Dataset Information

Recombinant human activated protein C for the treatment of severe sepsis and septic shock: a study protocol for incorporating observational evidence using a Bayesian approach.

ABSTRACT: Activated protein C (aPC) plays a pivotal role in modulating a severe inflammatory response and is thought to be beneficial for patients with sepsis. However, several meta-analyses of randomised controlled trials (RCTs) show that aPC is not significantly associated with improved survival in critically ill patients with sepsis. One suggestion is that these analyses simply ignored observational evidence. The present study aims to quantitatively demonstrate how observational data can alter the findings derived from synthesised evidence from RCTs by using a Bayesian approach.RCTs and observational studies investigating the effect of aPC on mortality outcome in critically ill patients with sepsis will be included. The quality of included RCTs will be assessed by using the Delphi list. Publication bias will be quantitatively analysed by using the traditional Egger regression test and the Begg rank correlation test. Observational data will be used as the informative prior for the distribution of OR. A power transformation of the observational data likelihood will be considered. Observational evidence will be down-weighted by a power of ? which takes values from 0 to 1. Trial sequential analysis will be performed to quantify the reliability of data in meta-analysis adjusting significance levels for sparse data and multiple testing on accumulating trials.PROSPERO (CRD42014009562).

SUBMITTER: Zhang Z

PROVIDER: S-EPMC4120342 | biostudies-other | 2014 Jul

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-other

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Recombinant human activated protein C for the treatment of severe sepsis and septic shock: a study protocol for incorporating observational evidence using a Bayesian approach.

Zhang Zhongheng Z

BMJ open 20140731 7

<h4>Introduction</h4>Activated protein C (aPC) plays a pivotal role in modulating a severe inflammatory response and is thought to be beneficial for patients with sepsis. However, several meta-analyses of randomised controlled trials (RCTs) show that aPC is not significantly associated with improved survival in critically ill patients with sepsis. One suggestion is that these analyses simply ignored observational evidence. The present study aims to quantitatively demonstrate how observational da ...[more]

PMID: 25082420

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundSepsis is a common and frequently fatal condition. Human recombinant activated protein C (APC) has been introduced to reduce the high risk of death associated with severe sepsis or septic shock. This systematic review is an update of a Cochrane review originally published in 2007.ObjectivesWe assessed the benefits and harms of APC for patients with severe sepsis or septic shock.Search methodsWe searched CENTRAL (The Cochrane Library 2012, Issue 6); MEDLINE (2010 to June 2012); EMBASE (2010 to June 2012); BIOSIS (1965 to June 2012); CINAHL (1982 to June 2012) and LILACS (1982 to June 2012). There was no language restriction.Selection criteriaWe included randomized clinical trials assessing the effects of APC for severe sepsis or septic shock in adults and children. We excluded studies on neonates. We considered all-cause mortality at day 28 and at the end of study follow up, and hospital mortality as the primary outcomes.Data collection and analysisWe independently performed trial selection, risk of bias assessment, and data extraction in duplicate. We estimated relative risks (RR) for dichotomous outcomes. We measured statistical heterogeneity using the I(2) statistic. We used a random-effects model.Main resultsWe identified one new randomized clinical trial in this update which includes six randomized clinical trials involving 6781 participants in total, five randomized clinical trials in adult (N = 6307) and one randomized clinical trial in paediatric (N = 474) participants. All trials had high risk of bias and were sponsored by the pharmaceutical industry. APC compared with placebo did not significantly affect all-cause mortality at day 28 compared with placebo (780/3435 (22.7%) versus 767/3346 (22.9%); RR 1.00, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.86 to 1.16; I(2) = 56%). APC did not significantly affect in-hospital mortality (393/1767 (22.2%) versus 379/1710 (22.1%); RR 1.01, 95% CI 0.87 to 1.16; I(2) = 20%). APC was associated with an increased risk of serious bleeding (113/3424 (3.3%) versus 74/3343 (2.2%); RR 1.45, 95% CI 1.08 to 1.94; I(2) = 0%). APC did not significantly affect serious adverse events (463/3334 (13.9%) versus 439/3302 (13.2%); RR 1.04, 95% CI 0.92 to 1.18; I(2) = 0%). Trial sequential analyses showed that more trials do not seem to be needed for reliable conclusions regarding these outcomes.Authors' conclusionsThis updated review found no evidence suggesting that APC should be used for treating patients with severe sepsis or septic shock. APC seems to be associated with a higher risk of bleeding. The drug company behind APC, Eli Lilly, has announced the discontinuation of all ongoing clinical trials using this drug for treating patients with severe sepsis or septic shock. APC should not be used for sepsis or septic shock outside randomized clinical trials.

Project description:In randomised controlled trials, procalcitonin (PCT)-guided antibiotic treatment has been proven to significantly reduce length of antibiotic therapy in intensive care unit (ICU) patients. However, concern was raised on low protocol adherence and high rates of overruling, and thus the value of PCT-guided treatment in real clinical life outside study conditions remains unclear. In this study, adherence to a PCT protocol to guide antibiotic treatment in patients with severe sepsis and septic shock was analysed.From 2012 to 2014, surgical ICU patients with severe sepsis or septic shock were retrospectively screened for PCT measurement series appropriate to make treatment decisions on antibiotic therapy. We compared (1) patients with appropriate PCT measurement series to patients without appropriate series; (2) patients who reached the antibiotic stopping advice threshold (PCT?<?0.5 ng/mL and/or decrease to 10% of peak level) to patients who did not reach a stopping advice threshold; and (3) patients who were treated adherently to the PCT protocol to non-adherently treated patients. The groups were compared in terms of antibiotic treatment duration, PCT kinetics, and other clinical outcomes.Of 81 patients with severe sepsis or septic shock, 14 were excluded due to treatment restriction or short course in the ICU. The final analysis was performed on 67 patients. Forty-two patients (62.7%) had appropriate PCT measurement series. In patients with appropriate PCT series, median initial PCT (p?=?0.001) and peak PCT levels (p?<?0.001) were significantly higher compared to those with non-appropriate series. In 26 patients with appropriate series, PCT levels reached an antibiotic stopping advice. In 8 of 26 patients with stopping advice, antibiotics were discontinued adherently to the PCT protocol (30.8%). Patients with adherently discontinued antibiotics had a shorter antibiotic treatment (7d [IQR 6-9] vs. 12d [IQR 9-16]; p?=?0.002). No differences were seen in terms of other clinical outcomes.In patients with severe sepsis and septic shock, procalcitonin testing was irregular and adherence to a local PCT protocol was low in real clinical life. However, adherently treated patients had a shorter duration of antibiotic treatment without negative clinical outcomes. Procalcitonin peak values and kinetics had a clear impact on the regularity of PCT testing.

