ArticleDer Internist2007
[Endogenous anticoagulant therapy for sepsis. Success and failure].
Article in Der Internist, 2007. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Whereas antithrombin and tifacogin failed to improve clinical outcome in cases of severe sepsis, drotrecogin alfa (activated) increased the chances of survival of patients with this condition. Concerns about efficacy and safety of drotrecogin alfa have been raised because of internal and external validity and internal consistency problems found in the PROWESS study, and because of the drug's single positive pivotal phase III documentation that led to restricted marketing authorisations for only a subgroup of studied patients whose randomisation had not been stratified. Concerns intensified with data from ADDRESS, the PROWESS follow-up, and paediatric studies. It is difficult to make rational and safe recommendations for drotrecogin alfa use on the available evidence. Further trials have been suggested. The relevant bodies should review product approval in light of their own guidelines for marketing authorisations on the basis of single pivotal trials and request the further study required to prevent the possibility of patients receiving a non-efficacious and potentially lethal drug.
Indexed as
Identifiers
17390117What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.