Protein C Worldwide Evaluation In Severe Sepsis Research Articles

Differences in reported sepsis incidence according to study design: a literature review.

BackgroundSepsis and severe sepsis are common conditions in hospital settings, and are associated with high rates of morbidity and mortality, but reported incidences vary considerably. In this literature review, we describe the variation in reported population-based incidences of sepsis and severe sepsis. We also examine methodological and demographic differences between studies that may explain this variation.MethodsWe carried out a literature review searching three major databases and reference lists of relevant articles, to identify all original studies reporting the incidence of sepsis or severe sepsis in the general population. Two authors independently assessed all articles, and the final decision to exclude an article was reached by consensus. We extracted data according to predetermined variables, including study country, sepsis definition, and data source. We then calculated descriptive statistics for the reported incidences of sepsis and severe sepsis. The studies were classified according to the method used to identify cases of sepsis or severe sepsis: chart-based (i.e. review of patient charts) or code-based (i.e. predetermined International Classification of Diseases [ICD] codes).ResultsAmong 482 articles initially screened, we identified 23 primary publications reporting incidence of sepsis and/or severe sepsis in the general population. The reported incidences ranged from 74 to 1180 per 100,000 person-years and 3 to 1074 per 100,000 person-years for sepsis and severe sepsis, respectively. Most chart-based studies used the Bone criteria (or a modification hereof) and Protein C Worldwide Evaluation in Severe Sepsis (PROWESS) study criteria to identify cases of sepsis and severe sepsis. Most code-based studies used ICD-9 codes, but the number of codes used ranged from 1 to more than 1200. We found that the incidence varied according to how sepsis was identified (chart-based vs. code-based), calendar year, data source, and world region.ConclusionThe reported incidences of sepsis and severe sepsis in the general population varied greatly between studies. Such differences may be attributable to differences in the methods used to collect the data, the study period, or the world region where the study was undertaken. This finding highlights the importance of standardised definitions and acquisition of data regarding sepsis and severe sepsis.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12874-016-0237-9) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Thrombomodulin/activated protein C system in septic disseminated intravascular coagulation.

The thrombomodulin (TM)/activated protein C (APC) system plays an important role in maintaining the homeostasis of thrombosis and hemostasis and maintaining vascular integrity in vivo. TM expressed on vascular endothelium binds to thrombin, forming a 1:1 complex and acts as an anticoagulant. In addition, the thrombin-TM complex activates protein C to produce APC, which inactivates factors VIIIa and Va in the presence of protein S, thereby inhibiting further thrombin formation. Intriguingly, APC possesses anti-inflammatory as well as cytoprotective activities. Moreover, the extracellular domain of TM also possesses APC-independent anti-inflammatory and cytoprotective activities. Of note, the TM/APC system is compromised in disseminated intravascular coagulation (DIC) caused by sepsis due to various mechanisms, including cleavage of cell-surface TM by exaggerated cytokines and proteases produced by activated inflammatory cells. Thus, it is reasonable to assume that reconstitution of the TM/APC system by recombinant proteins would alleviate sepsis and DIC. On the basis of the success of the Protein C Worldwide Evaluation in Severe Sepsis (PROWESS) trial, the FDA approved the use of recombinant human APC (rhAPC) for severe sepsis patients in 2002. However, subsequent clinical trials failed to show clinical benefits for rhAPC, and an increased incidence of hemorrhage-related adverse events was noted, which prompted the industry to withdraw rhAPC from the market. On the other hand, recombinant human soluble TM (rTM) has been used for treatment of individuals with DIC since 2008 in Japan, and a phase III clinical trial evaluating the efficacy of rTM in severe sepsis patients with coagulopathy is now ongoing in the USA, South America, Asia, Australia, European Union, and other countries. This review article discusses the molecular mechanisms by which the TM/APC system produces anticoagulant as well as anti-inflammatory and cytoprotective activities in septic DIC patients.