Project description:IntroductionCurrent low (stress) dose corticosteroid regimens may have therapeutic advantage in severe sepsis and septic shock despite conflicting results from two landmark randomised controlled trials (RCT). We systematically reviewed the efficacy of corticosteroid therapy in severe sepsis and septic shock.MethodsRCTs were identified (1950-September 2008) by multiple data-base electronic search (MEDLINE via OVID, OVID PreMedline, OVID Embase, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled trials, Cochrane database of systematic reviews, Health Technology Assessment Database and Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effects) and hand search of references, reviews and scientific society proceedings. Three investigators independently assessed trial inclusion and data extraction into standardised forms; differences resolved by consensus.ResultsCorticosteroid efficacy, compared with control, for hospital-mortality, proportion of patients experiencing shock-resolution, and infective and non-infective complications was assessed using Bayesian random-effects models; expressed as odds ratio (OR, (95% credible-interval)). Bayesian outcome probabilities were calculated as the probability (P) that OR ≥1. Fourteen RCTs were identified. High-dose (>1000 mg hydrocortisone (equivalent) per day) corticosteroid trials were associated with a null (n = 5; OR 0.91(0.31-1.25)) or higher (n = 4, OR 1.46(0.73-2.16), outlier excluded) mortality probability (P = 42.0% and 89.3%, respectively). Low-dose trials (<1000 mg hydrocortisone per day) were associated with a lower (n = 9, OR 0.80(0.40-1.39); n = 8 OR 0.71(0.37-1.10), outlier excluded) mortality probability (20.4% and 5.8%, respectively). OR for shock-resolution was increased in the low dose trials (n = 7; OR 1.20(1.07-4.55); P = 98.2%). Patient responsiveness to corticotrophin stimulation was non-determinant. A high probability of risk-related treatment efficacy (decrease in log-odds mortality with increased control arm risk) was identified by metaregression in the low dose trials (n = 9, slope coefficient -0.49(-1.14, 0.27); P = 92.2%). Odds of complications were not increased with corticosteroids.ConclusionsAlthough a null effect for mortality treatment efficacy of low dose corticosteroid therapy in severe sepsis and septic shock was not excluded, there remained a high probability of treatment efficacy, more so with outlier exclusion. Similarly, although a null effect was not excluded, advantageous effects of low dose steroids had a high probability of dependence upon patient underlying risk. Low dose steroid efficacy was not demonstrated in corticotrophin non-responders. Further large-scale trials appear mandated.

Project description:The role of recombinant activated protein C (aPC) during sepsis is still controversial. It showed anti-inflammatory effect and improved the microvascular perfusion in experimental models of septic shock. The present study was aimed at testing the hypothesis that recombinant aPC therapy improves the microcirculation during severe sepsis.Prospective observational study on patients admitted in a 12-beds intensive care unit of a university hospital from July 2010 to December 2011, with severe sepsis and at least two sepsis-induced organ failures occurring within 48 hours from the onset of sepsis, who received an infusion of aPC (24 mcg/kg/h for 96 hours) (aPC group). Patients with contraindications to aPC administration were also monitored (no-aPC group).At baseline (before starting aPC infusion, T0), after 24 hours (T1a), 48 hours (T1b), 72 hours (T1c) and 6 hours after the end of aPC infusion (T2), general clinical and hemodynamic parameters were collected and the sublingual microcirculation was evaluated with sidestream dark-field imaging. Total vessel density (TVD), perfused vessel density (PVD), De Backer score, microvascular flow index (MFIs), the proportion of perfused vessels (PPV) and the flow heterogeneity index (HI) were calculated for small vessels. The perfused boundary region (PBR) was measured as an index of glycocalyx damage. Variables were compared between time points and groups using non parametric or parametric statistical tests, as appropriate.In the 13 aPC patients mean arterial pressure (MAP), base excess, lactate, PaO2/FiO2 and the Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA) score significantly improved over time, while CI and ITBVI did not change. MFIs, TVD, PVD, PPV significantly increased over time and the HI decreased (p?<?0.05 in all cases), while the PBR did not change. No-aPC patients (n?=?9) did not show any change in the microcirculation over time. A positive correlation was found between MFIs and MAP. TVD, PVD and De Backer score negatively correlated with norepinephrine dose, and the SOFA score negatively correlated with MFIs, TVD and PVD.aPC significantly improves the microcirculation in patients with severe sepsis/septic shock.NCT01806428.

Dataset Information

Recombinant human activated protein C for the treatment of severe sepsis and septic shock: a study protocol for incorporating observational evidence using a Bayesian approach.

Publications

Recombinant human activated protein C for the treatment of severe sepsis and septic shock: a study protocol for incorporating observational evidence using a Bayesian approach.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets