Explore the vast range of titles available.

Septic shock is characterized by a dysregulated host response to infection and is associated with a mortality of 45 to 50%. In this multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial in 1241 patients, hydrocortisone plus fludrocortisone reduced 90-day mortality.

Whether the antiinflammatory and immunomodulatory effects of glucocorticoids may decrease mortality among patients with severe community-acquired pneumonia is unclear. In this phase 3, multicenter, double-blind, randomized, controlled trial, we assigned adults who had been admitted to the intensive care unit (ICU) for severe community-acquired pneumonia to receive intravenous hydrocortisone (200 mg daily for either 4 or 7 days as determined by clinical improvement, followed by tapering for a total of 8 or 14 days) or to receive placebo. All the patients received standard therapy, including antibiotics and supportive care. The primary outcome was death at 28 days. A total of 800 patients had undergone randomization when the trial was stopped after the second planned interim analysis. Data from 795 patients were analyzed. By day 28, death had occurred in 25 of 400 patients (6.2%; 95% confidence interval [CI], 3.9 to 8.6) in the hydrocortisone group and in 47 of 395 patients (11.9%; 95% CI, 8.7 to 15.1) in the placebo group (absolute difference, -5.6 percentage points; 95% CI, -9.6 to -1.7; P = 0.006). Among the patients who were not undergoing mechanical ventilation at baseline, endotracheal intubation was performed in 40 of 222 (18.0%) in the hydrocortisone group and in 65 of 220 (29.5%) in the placebo group (hazard ratio, 0.59; 95% CI, 0.40 to 0.86). Among the patients who were not receiving vasopressors at baseline, such therapy was initiated by day 28 in 55 of 359 (15.3%) of the hydrocortisone group and in 86 of 344 (25.0%) in the placebo group (hazard ratio, 0.59; 95% CI, 0.43 to 0.82). The frequencies of hospital-acquired infections and gastrointestinal bleeding were similar in the two groups; patients in the hydrocortisone group received higher daily doses of insulin during the first week of treatment. Among patients with severe community-acquired pneumonia being treated in the ICU, those who received hydrocortisone had a lower risk of death by day 28 than those who received placebo. (Funded by the French Ministry of Health; CAPE COD ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02517489.).

Whether hydrocortisone reduces mortality among patients with septic shock is unclear. Patients with septic shock undergoing mechanical ventilation were assigned to receive an infusion of hydrocortisone or placebo. Hydrocortisone did not result in lower 90-day mortality.

Background Bronchopulmonary dysplasia (BPD) is the most common complication of preterm birth with short-term and long-term adverse consequences. Although the glucocorticoid dexamethasone has been proven to be beneficial for the prevention of BPD, there are concerns about an increased risk of adverse neurodevelopmental outcome. Hydrocortisone has been suggested as an alternative therapy. The aim of the Systemic Hydrocortisone To Prevent Bronchopulmonary Dysplasia in preterm infants (SToP-BPD) trial is to assess the efficacy and safety of postnatal hydrocortisone administration for the reduction of death or BPD in ventilator-dependent preterm infants. Methods/design The SToP-BPD study is a multicentre, double-blind, placebo-controlled hydrocortisone trial in preterm infants at risk for BPD. After parental informed consent is obtained, ventilator-dependent infants are randomly allocated to hydrocortisone or placebo treatment during a 22-day period. The primary outcome measure is the composite outcome of death or BPD at 36 weeks postmenstrual age. Secondary outcomes are short-term effects on pulmonary condition and long-term neurodevelopmental sequelae assessed at 2 years corrected age. Complications of treatment, other serious adverse events and suspected unexpected serious adverse reactions are reported as safety outcomes. This pre-specified statistical analysis plan was written and submitted without knowledge of the unblinded data. Trial registration Netherlands Trial Register, NTR2768 . Registered on 17 February 2011. EudraCT, 2010-023777-19. Registered on 2 November 2010.

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 . . .

Background Sepsis accounts for 30% to 50% of all in-hospital deaths in the United States. Other than antibiotics and source control, management strategies are largely supportive with fluid resuscitation and respiratory, renal, and circulatory support. Intravenous vitamin C in conjunction with thiamine and hydrocortisone has recently been suggested to improve outcomes in patients with sepsis in a single-center before-and-after study. However, before this therapeutic strategy is adopted, a rigorous assessment of its efficacy is needed. Methods The Vitamin C, Thiamine and Steroids in Sepsis (VICTAS) trial is a prospective, multi-center, double-blind, adaptive sample size, randomized, placebo-controlled trial. It will enroll patients with sepsis causing respiratory or circulatory compromise or both. Patients will be randomly assigned (1:1) to receive intravenous vitamin C (1.5 g), thiamine (100 mg), and hydrocortisone (50 mg) every 6 h or matching placebos until a total of 16 administrations have been completed or intensive care unit discharge occurs (whichever is first). Patients randomly assigned to the comparator group are permitted to receive open-label stress-dose steroids at the discretion of the treating clinical team. The primary outcome is consecutive days free of ventilator and vasopressor support (VVFDs) in the 30 days following randomization. The key secondary outcome is mortality at 30 days. Sample size will be determined adaptively by using interim analyses with pre-stated stopping rules to allow the early recognition of a large mortality benefit if one exists and to refocus on the more sensitive outcome of VVFDs if an early large mortality benefit is not observed. Discussion VICTAS is a large, multi-center, double-blind, adaptive sample size, randomized, placebo-controlled trial that will test the efficacy of vitamin C, thiamine, and hydrocortisone as a combined therapy in patients with respiratory or circulatory dysfunction (or both) resulting from sepsis. Because the components of this therapy are inexpensive and readily available and have very favorable risk profiles, demonstrated efficacy would have immediate implications for the management of sepsis worldwide. Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03509350 . First registered on April 26, 2018, and last verified on December 20, 2018. Protocol version: 1.4, January 9, 2019

Background The purpose of this study was to determine whether the provision of corticosteroids improves time to shock reversal and outcomes in patients with post-cardiac arrest shock. Methods We conducted a randomized, double-blind trial of post-cardiac arrest patients in shock, defined as vasopressor support for a minimum of 1 hour. Patients were randomized to intravenous hydrocortisone 100 mg or placebo every 8 hours for 7 days or until shock reversal. The primary endpoint was time to shock reversal. Results Fifty patients were included with 25 in each group. There was no difference in time to shock reversal between groups (hazard ratio: 0.83 [95 % CI: 0.40–1.75], p  = 0.63). We found no difference in secondary outcomes including shock reversal (52 % vs. 60 %, p  = 0.57), good neurological outcome (24 % vs. 32 %, p  = 0.53) or survival to discharge (28 % vs. 36 %, p  = 0.54) between the hydrocortisone and placebo groups. Of the patients with a baseline cortisol < 15 ug/dL, 100 % (6/6) in the hydrocortisone group achieved shock reversal compared to 33 % (1/3) in the placebo group ( p  = 0.08). All patients in the placebo group died (100 %; 3/3) whereas 50 % (3/6) died in the hydrocortisone group ( p  = 0.43). Conclusions In a population of cardiac arrest patients with vasopressor-dependent shock, treatment with hydrocortisone did not improve time to shock reversal, rate of shock reversal, or clinical outcomes when compared to placebo. Clinical trial registration Clinicaltrials.gov: NCT00676585 , registration date: May 9, 2008.