Drotrecogin alfa (activated) did not reduce mortality at 28 or 90 days in patients with septic shock

ACP Journal Club21 August 2012Drotrecogin alfa (activated) did not reduce mortality at 28 or 90 days in patients with septic shockChristian Brun-Buisson, MDChristian Brun-Buisson, MDCHU Henri Mondor, AP-HP, Créteil, France (C.B.)Search for more papers by this authorAuthor, Article, and Disclosure Informationhttps://doi.org/10.7326/0003-4819-157-4-201208210-02011 SectionsAboutFull TextPDF ToolsAdd to favoritesDownload CitationsTrack CitationsPermissions ShareFacebookTwitterLinkedInRedditEmail Source CitationRanieri VM, Thompson BT, Barie PS, et al; PROWESS-SHOCK Study Group. Drotrecogin alfa (activated) in adults with septic shock. N Engl J Med. 2012;366:2055-64. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/22616830Clinical Impact RatingsHospitalists: Infectious Disease: Critical Care: References1 Bernard GR, Vincent JL, Laterre PF, et al; Recombinant human protein C Worldwide Evaluation in Severe Sepsis (PROWESS) study group. Efficacy and safety of recombinant human activated protein C for severe sepsis. N Engl J Med. 2001;344:699-709. [PMID: 11236773] Google Scholar2 Nadel S, Goldstein B, Williams MD, et al; REsearching severe Sepsis and Organ dysfunction in children: a gLobal perspective (RESOLVE) study group. Drotrecogin alfa (activated) in children with severe sepsis: a multicentre phase III randomised controlled trial. Lancet. 2007;369:836-43. [PMID: 17350452] Google Scholar3 Abraham E, Laterre PF, Garg R, et al; Administration of Drotrecogin Alfa (Activated) in Early Stage Severe Sepsis (ADDRESS) Study Group. Drotrecogin alfa (activated) for adults with severe sepsis and a low risk of death. N Engl J Med. 2005;353:1332-41. [PMID: 16192478] Google Scholar Author, Article, and Disclosure InformationAuthors: Christian Brun-Buisson, MDAffiliations: CHU Henri Mondor, AP-HP, Créteil, France (C.B.)This article was published at Annals.org on 7 August 2012. PreviousarticleNextarticle Advertisement FiguresReferencesRelatedDetails Metrics 21 August 2012Volume 157, Issue 4Page: JC2-11KeywordsDrugsHemorrhageMortalityResuscitationSaline solutionsSepsisSerious adverse eventsShockVasopressorsWeaning ePublished: 21 August 2012 Issue Published: 21 August 2012 Copyright & PermissionsCopyright © 2012 by American College of Physicians. All Rights Reserved.PDF downloadLoading ...

Effectiveness and safety of drotrecogin alfa (activated) for severe sepsis: a meta-analysis and metaregression

Drotrecogin alfa (activated) was approved for use in severe sepsis in 2001 on the basis of the Recombinant Human Activated Protein C Worldwide Evaluation in Severe Sepsis (PROWESS) trial, but controversies about its effectiveness remain. We aimed to assess effectiveness and safety of use of this drug in the past 10 years and compare them with the original PROWESS results. We searched PubMed, Embase, Ovid, Cochrane Library, Evidence-Based Medicine, and the American College of Physicians Journal Club databases for experimental and analytical studies of drotrecogin alfa (activated) in adults with severe sepsis until Jan 31, 2012. We calculated adjusted risk ratios for effectiveness and safety outcomes with random-effects models. We did a metaregression to assess the effect of severity of illness on the risk of death and the risk of bleeding associated with drotrecogin alfa (activated). We included nine controlled trials (41,401 patients) and 16 single-group studies (5822 patients) in effectiveness analyses and 20 studies (8245 patients) in safety analyses. Hospital mortality was reduced by 18% with drotrecogin alfa (activated) compared with controls (relative risk 0·822, 95% CI 0·779-0·867; p<0·0001; I(2)=40%). This mortality reduction was much the same as was noted in PROWESS (0·851, 0·740-0·979), but smaller than that of patients in PROWESS with high disease severity (0·708, 0·590-0·849). Propensity-adjusted studies also showed a significant mortality reduction with lower heterogeneity (0·844, 0·800-0·891; p<0·0001, I(2)=18%). These findings were not changed by the addition of PROWESS-SHOCK results. Metaregression showed greater benefits of drotrecogin alfa (activated) with increasing control mortality (p=0·01) and more severe disease (p=0·04). Hospital mortality for single-group studies of drotrecogin alfa (activated) was 41% (95% CI 35-48), and was higher than that noted in PROWESS at 31% (27-36; p<0·0001). The serious bleeding rate with drotrecogin alfa (activated) was 5·6% (4·5-6·9), which was higher than the 3·5% (2·5-5·0) noted in PROWESS (p=0·003), but similar to that reported in PROWESS high disease severity (p=0·073). Real-life use of drotrecrogin alfa (activated) was associated with significant reduction in hospital mortality and increased rates of bleeding in patients with severe sepsis. Our effectiveness findings were in line with the PROWESS trial but not with the PROWESS-SHOCK trial. None.

