Explore the vast range of titles available.

Background Hemophagocytic lymphohistiocytosis (HLH) is a rare though often fatal hyperinflammatory syndrome mimicking sepsis in the critically ill. Diagnosis relies on the HLH-2004 criteria and HScore, both of which have been developed in pediatric or adult non-critically ill patients, respectively. Therefore, we aimed to determine the sensitivity and specificity of HLH-2004 criteria and HScore in a cohort of adult critically ill patients. Methods In this further analysis of a retrospective observational study, patients ≥ 18 years admitted to at least one adult ICU at Charité – Universitätsmedizin Berlin between January 2006 and August 2018 with hyperferritinemia of ≥ 500 μg/L were included. Patients’ charts were reviewed for clinically diagnosed or suspected HLH. Receiver operating characteristics (ROC) analysis was performed to determine prediction accuracy. Results In total, 2623 patients with hyperferritinemia were included, of whom 40 patients had HLH. We found the best prediction accuracy of HLH diagnosis for a cutoff of 4 fulfilled HLH-2004 criteria (95.0% sensitivity and 93.6% specificity) and HScore cutoff of 168 (100% sensitivity and 94.1% specificity). By adjusting HLH-2004 criteria cutoffs of both hyperferritinemia to 3000 μg/L and fever to 38.2 °C, sensitivity and specificity increased to 97.5% and 96.1%, respectively. Both a higher number of fulfilled HLH-2004 criteria [OR 1.513 (95% CI 1.372–1.667); p  <  0.001] and a higher HScore [OR 1.011 (95% CI 1.009–1.013); p  <  0.001] were significantly associated with in-hospital mortality. Conclusions An HScore cutoff of 168 revealed a sensitivity of 100% and a specificity of 94.1%, thereby providing slightly superior diagnostic accuracy compared to HLH-2004 criteria. Both HLH-2004 criteria and HScore proved to be of good diagnostic accuracy and consequently might be used for HLH diagnosis in critically ill patients. Clinical trial registration The study was registered with www.ClinicalTrials.gov ( NCT02854943 ) on August 1, 2016.

Rationale Steroid profiles in combination with a corticotropin stimulation test provide information about steroidogenesis and its functional reserves in critically ill patients. Objectives We investigated whether steroid profiles before and after corticotropin stimulation can predict the risk of in-hospital death in sepsis. Methods An exploratory data analysis of a double blind, randomized trial in sepsis (HYPRESS [HYdrocortisone for PRevention of Septic Shock]) was performed. The trial included adult patients with sepsis who were not in shock and were randomly assigned to placebo or hydrocortisone treatment. Corticotropin tests were performed in patients prior to randomization and in healthy subjects. Cortisol and precursors of glucocorticoids (17-OH-progesterone, 11-desoxycortisol) and mineralocorticoids (11-desoxycorticosterone, corticosterone) were analyzed using the multi-analyte stable isotope dilution method (LC–MS/MS). Measurement results from healthy subjects were used to determine reference ranges, and those from placebo patients to predict in-hospital mortality. Measurements and main results Corticotropin tests from 180 patients and 20 volunteers were included. Compared to healthy subjects, patients with sepsis had elevated levels of 11-desoxycorticosterone and 11-desoxycortisol, consistent with activation of both glucocorticoid and mineralocorticoid pathways. After stimulation with corticotropin, the cortisol response was subnormal in 12% and the corticosterone response in 50% of sepsis patients. In placebo patients ( n  = 90), a corticotropin-stimulated cortisol-to-corticosterone ratio > 32.2 predicted in-hospital mortality (AUC 0.8 CI 0.70–0.88; sensitivity 83%; and specificity 78%). This ratio also predicted risk of shock development and 90-day mortality. Conclusions In this exploratory analysis, we found that in sepsis mineralocorticoid steroidogenesis was more frequently impaired than glucocorticoid steroidogenesis. The corticotropin-stimulated cortisol-to-corticosterone ratio predicts the risk of in-hospital death. Trial registration Clinical trial registered with www.clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT00670254. Registered 1 May 2008, https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT00670254 .

