal and TBI subjects.

Cytokine Group Male (Mean ± SD) Female (Mean ± SD) P-value

IL-1β

Normal 1538.05 ± 279.87 1365.92 ± 393.54 0.15

TBI 1907.47 ± 760.48 1851.29 ± 860.21 0.352

IL-18 Normal 18.67 ± 3.14 19.93 ± 2.64 0.043

TBI 23.48 ± 11.41 28.91 ± 18.03 0.012

Abbreviations: IL, interleukin; TBI, traumatic brain injury; SD, standard deviation

Fig 3. Gender-based comparison of IL-1β (A) and IL-18 (B) levels in normal and TBI participants. Data are presented as mean ± standard deviation. Statistical significance was assessed using the Mann–Whitney U test. IL-1β levels did not differ significantly between sexes in either group (p > 0.05), whereas IL-18 levels were significantly higher in females than in males in both the normal and TBI groups.

We have also added the following paragraph to the Discussion chapter “Our data demonstrate a differential post-TBI inflammatory response between male and female subjects, denoted by higher IL-1β levels in males and elevated IL-18 levels in females. Our results align with the previous research work that also demonstrates gender-specific inflammatory response following TBI. For instance, in an animal study [48], male mice exhibited a significant increase in IL-1β levels compared to females following experimental TBI. Conversely, gender-specific data on IL-18 levels in the context of TBI are sparse. However, our findings are supported by a previous study [49] in which higher serum levels of IL-8, another related inflammatory cytokine, were demonstrated in TBI females compared to males. Taken together, our data demonstrate that females may exhibit a more robust cytokine response following TBI, which highlights the importance of gender-specific considerations in TBI management and immune-targeted therapeutic strategies.

In addition to addressing the reviewers’ suggestions, we have made minor corrections throughout the manuscript, which are visible in the tracked-changes manuscript.

Fig 1. Scatterplots exhibiting association between Glasgow coma scale (GCS) scores and serum interleukin (IL) levels. GCS scores were significantly negatively correlated (Spearman’s ρ = –0.43, p = 0.006) with IL-1β (A) and IL-18 (B) in TBI patients.

Fig 2. Box plots exhibiting comparative analysis of interleukin (IL) levels in serum of traumatic brain injury (TBI) patients (n = 40) and normal individuals (n = 40), as assessed by enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA). Levels of (A) IL-1β and (B) IL-18 are higher in TBI patients compared with normal individuals. Each box indicates interquartile range (IQR), the horizontal line inside the box exhibits the median, whiskers depict variability outside the upper and lower quartiles, circles (°) denote mild outliers (values between 1.5 and 3 times the IQR), and asterisks (*) indicate extreme outliers (values exceeding 3 times the IQR). Statistical significance was assessed using the Mann–Whitney U-test.

Fig 3. Gender-based comparison of IL-1β (A) and IL-18 (B) levels in normal and TBI participants. Data are presented as mean ± standard deviation. Statistical significance was assessed using the Mann–Whitney U test. IL-1β levels did not differ significantly between sexes in either group (p > 0.05), whereas IL-18 levels were significantly higher in females than in males in both the normal and TBI groups.

Fig 4. The area under the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve (AUC) and the discriminatory ability of IL-1β and IL-18. The black line in the figure represents IL-1β, and the grey line denotes IL-18. The Y-axis shows the ability of ILs to correctly detect TBI patients, and the X-axis represents the proportion of healthy individuals wrongly classified as TBI. The higher AUC value of IL-18 (0.78) than that of IL-1β (0.72) demonstrates its better diagnostic power as a biomarker.

Attachment

Submitted filename: Response to reviewers.docx

pone.0335877.s003.docx (542.6KB, docx)

Decision Letter 1

Subhra Mohapatra

12 Mar 2026

Upregulation of interleukin-1β and interleukin-18 in traumatic brain injury patients and their potential as biomarkers

PONE-D-25-55326R1

Dear Dr. Murtaza,

We’re pleased to inform you that your manuscript has been judged scientifically suitable for publication and will be formally accepted for publication once it meets all outstanding technical requirements.

Within one week, you’ll receive an e-mail detailing the required amendments. When these have been addressed, you’ll receive a formal acceptance letter and your manuscript will be scheduled for publication.