Drug for Severe Sepsis Is Withdrawn From Market, Fails to Reduce Mortality

A DRUG ONCE BELIEVED TO IMprove mortality rates of patients with severe sepsis has been withdrawn from the market because new evidence has revealed it fails to do so—10 years after the drug was approved by the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA). Eli Lilly and Company announced on October 25 that it was withdrawing drotrecogin alfa (activated) [Xigris, a recombinant human activated protein C (rhAPC)]. The withdrawal marks the end of a checkered history for rhAPC that began while the drug was initially under review during the FDA’s approval process. At that time, an advisory committee for the agency rendered a split vote on whether to recommend approval. This ambivalence prompted the agency to limit the indication for the drug to adult patients with severe sepsis (sepsis associated with acute organ dysfunction) who were at high risk of death. Even with the restriction, the drug—the only agent thought to reduce mortality in patients with severe sepsis—has been estimated to have generated more than $1 billion in sales in the decade it remained on the market. The FDA’s counterpart in Europe, the European Medicines Agency (EMA), has also been ambivalent about rhAPC. The EMA approved the drug in 2002, but by 2007, its Committee for Medicinal Products for Human Use (CHMP) noted that the initial efficacy results of the trial that served as the basis for the drug’s approval—the Recombinant Human Activated Protein C Worldwide Evaluation in Severe Sepsis (PROWESS) study (Bernard GR et al. N Engl J Med. 2001;344[10]:699-709)—had not been replicated in further studies. At the CHMP’s request, Lilly agreed to conduct a new placebo-controlled study to confirm that the benefits of rhAPC outweighed its risks in patients with septic shock—the latter being an indication similar but not identical to severe sepsis with multiple organ failure.

CURB-65, PSI, and APACHE II to Assess Mortality Risk in Patients With Severe Sepsis and Community Acquired Pneumonia in PROWESS

Patients with community-acquired pneumonia (CAP) comprised 35.6% of the overall phase 3 Recombinant Human Activated Protein C Worldwide Evaluation in Severe Sepsis (PROWESS) study and 33.1% of the placebo arm. We investigated the use of CURB-65, the Pneumonia Severity Index (PSI), and Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation II (APACHE II) prediction scores to identify the CAP population from the PROWESS placebo arm at the greatest mortality risk. Patients were classified as having CAP if the lung was the primary infection site and the patient originated from home. The abilities of CURB-65, PSI, and APACHE II scores to determine the 28-day and in-hospital mortality were compared using receiver operator characteristic (ROC) curves and the associated areas under the curve. PROWESS enrolled 278 patients with CAP in the placebo arm. The areas under the ROC curves for PSI = 5, CURB-65 ≥ 3, and APACHE II ≥ 25 for predicting 28-day (c = 0.65, 0.66, and 0.64, respectively) and in-hospital mortality (c = 0.65, 0.65, and 0.64, respectively) were not statistically different from each other. The 28-day mortality of patients with a PSI score of 5, CURB-65 ≥ 3, and APACHE II ≥ 25 was 41.6%, 37.9%, and 43.5%, respectively. Despite early diagnosis and appropriate antibiotic therapy, conventionally treated CAP with PSI = 5, CURB-65 3, or APACHE II 25 has an unacceptably high mortality. In this study, PSI, CURB-65, and APACHE II scoring systems perform similarly in predicting the 28-day and in-hospital mortality; however, differences in the categorization of severe CAP were observed and there was a significant mortality in patients with a CURB-65 <3 and PSI <5.

