OBJECTIVES: Sepsis is a lethal syndrome annually affecting approximately 900,000 patients in the United States alone. Despite their benefit in rheumatoid disease, selective antitumor necrosis factor agents failed to improve outcome in early sepsis trials in the 1990s. However, data from additional sepsis trials testing these agents are now available. We therefore sought to determine the effect on survival of selective antitumor necrosis factor agents in randomized clinical sepsis trials.. DATA SOURCES: PubMed, Scopus, Embase, and Web of Science. STUDY SELECTION: Randomized human sepsis trials of selective antitumor necrosis factor agents reporting survival rates. DATA EXTRACTION: Two investigators independently collected relevant data on study characteristics, treatment interventions, and patients from each study. DATA SYNTHESIS: Antitumor necrosis factor agents in 15 sepsis trials (n=8,896 patients) meeting inclusion criteria had similar effects (I=0, p=0.84) and compared with controls (placebo in 14 trials or a lower dose in one trial) overall decreased the relative risk of death (95% CI) (0.93 [0.88-0.98], p=0.01). In subgroup analysis, tumor necrosis factor monoclonal antibodies (10 trials, n=6,818) alone produced a significant survival benefit (0.93 [0.87, 0.99], p=0.02) (I=0, p=0.83). Tumor necrosis factor polyclonal antibodies (two trials, n=151) and low-molecular-weight soluble receptor (two trials, n=1,786) had similar beneficial effects to antitumor necrosis factor agents overall (0.82 [0.49-1.37], p=0.45; 0.93 [0.81-1.08], p=0.33, respectively). The effect of tumor necrosis factor high-molecular-weight soluble receptor (one trial, n=141) was not significantly different from other agents but was on the side of harm (1.50 [0.86-2.61], p=0.16). CONCLUSION: Antitumor necrosis factor agents produced a modest but significant decrease in the risk of dying with sepsis. Prior individual trials failed to demonstrate benefit, likely because they were underpowered. A definitive trial demonstrating the potential benefit of such agents might require 10,000 or more patients with sepsis.
OBJECTIVES:Sepsis is a lethal syndrome annually affecting approximately 900,000 patients in the United States alone. Despite their benefit in rheumatoid disease, selective antitumor necrosis factor agents failed to improve outcome in early sepsis trials in the 1990s. However, data from additional sepsis trials testing these agents are now available. We therefore sought to determine the effect on survival of selective antitumor necrosis factor agents in randomized clinical sepsis trials.. DATA SOURCES: PubMed, Scopus, Embase, and Web of Science. STUDY SELECTION: Randomized humansepsis trials of selective antitumor necrosis factor agents reporting survival rates. DATA EXTRACTION: Two investigators independently collected relevant data on study characteristics, treatment interventions, and patients from each study. DATA SYNTHESIS: Antitumor necrosis factor agents in 15 sepsis trials (n=8,896 patients) meeting inclusion criteria had similar effects (I=0, p=0.84) and compared with controls (placebo in 14 trials or a lower dose in one trial) overall decreased the relative risk of death (95% CI) (0.93 [0.88-0.98], p=0.01). In subgroup analysis, tumor necrosis factor monoclonal antibodies (10 trials, n=6,818) alone produced a significant survival benefit (0.93 [0.87, 0.99], p=0.02) (I=0, p=0.83). Tumor necrosis factor polyclonal antibodies (two trials, n=151) and low-molecular-weight soluble receptor (two trials, n=1,786) had similar beneficial effects to antitumor necrosis factor agents overall (0.82 [0.49-1.37], p=0.45; 0.93 [0.81-1.08], p=0.33, respectively). The effect of tumor necrosis factor high-molecular-weight soluble receptor (one trial, n=141) was not significantly different from other agents but was on the side of harm (1.50 [0.86-2.61], p=0.16). CONCLUSION: Antitumor necrosis factor agents produced a modest but significant decrease in the risk of dying with sepsis. Prior individual trials failed to demonstrate benefit, likely because they were underpowered. A definitive trial demonstrating the potential benefit of such agents might require 10,000 or more patients with sepsis.
Authors: Peter Q Eichacker; Chantal Parent; Andre Kalil; Claire Esposito; Xizhong Cui; Steven M Banks; Eric P Gerstenberger; Yvonne Fitz; Robert L Danner; Charles Natanson Journal: Am J Respir Crit Care Med Date: 2002-11-01 Impact factor: 21.405
Authors: K Reinhart; T Menges; B Gardlund; J Harm Zwaveling; M Smithes; J L Vincent; J M Tellado; A Salgado-Remigio; R Zimlichman; S Withington; K Tschaikowsky; R Brase; P Damas; H Kupper; J Kempeni; J Eiselstein; M Kaul Journal: Crit Care Med Date: 2001-04 Impact factor: 7.598
Authors: E Abraham; P F Laterre; J Garbino; S Pingleton; T Butler; T Dugernier; B Margolis; K Kudsk; W Zimmerli; P Anderson; M Reynaert; D Lew; W Lesslauer; S Passe; P Cooper; A Burdeska; M Modi; A Leighton; M Salgo; P Van der Auwera Journal: Crit Care Med Date: 2001-03 Impact factor: 7.598
Authors: J Gallagher; C Fisher; B Sherman; M Munger; B Meyers; T Ellison; S Fischkoff; W T Barchuk; L Teoh; R Velagapudi Journal: Intensive Care Med Date: 2001-07 Impact factor: 17.440
Authors: Mitchell M Levy; Antonio Artigas; Gary S Phillips; Andrew Rhodes; Richard Beale; Tiffany Osborn; Jean-Louis Vincent; Sean Townsend; Stanley Lemeshow; R Phillip Dellinger Journal: Lancet Infect Dis Date: 2012-10-26 Impact factor: 25.071
Authors: Peter E Morris; Brian Zeno; Andrew C Bernard; Xiangning Huang; Shampa Das; Timi Edeki; Steven G Simonson; Gordon R Bernard Journal: Crit Care Date: 2012-02-17 Impact factor: 9.097