The survival benefit of corticosteroids in septic shock remains uncertain. To estimate the individual treatment effect (ITE) of corticosteroids in adults with septic shock in intensive care units using machine learning and to evaluate the net benefit of corticosteroids when the decision to treat is based on the individual estimated absolute treatment effect. This cohort study used individual patient data from 4 trials on steroid supplementation in adults with septic shock as a training cohort to model the ITE using an ensemble machine learning approach. Data from a double-blinded, placebo-controlled randomized clinical trial comparing hydrocortisone with placebo were used for external validation. Data analysis was conducted from September 2019 to February 2020. Intravenous hydrocortisone 50 mg dose every 6 hours for 5 to 7 days with or without enteral 50 μg of fludrocortisone daily for 7 days. The control was either the placebo or usual care. All-cause 90-day mortality. A total of 2548 participants were included in the development cohort, with median (interquartile range [IQR]) age of 66 (55-76) years and 1656 (65.0%) men. The median (IQR) Simplified Acute Physiology Score (SAPS II) was 55 [42-69], and median (IQR) Sepsis-related Organ Failure Assessment score on day 1 was 11 (9-13). The crude pooled relative risk (RR) of death at 90 days was 0.89 (95% CI, 0.83 to 0.96) in favor of corticosteroids. According to the optimal individual model, the estimated median absolute risk reduction was of 2.90% (95% CI, 2.79% to 3.01%). In the external validation cohort of 75 patients, the area under the curve of the optimal individual model was 0.77 (95% CI, 0.59 to 0.92). For any number willing to treat (NWT; defined as the acceptable number of people to treat to avoid 1 additional outcome considering the risk of harm associated with the treatment) less than 25, the net benefit of treating all patients vs treating nobody was negative. When the NWT was 25, the net benefit was 0.01 for the treat all with hydrocortisone strategy, -0.01 for treat all with hydrocortisone and fludrocortisone strategy, 0.06 for the treat by SAPS II strategy, and 0.31 for the treat by optimal individual model strategy. The net benefit of the SAPS II and the optimal individual model treatment strategies converged to zero for a smaller number willing to treat, but the individual model was consistently superior than model based on the SAPS II score. These findings suggest that an individualized treatment strategy to decide which patient with septic shock to treat with corticosteroids yielded positive net benefit regardless of potential corticosteroid-associated side effects.

Pre-existing knowledge, a 'schema', facilitates the encoding, consolidation, and retrieval of schema-relevant information. Such schema-based memory is key to every form of education and provides intriguing insights into the integration of new information and prior knowledge. Stress is known to have a critical impact on memory processes, mainly through the action of glucocorticoids and catecholamines. However, whether stress and these major stress mediators affect schema-based learning is completely unknown. To address this question, we performed two experiments, in which participants acquired a schema on day 1 and learned schema-related as well as schema-unrelated information on day 2. In the first experiment, participants underwent a stress or control manipulation either immediately or about 25 min before schema-based memory testing. The second experiment tested whether glucocorticoid and/or noradrenergic activation is sufficient to modulate schema-based memory. To this end, participants received orally a placebo, hydrocortisone, the α2-adrenoceptor-antagonist yohimbine, leading to increased noradrenergic stimulation, or both drugs, before completing the schema-based memory test. Our data indicate that stress, irrespective of the exact timing of the stress exposure, impaired schema-based learning, while leaving learning of schema-unrelated information intact. A very similar effect was obtained after hydrocortisone, but not yohimbine, administration. These data show that stress disrupts participants' ability to benefit from prior knowledge during learning and that glucocorticoid activation is sufficient to produce this effect. Our findings provide novel insights into the impact of stress and stress hormones on the dynamics of human memory and have important practical implications, specifically for educational contexts.

In animal models, corticosterone elevations are associated with hippocampal changes that can be prevented with phenytoin. In humans, Cushing's syndrome and long-term prescription corticosteroid use are associated with a reduction in the hippocampal volume. However, little is known about the effects of short-term corticosteroid administration on the hippocampus. The current report examines changes in the hippocampal volume during a brief hydrocortisone exposure and whether volumetric changes can be blocked by phenytoin. A randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, within-subject crossover study was conducted in healthy adults (n=17). Participants received hydrocortisone (160 mg/day)/placebo, phenytoin/placebo, both medications together, or placebo/placebo, with 21-day washouts between the conditions. Structural MRI scans and cortisol levels were obtained following each medication condition. No significant difference in the total brain volume was observed with hydrocortisone. However, hydrocortisone was associated with a significant 1.69% reduction in the total hippocampal volume compared with placebo. Phenytoin blocked the volume reduction associated with hydrocortisone. Reduction in hippocampal volume correlated with the change in cortisol levels (r=-0.58, P=0.03). To our knowledge, this is the first report of structural hippocampal changes with brief corticosteroid exposure. The correlation between the change in hippocampal volume and cortisol level suggests that the volume changes are related to cortisol elevation. Although the findings from this pilot study need replication, they suggest that the reductions in hippocampal volume occur even during brief exposure to corticosteroids, and that hippocampal changes can, as in animal models, be blocked by phenytoin. The results may have implications both for understanding the response of the hippocampus to stress as well as for patients receiving prescription corticosteroids.