A prospective, observational study of Xigris Use in the United States (XEUS)

Background Use of pharmacologic agents in clinical practice may differ from the manner in which they were studied in rigorous randomized clinical trials. This was a prospective, observational, noninterventional study to determine the profile of patients receiving drotrecogin alfa (activated) in clinical practice, provide additional outcome and safety data, and allow for a comparison to patients studied in the phase 3 Protein C Worldwide Evaluation in Severe Sepsis (PROWESS) trial. Methods A total of 548 adult patients with severe sepsis were enrolled from 61 nonteaching or academically affiliated hospitals in the United States. Patients received drotrecogin alfa (activated) as part of physician-directed therapy for severe sepsis. Results The Xigris Use in the United States (XEUS) patients were younger (58 vs 63 years of age), had more comorbidities, and more sepsis-induced organ dysfunction at baseline compared to high-risk (Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation II score ≥ 25) PROWESS patients who received drotrecogin alfa (activated), (cardiovascular, 85.0% vs 79.7%; hematologic, 22.3% vs 16.4%; and renal, 57.9% vs 50.7%) (all P < .05). The XEUS patients had a higher mortality rate compared to high-risk PROWESS patients receiving drotrecogin alfa (activated) (36.7% vs 30.9%; P = .062) but a similar safety profile (infusion period serious bleeding, 2.7% vs 2.2%; P = .579; 28-day serious bleeding, 3.1% vs 3.9%; P = .520). The rate of intracranial hemorrhage in XEUS was 0.2%. Conclusions Patients receiving drotrecogin alfa (activated) in clinical practice were more acutely ill, had a higher mortality rate, but a similar safety profile with respect to serious bleeding events compared to the PROWESS trial.

Adverse outcomes associated with the use of drotrecogin alfa (activated) in patients with severe sepsis and baseline bleeding precautions*

Key clinical trials involving drotrecogin alfa (activated) (or recombinant human activated protein C) excluded patients with specific baseline bleeding precautions. However, not all such precautions are considered contraindications to treatment with recombinant human activated protein C in current product labeling. To compare outcomes of patients receiving recombinant human activated protein C with or without baseline bleeding precautions as defined by the Recombinant Human Activated Protein C Worldwide Evaluation in Severe Sepsis (PROWESS) trial. Retrospective medical record review. Two tertiary care institutions: An academic medical center and an affiliated Veterans Affairs Medical Center. All patients receiving recombinant human activated protein C for treatment of sepsis. Demographic information, characteristics associated with inclusion and exclusion criteria of the PROWESS trial, and 30-day postdischarge outcomes. Seventy-three patients received recombinant human activated protein C. Serious bleeding events occurred in 7 of 20 patients (35%) with any baseline bleeding precaution vs. only 2 of 53 patients (3.8%) without any bleeding precautions (p < 0.0001). More patients with a baseline bleeding precaution died compared with patients without any bleeding precautions (65% vs. 24.5%, p = 0.0015). Patients with a baseline bleeding precaution had a higher mean Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation II score (27.5 vs. 22.7, p = 0.015). Multivariate analysis demonstrated that the presence of a baseline bleeding precaution was the only independent variable associated with occurrence of serious bleeding events. The presence of a baseline bleeding precaution, increased Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation II score, and the presence of bloodstream infection were independent variables associated with mortality. Patients with severe sepsis who received recombinant human activated protein C with baseline bleeding precautions as defined by product labeling had significantly higher rates of both serious bleeding events and deaths compared with those without bleeding precautions. These data suggest that strict adherence to PROWESS trial exclusion criteria would further limit serious bleeding events associated with the use of recombinant human activated protein C.