Abstract Objective To assess the effects of corticosteroids on mortality in patients with severe sepsis and septic shock. Data sources Randomised and quasi-randomised trials of corticosteroids versus placebo (or supportive treatment alone) retrieved from the Cochrane infectious diseases group's trials register, the Cochrane central register of controlled trials, Medline, Embase, and LILACS. Review method Two pairs of reviewers agreed on eligibility of trials. One reviewer entered data on to the computer and four reviewers checked them. We obtained some missing data from authors of trials and assessed methodological quality of trials. Results 16/23 trials (n = 2063) were selected. Corticosteroids did not change 28 day mortality (15 trials, n = 2022; relative risk 0.92, 95% confidence interval 0.75 to 1.14) or hospital mortality (13 trials, n = 1418; 0.89, 0.71 to 1.11). There was significant heterogeneity. Subgroup analysis on long courses (≥ 5 days) with low dose (≤ 300 mg hydrocortisone or equivalent) corticosteroids showed no more heterogeneity. The relative risk for mortality was 0.80 at 28 days (five trials, n = 465; 0.67 to 0.95) and 0.83 at hospital discharge (five trials, n = 465, 0.71 to 0.97). Use of corticosteroids reduced mortality in intensive care units (four trials, n = 425, 0.83, 0.70 to 0.97), increased shock reversal at 7 days (four trials, n = 425; 1.60, 1.27 to 2.03) and 28 days (four trials, n = 425, 1.26, 1.04 to 1.52) without inducing side effects. Conclusions For all trials, regardless of duration of treatment and dose, use of corticosteroids did not significantly affect mortality. With long courses of low doses of corticosteroids, however, mortality at 28 days and hospital morality was reduced.

Large clinical trials testing hydrocortisone therapy in septic shock have produced conflicting results. Subgroups may benefit of hydrocortisone treatment depending on their individual immune response. We performed an exploratory analysis of the database from the international randomized controlled clinical trial Corticosteroid Therapy of Septic Shock (CORTICUS) employing machine learning to a panel of 137 variables collected from the Berlin subcohort comprising 83 patients including demographic and clinical measures, organ failure scores, leukocyte counts and levels of circulating cytokines. The identified theranostic marker was validated against data from a cohort of the Hellenic Sepsis Study Group (HSSG) ( n = 246), patients enrolled in the clinical trial of Sodium Selenite and Procalcitonin Guided Antimicrobial Therapy in Severe Sepsis (SISPCT, n = 118), and another, smaller clinical trial (Crossover study, n = 20). In addition, in vitro blood culture experiments and in vivo experiments in mouse models were performed to assess biological plausibility. A low serum IFNγ/IL10 ratio predicted increased survival in the hydrocortisone group whereas a high ratio predicted better survival in the placebo group. Using this marker for a decision rule, we applied it to three validation sets and observed the same trend. Experimental studies in vitro revealed that IFNγ/IL10 was negatively associated with the load of (heat inactivated) pathogens in spiked human blood and in septic mouse models. Accordingly, an in silico analysis of published IFNγ and IL10 values in bacteremic and non-bacteremic patients with the Systemic Inflammatory Response Syndrome supported this association between the ratio and pathogen burden. We propose IFNγ/IL10 as a molecular marker supporting the decision to administer hydrocortisone to patients in septic shock. Prospective clinical studies are necessary and standard operating procedures need to be implemented, particularly to define a generic threshold. If confirmed, IFNγ/IL10 may become a suitable theranostic marker for an urging clinical need.