An invoice will be generated when your article is formally accepted. Please note, if your institution has a publishing partnership with PLOS and your article meets the relevant criteria, all or part of your publication costs will be covered. Please make sure your user information is up-to-date by logging into Editorial Manager at Editorial Manager®  and clicking the ‘Update My Information' link at the top of the page. For questions related to billing, please contact  and clicking the ‘Update My Information' link at the top of the page. For questions related to billing, please contact billing support ..

If your institution or institutions have a press office, please notify them about your upcoming paper to help maximize its impact. If they’ll be preparing press materials, please inform our press team as soon as possible -- no later than 48 hours after receiving the formal acceptance. Your manuscript will remain under strict press embargo until 2 pm Eastern Time on the date of publication. For more information, please contact onepress@plos.org.

Kind regards,

Subhra Mohapatra, MS PhD

Academic Editor

PLOS One

Additional Editor Comments (optional):

Reviewers' comments:

Reviewer's Responses to Questions

Comments to the Author

Reviewer #1: All comments have been addressed

Reviewer #2: All comments have been addressed

**********

2. Is the manuscript technically sound, and do the data support the conclusions??>

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

3. Has the statistical analysis been performed appropriately and rigorously? -->?>

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

4. Have the authors made all data underlying the findings in their manuscript fully available??>

The PLOS Data policy requires authors to make all data underlying the findings described in their manuscript fully available without restriction, with rare exception (please refer to the Data Availability Statement in the manuscript PDF file). The data should be provided as part of the manuscript or its supporting information, or deposited to a public repository. For example, in addition to summary statistics, the data points behind means, medians and variance measures should be available. If there are restrictions on publicly sharing data—e.g. participant privacy or use of data from a third party—those must be specified.-->

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

5. Is the manuscript presented in an intelligible fashion and written in standard English??>

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

Reviewer #1: (No Response)

Reviewer #2: (No Response)

**********

what does this mean? ). If published, this will include your full peer review and any attached files.). If published, this will include your full peer review and any attached files.

If you choose “no”, your identity will remain anonymous but your review may still be made public.

Do you want your identity to be public for this peer review? For information about this choice, including consent withdrawal, please see our For information about this choice, including consent withdrawal, please see our Privacy Policy .-->

Reviewer #1: No

Reviewer #2: No

**********

Acceptance letter

Subhra Mohapatra

PONE-D-25-55326R1

PLOS One

Dear Dr. Murtaza,

I'm pleased to inform you that your manuscript has been deemed suitable for publication in PLOS One. Congratulations! Your manuscript is now being handed over to our production team.

At this stage, our production department will prepare your paper for publication. This includes ensuring the following:

* All references, tables, and figures are properly cited

* All relevant supporting information is included in the manuscript submission,

* There are no issues that prevent the paper from being properly typeset

You will receive further instructions from the production team, including instructions on how to review your proof when it is ready. Please keep in mind that we are working through a large volume of accepted articles, so please give us a few days to review your paper and let you know the next and final steps.

Lastly, if your institution or institutions have a press office, please let them know about your upcoming paper now to help maximize its impact. If they'll be preparing press materials, please inform our press team within the next 48 hours. Your manuscript will remain under strict press embargo until 2 pm Eastern Time on the date of publication. For more information, please contact onepress@plos.org.

You will receive an invoice from PLOS for your publication fee after your manuscript has reached the completed accept phase. If you receive an email requesting payment before acceptance or for any other service, this may be a phishing scheme. Learn how to identify phishing emails and protect your accounts at https://explore.plos.org/phishing.

If we can help with anything else, please email us at customercare@plos.org.

Thank you for submitting your work to PLOS ONE and supporting open access.

Kind regards,

PLOS ONE Editorial Office Staff

on behalf of

Dr. Subhra Mohapatra

Academic Editor

PLOS One

Associated Data

    This section collects any data citations, data availability statements, or supplementary materials included in this article.

    Supplementary Materials

    S1 File. Raw data.

    (XLSX)

    pone.0335877.s001.xlsx (12.6KB, xlsx)
    Attachment

    Submitted filename: Response to reviewers.docx

    pone.0335877.s003.docx (542.6KB, docx)

    Data Availability Statement

    All relevant data are within the paper and its Supporting information files.


    Articles from PLOS One are provided here courtesy of PLOS

    RESOURCES