Dissociation of Activated Protein C Functions by Elimination of Protein S Cofactor Enhancement

Activated protein C (APC) plays a critical anticoagulant role in vivo by inactivating procoagulant factor Va and factor VIIIa and thus down-regulating thrombin generation. In addition, APC bound to the endothelial cell protein C receptor can initiate protease-activated receptor-1 (PAR-1)-mediated cytoprotective signaling. Protein S constitutes a critical cofactor for the anticoagulant function of APC but is not known to be involved in regulating APC-mediated protective PAR-1 signaling. In this study we utilized a site-directed mutagenesis strategy to characterize a putative protein S binding region within the APC Gla domain. Three single amino acid substitutions within the APC Gla domain (D35T, D36A, and A39V) were found to mildly impair protein S-dependent anticoagulant activity (<2-fold) but retained entirely normal cytoprotective activity. However, a single amino acid substitution (L38D) ablated the ability of protein S to function as a cofactor for this APC variant. Consequently, in assays of protein S-dependent factor Va proteolysis using purified proteins or in the plasma milieu, APC-L38D variant exhibited minimal residual anticoagulant activity compared with wild type APC. Despite the location of Leu-38 in the Gla domain, APC-L38D interacted normally with endothelial cell protein C receptor and retained its ability to trigger PAR-1 mediated cytoprotective signaling in a manner indistinguishable from that of wild type APC. Consequently, elimination of protein S cofactor enhancement of APC anticoagulant function represents a novel and effective strategy by which to separate the anticoagulant and cytoprotective functions of APC for potential therapeutic gain.

Influence of enrollment sequence effect on observed outcomes in the ADDRESS and PROWESS studies of drotrecogin alfa (activated) in patients with severe sepsis

IntroductionWe performed a study to determine whether an enrollment sequence effect noted in the PROWESS (recombinant human activated Protein C Worldwide Evaluation in Severe Sepsis) trial exists in the ADDRESS (Administration of Drotrecogin Alfa [Activated] [DrotAA] in Early Stage Severe Sepsis) trial.MethodsWe evaluated prospectively defined subgroups from two large phase 3 clinical trials: ADDRESS, which included 516 sites in 34 countries, and PROWESS, which included 164 sites in 11 countries. ADDRESS consisted of patients with severe sepsis at low risk of death not indicated for treatment with DrotAA. PROWESS consisted of patients with severe sepsis with one or more organ dysfunctions. DrotAA (24 μg/kg per hour) or placebo was infused for 96 hours.ResultsIn ADDRESS and PROWESS, there was a statistically significant interaction between the DrotAA treatment effect and the sequence in which patients were enrolled. In both trials, higher mortality was associated with DrotAA use in the subgroup of patients enrolled first at study sites. Compared with placebo, PROWESS mortality was lower with DrotAA treatment for the second and subsequent patients enrolled, whereas in ADDRESS, mortality remained higher for the second patient enrolled but thereafter was lower for DrotAA-treated patients. Comparison of patients enrolled first with subsequent patients enrolled indicated that the characteristics of patients changed. Subsequently enrolled patients were treated earlier, were less likely to suffer nonserious bleeds (ADDRESS), and experienced fewer protocol violations (PROWESS).ConclusionsAnalyses suggest that an enrollment sequence effect was present in the ADDRESS and PROWESS trials. Analysis of this effect on outcomes suggests that it is most apparent in patients at lower risk of death. In PROWESS, this effect appeared to be associated with a reduction of the DrotAA treatment effect for the first patients enrolled at each site. In ADDRESS, this effect may have contributed to early termination of the study. The finding of an enrollment sequence effect in two separate trials suggests that trial designs, site selection and training, data collection and monitoring, and statistical analysis plans may need to be adjusted for these potentially confounding events.Trial RegistrationADDRESS trial registration number: NCT00568737. PROWESS was completed before trial registration was required.