IntroductionThe benefits and risks of low-dose hydrocortisone in patients with septic shock have been investigated in numerous randomised controlled trials and trial-level meta-analyses. Yet, the routine use of this treatment remains controversial. To overcome the limitations of previous meta-analyses inherent to the use of aggregate data, we will perform an individual patient data meta-analysis (IPDMA) on the effect of hydrocortisone with or without fludrocortisone compared with placebo or usual care on 90-day mortality and other outcomes in patients with septic shock.Methods and analysisTo assess the benefits and risks of hydrocortisone, with or without fludrocortisone for adults with septic shock, we will search major electronic databases from inception to September 2020 (Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, MEDLINE, EMBASE and Latin American Caribbean Health Sciences Literature), complimented by a search for unpublished trials. The primary analysis will compare hydrocortisone with or without fludrocortisone to placebo or no treatment in adult patients with septic shock. Secondary analyses will compare hydrocortisone to placebo (or usual care), hydrocortisone plus fludrocortisone to placebo (or usual care), and hydrocortisone versus hydrocortisone plus fludrocortisone. The primary outcome will be all cause mortality at 90 days. We will conduct both one-stage IPDMA using mixed-effect models and machine learning with targeted maximum likelihood analyses. We will assess the risk of bias related to unshared data and related to the quality of individual trial.Ethics and disseminationThis IPDMA will use existing data from completed randomised clinical trials and will comply with the ethical and regulatory requirements regarding data sharing for each of the component trials. The findings of this study will be submitted for publication in a peer-review journal with straightforward policy for open access.PROSPERO registration numberCRD42017062198.

IntroductionHaemophagocytic lymphohistiocytosis (HLH) in adults is characterised by toxic immune activation and a sepsis-like syndrome, leading to high numbers of undiagnosed cases and mortality rates of up to 68%. Early diagnosis and specific immune suppressive treatment are mandatory to avoid fatal outcome, but the diagnostic criteria (HLH-2004) are adopted from paediatric HLH and have not been validated in adults. Experimental studies suggest biomarkers to sufficiently diagnose HLH. However, biomarkers for the diagnosis of adult HLH have not yet been investigated.Methods and analysisThe HEMICU (Diagnostic biomarkers for adult haemophagocytic lymphohistiocytosis in critically ill patients) study aims to estimate the incidence rate of adult HLH among suspected adult patients in intensive care units (ICUs). Screening for HLH will be performed in 16 ICUs of Charité – Universitätsmedizin Berlin. The inclusion criteria are bicytopaenia, hyperferritinaemia (≥500 µg/L), fever or when HLH is suspected by the clinician. Over a period of 2 years, we expect inclusion of about 100 patients with suspected HLH. HLH will be diagnosed if at least five of the HLH-2004 criteria are fulfilled, together with an expert review; all other included patients will serve as controls. Second, a panel of potential biomarker candidates will be explored. DNA, plasma and serum will be stored in a biobank. The primary endpoint of the study is the incidence rate of adult HLH among suspected adult patients during ICU stay. Out of a variety of measured biomarkers, this study furthermore aims to find highly potential biomarkers for the diagnosis of adult HLH in ICU. The results of this study will contribute to improved recognition and patient outcome of adult HLH in clinical routine.Ethics and disseminationThe institutional ethics committee approved this study on 1 August 2018 (Ethics Committee of Charité – Universitätsmedizin Berlin, EA4/006/18). The results of the study will be disseminated in an international peer-reviewed journal and presented at international conferences.Trial registration numberNCT03510650.

To determine whether glycemic control is less feasible when hydrocortisone is given as a bolus compared with continuous application in septic shock patients. Observational prospective pilot study. Fourteen-bed surgical university hospital ICU. Sixteen consecutive patients with septic shock receiving a continuous infusion of 200 mg hydrocortisone/day and an infusion regime of insulin keeping blood glucose below 150 mg/dl. Blood glucose and insulin infusion were adjusted to steady state before intervention. At baseline, the continuous hydrocortisone infusion was replaced with a single bolus of 50 mg hydrocortisone. During a subsequent 6-h period, blood glucose was monitored hourly and insulin infusion was kept constant. Afterwards, hydrocortisone application and adjustment of blood glucose was resumed according to standard treatment. Mean blood glucose in steady state at baseline immediately prior to intervention was 128 mg/dl (range 114-141 mg/dl; 95% confidence interval). After bolus injection of hydrocortisone, blood glucose increased significantly within 6 h with peak levels of 154 mg/dl (range 132-178 mg/dl; p<0.01). Blood glucose returned to baseline with restoration of continuous hydrocortisone infusion. There were marked inter-individual variations with peak glucose values up to 254 mg/dl, but no significant difference in intra-individual glucose variability before and after bolus injection of hydrocortisone. Bolus injections of hydrocortisone may induce significant increases of blood glucose in patients with septic shock. The individual response is highly variable and we speculate that repetitive boluses would induce marked undulation of blood glucose. In terms of glycemic-control strategies, a continuous infusion of hydrocortisone seems to be preferable.