Drotrecogin alfa (activated): real-life use and outcomes for the UK

IntroductionIn March 2001, the results of the Recombinant Human Activated Protein C Worldwide Evaluation in Severe Sepsis (PROWESS) study were published, which indicated a 6.1% absolute reduction in 28-day mortality. Drotrecogin alfa (activated; DrotAA) was subsequently approved for use in patients with severe sepsis.MethodsIn December 2002, critical care units in England, Wales and Northern Ireland were invited to participate in an audit of DrotAA. Data for each infusion of DrotAA were linked to case mix and outcome data from a national audit. Use of DrotAA was described and a nonrandomized comparison of effectiveness was conducted.Results1,292 infusions of DrotAA were recorded in 112 units; 61% commenced during the first 24 hours in the unit. The majority (77%) of patients had three or more organs failing; lung (42%) and abdomen (40%) were the most common primary sites of infection. Crude hospital mortality was high (45%); at 28 days, only 18% had left acute hospital and 19% were still in the unit. For 30%, the full 96-hour infusion was not completed; 24% of infusions were interrupted; 8.1% experienced one or more serious adverse events, of which 77% were serious bleeding events. Of eight relative risks estimated from individually-matched (0.75 to 0.85) and propensity-matched (0.82 to 0.90) controls, seven were consistent with the results of PROWESS. Restricting the analysis to patients receiving DrotAA during the first 24 hours resulted in larger treatment effects (relative risks 0.62 to 0.81). For all matches, similar patterns were seen across subgroups. No effect of DrotAA was seen for two organs failing or lower severity scores, compared with a significant mortality reduction for three or more organs failing or higher severity scores.ConclusionUse of DrotAA was approximately one in 16 for admissions meeting the definition for severe sepsis and with two or more organs failing. Patients receiving DrotAA were younger and more severely ill but were less likely to have serious conditions in their past medical history. Nonrandomized estimates for the effectiveness of DrotAA were consistent with the findings of PROWESS. DrotAA appeared not to be effective in patients with less severe disease.

Introduction: severe sepsis and drotrecogin alfa (activated)

Introduction: severe sepsis and drotrecogin alfa (activated)

The protein C pathway: implications for the design of the RESPOND study

The predictive value of plasma protein C level in sepsis has been demonstrated in a number of studies in which depressed protein C levels were associated with increased likelihood of negative outcome. Data from the PROWESS (Recombinant Human Activated Protein C Worldwide Evaluation in Severe Sepsis) trial indicate that administration of drotrecogin alfa (activated; DrotAA) leads to an increase in endogenous protein C levels in severe sepsis patients. In a group as heterogeneous as sepsis patients, the currently approved dose and duration of administration (24 μg/kg per hour for 96 hours) might not be optimal in some individuals. The RESPOND (Research Evaluating Serial Protein C levels in severe sepsis patients ON Drotrecogin alfa [activated]) trial is a phase II study being conducted to explore the use of endogenous protein C level as both a biomarker and a steering parameter for administration of DrotAA. Eligible patients will receive DrotAA either at the normal, currently approved dose and duration of administration ('standard therapy') or at a higher dose with variable infusion duration or variable infusion duration only ('alternative therapy'). The duration of DrotAA infusion in the alternative therapy arm depends on the individual response in terms of sustained increase in endogenous protein C. The ultimate aims of this and potential following studies are as follows: to establish serial plasma protein C measurement as a biomarker that will aid in the identification of severe sepsis patients who are most likely to benefit from DrotAA therapy, to enable adjustment of DrotAA therapy in individual patients (specifically, the possibility to use a higher dose and to adjust the infusion duration), and to provide guidance to the clinician regarding whether the patient is responding to DrotAA.

Clinical trials in severe sepsis with drotrecogin alfa (activated)

Drotecogin alfa (activated; DrotAA) was approved in 2001 by the US Food and Drug Administration for the treatment of patients with severe sepsis who are at high risk for death. The European Agency for the Evaluation of Medical Products also recommended that DrotAA could be administered to patients with severe sepsis and multiple organ dysfunction when added to the best standard care. Following the initial publication of the PROWESS (Protein C Worldwide Evaluation in Severe Sepsis) findings, multiple subgroup analyses supported the need for additional studies to explore the various hypotheses raised by this study. This review discusses all large clinical trials exploring the efficacy and safety of DrotAA and proposes recommendations for the use of DrotAA in severe sepsis.

Elevated Plasma Concentrations of IL-6 and Elevated APACHE II Score Predict Acute Kidney Injury in Patients with Severe Sepsis

Acute kidney injury (AKI) is common in critically ill patients with severe sepsis (SS), and the predictors of AKI in this population have not been well characterized. The study group was the placebo group of the Prospective Recombinant Human Activated Protein C Worldwide Evaluation in Severe Sepsis (PROWESS) data set. PROWESS is a prospective, randomized, controlled study of the use of drotrecogin alpha (activated) for the treatment of SS. Placebo patients who had an admission renal sepsis organ failure score of 2 or more were excluded. AKI was defined as an increase in serum creatinine of 25% or 0.3 mg/dl during the first week postbaseline. The incidence of relevant parameters was then compared in patients with and without AKI. Half of the patients were randomly assigned to a model-building data set, and multivariable Cox regression was used to determine risk factors. Factors that remained significant in the remaining "model validation" data set were considered significant. Of the 840 patients in the placebo group, 547 met inclusion criteria. Of the 547 patients, 127 (23.2%) patients met criteria for AKI. The mean age of the 547 patients was 59.8 +/- 17.0, and 43.3% of the cohort were female. The ethnicity breakdown was as follows: White 83.2%, black 5.9%, and other 11%. Univariate analyses indicated that patients with AKI had a higher incidence of a dependence on the basis of activity of daily living scale (38.6 versus 26.7%; P = 0.01), a lower baseline platelet count (193,000 versus 222,000; P = 0.02), a higher baseline respiratory Sepsis Organ Failure Assessment score (2.9 versus 2.7; P = 0.02), higher preinfusion Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation II (APACHE II) score (24.8 versus 22.0; P = 0.0002), older age (63.7 versus 58.7 yr; P = 0.008), and higher log IL-6 (6.6 versus 5.8; P = 0.0006). In a multivariable Cox regression, the predictors of AKI were log IL-6 (P < 0.0001) and APACHE II (P = 0.0008). Increased log IL-6 and APACHE II score are significant risk factors of AKI in patients with SS. IL-6 data and the absence of correlation with measures of hypotension (e.g., mean arterial pressure, dosage of vasopressors) support the notion that inflammation is a significant component of AKI in SS.

Update in Critical Care 2005

Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) stopped earlier than planned because of apparent benefit, such as PROWESS (Recombinant Human Activated Protein C Worldwide Evaluation in Severe Sepsis) and the ARDS (Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome) Network low tidal volume study, often generate considerable excitement and affect clinical practice. Montori and coworkers (1) systematically reviewed RCTs involving interventions stopped early for benefit, finding that such trials are becoming more common, often fail to adequately report relevant information about the stopping decision, and show implausibly large treatment effects, particularly when the number of events is small. Because the decision to stop is typically driven by highly significant p value thresholds, trials that are terminated early because of apparent benefit will frequently show large treatment effects, even when the number of events is large. In the future, journals should require adequate reporting about the stopping decision. Glance through any major medical journal and you will increasingly encounter terms from the world of molecular medicine that, unless you live in that world, are unfamiliar and sometimes meaningless. A supplement to Critical Care Medicine (2) attempts to demystify these terms with a series of short articles by international experts that use extensive illustrations and diagrams to emphasize the value of these concepts in the context of the “real world” practice of critical care medicine.

Recombinant activated protein C: the key is clinical assessment of risk of death, not subset analysis

The PROWESS (Recombinant Human Activated Protein C Worldwide Evaluation in Severe Sepsis) trial demonstrated a 6.1% absolute decrease in mortality with a p value of 0.005. Despite the impressive results of this trial, criticism of the study has targeted various aspects of design, analysis and interpretation. Additional studies of recombinant activated protein C (rhAPC) have added to our understanding about this drug and to controversy as well. So how do we deal with rhAPC use in our clinical practice?

Protein C concentrations in severe sepsis: an early directional change in plasma levels predicts outcome