Abstract Rationale Sustained sepsis-associated immunosuppression is associated with uncontrolled infection, multiple organ dysfunction, and death. Objectives In the first controlled biomarker-guided immunostimulatory trial in sepsis, we tested whether granulocyte–macrophage colony-stimulating factor (GM-CSF) reverses monocyte deactivation, a hallmark of sepsis-associated immunosuppression (primary endpoint), and improves the immunological and clinical course of patients with sepsis. Methods In a prospective, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, multicenter trial, 38 patients (19/group) with severe sepsis or septic shock and sepsis-associated immunosuppression (monocytic HLA-DR [mHLA-DR] <8,000 monoclonal antibodies (mAb) per cell for 2 d) were treated with GM-CSF (4 μg/kg/d) or placebo for 8 days. The patients' clinical and immunological course was followed up for 28 days. Measurements and Main Results Both groups showed comparable baseline mHLA-DR levels (5,609 ± 3,628 vs. 5,659 ± 3,332 mAb per cell), which significantly increased within 24 hours in the GM-CSF group. After GM-CSF treatment, mHLA-DR was normalized in 19/19 treated patients, whereas this occurred in 3/19 control subjects only (P < 0.001). GM-CSF also restored ex-vivo Toll-like receptor 2/4–induced proinflammatory monocytic cytokine production. In patients receiving GM-CSF, a shorter time of mechanical ventilation (148 ± 103 vs. 207 ± 58 h, P = 0.04), an improved Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation-II score (P = 0.02), and a shorter length of both intrahospital and intensive care unit stay was observed (59 ± 33 vs. 69 ± 46 and 41 ± 26 vs. 52 ± 39 d, respectively, both not significant). Side effects related to the intervention were not noted. Conclusions Biomarker-guided GM-CSF therapy in sepsis is safe and effective for restoring monocytic immunocompetence. Use of GM-CSF may shorten the time of mechanical ventilation and hospital/intensive care unit stay. A multicenter trial powered for the improvement of clinical parameters and mortality as primary endpoints seems indicated. Clinical trial registered with www.clinicaltrials.gov (NCT00252915).

The benefit of adjuvant use of corticosteroids in patients with septic shock remains controversial. In this international, multicenter, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial, adjunctive therapy with hydrocortisone in nearly 500 patients with septic shock was not found to be clinically helpful. This lack of benefit was also found in a subgroup of patients who did not have a response to a corticotropin test. Adjunctive therapy with hydrocortisone in nearly 500 patients with septic shock was not found to be clinically helpful. This lack of benefit was also found in a subgroup of patients who did not have a response to a corticotropin test. Severe sepsis is a major cause of mortality and morbidity worldwide. 1 , 2 Septic shock, the most severe manifestation, occurs in 2 to 20% of inpatients. 3 The incidence of the condition has been rising, 4 and a death rate of 33 to 61% has been reported in the placebo groups of multicenter trials. 5 – 8 The use of corticosteroids as an adjunctive therapy has been controversial for decades. 9 After the study by Schumer, 10 a short course of high-dose corticosteroids became accepted therapy. Subsequent studies, however, did not confirm a survival benefit with this regimen and suggested an increase in superinfection-related mortality. 11 – 13 Studies . . .