IntroductionProtein C, because of its central role in hemostasis, plays an integral role in the host response to infection. Protein C depletion, resulting from increased consumption, degradation, and/or decreased synthesis, is characteristic of sepsis and has been shown to predict morbidity and mortality. The objective of this study was to determine whether early directional changes in protein C levels correlate with outcome.MethodsPatients in the Recombinant Human Activated Protein C Worldwide Evaluation in Severe Sepsis (PROWESS) clinical trial were assessed and categorized by baseline protein C (n = 1574). Deficiency was categorized as: severe deficiency, protein C levels ≤ 40% of normal protein C activity (n = 615, 39% of patients); deficient, protein C levels 41–80% of normal protein C activity (n = 764, 48.5% of patients); and normal, >80% of normal protein C activity (n = 195, 12.4% of patients). Logistic regression analysis of 28-day mortality for placebo patients was used to investigate whether baseline and day 1 protein C levels were independent risk factors for mortality. The impact of treatment with drotrecogin alfa (activated) (DrotAA) was also assessed.ResultsProtein C levels at baseline and day 1 were independent risk factors in placebo patients. If baseline protein C levels of severely deficient placebo patients remained ≤ 40% at day 1 their odds of death increased (odds ratio = 2.75, P < 0.0001), while if levels improved to >40% by day 1 their risk of death decreased (odds ratio = 0.43, P = 0.03). If baseline protein C levels of placebo patients were >40% but decreased by ≥ 10% on day 1, their risk of death increased (odds ratio = 1.87, P = 0.02). DrotAA treatment improved protein C levels by day 1 compared with placebo (P = 0.008) and reduced the risk of death in severely deficient (≤ 40%) patients at baseline. Treatment also decreased the number of severely protein C deficient (= 40%) patients and decreased the number of deficient (41–80%) patients and normal (>80%) patients who had a ≥ 10% decrease in protein C levels by day 1.ConclusionBaseline protein C levels were an independent predictor of sepsis outcome. Day 1 changes in protein C, regardless of baseline levels, were also predictive of outcome. The association of DrotAA treatment, increased protein C levels, and improved survival may partially explain the mechanism of action.

Evaluation of the cost-effectiveness of drotrecogin alfa (activated) for the treatment of severe sepsis in the United Kingdom

The aim of this study was to assess the cost-effectiveness of drotrecogin alfa (activated) compared with best supportive care in a UK cohort of adult intensive-care patients with severe sepsis. A systematic review of evidence on the clinical- and cost-effectiveness of drotrecogin alfa (activated) was undertaken, and a decision-analytic model was developed to estimate the cost-effectiveness of treatment in the United Kingdom. Trial data from the Recombinant Human Activated Protein C Worldwide Evaluation in Severe Sepsis (PROWESS) study have been synthesized with other data, including UK data on severe sepsis, to estimate the costs and consequences of treatment over time. For patients with severe sepsis and multiple organ dysfunction, the estimates of cost per life year and cost per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) are pounds 4931 and pounds 8228, respectively. For patients with severe sepsis alone, the cost per life-year and cost per QALY are pouhds 5495 and pounds 9161, respectively. Whereas the therapeutic cost for drotrecogin alfa (activated) appears high (at around pounds 5000 per patient) and the potential impact on the provider budget is considerable, drotrecogin alfa (activated) is clinically effective, represents a cost-effective use of resources, and is a significant advance in the treatment of severe sepsis in patients requiring intensive care.

Cost-effectiveness of drotrecogin alfa (activated) in the treatment of severe sepsis with multiple organ failure

The aim of this study was to estimate the expected cost and clinical benefits associated with the use of drotrecogin alfa (activated) (Xigris; Eli Lilly and Company; Indianapolis, IN) in the French hospital setting. The recombinant human activated PROtein C Worldwide Evaluation in Severe Sepsis (PROWESS) study results (1271 patients with multiple organ failure) were adjusted to 9,948 hospital stays from a database of Parisian area intensive-care units (ICUs)-the CubRea (Intensive Care Database User Group) database. The analysis features a decision tree with a probabilistic sensitivity analysis. The cost per life year gained (LYG) of drotrecogin treatment for severe sepsis with multiple organ failure (European indication) was estimated to be dollars 11,812. At the hospital level, the drug is expected to induce an additional cost of dollars 7545 per treated patient. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio ranges from dollars 7873 per LYG for patients receiving three organ supports during ICU stay to dollars 17,704 per LYG for patients receiving less than two organ supports. Drotrecogin alfa (activated) is cost-effective in the treatment of severe sepsis with multiple organ failure when added to best standard care. The cost-effectiveness of the drug increases with baseline disease severity, but it remains cost-effective for all patients when used in compliance with the European approved indication.