SynthesisThe Cochrane database of systematic reviews2008
Human recombinant activated protein C for severe sepsis.
Synthesis in The Cochrane database of systematic reviews, 2008. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 20 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
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
20 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 36 citations in OpenAlex.
- Human recombinant protein C for severe sepsis and septic shock in adult and paediatric patients.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2012Pooled it
- Targeting Toll-like receptor-driven systemic inflammation by engineering an innate structural fold into drugs.Nature communications · 2023Article
- Immune Deregulation in Sepsis and Septic Shock: Reversing Immune Paralysis by Targeting PD-1/PD-L1 Pathway.Frontiers in immunology · 2020Review
- A Systematic Summary of Systematic Reviews on Anticoagulant Therapy in Sepsis.Journal of clinical medicine · 2019Review
- The autodigestion hypothesis for shock and multi-organ failure.Annals of biomedical engineering · 2014Review
- Therapeutic targeting of NOD1 receptors.British journal of pharmacology · 2013Review
- Pancreatic digestive enzyme blockade in the intestine increases survival after experimental shock.Science translational medicine · 2013Article
- Updates on role of human recombinant activated protein C in patients with sepsis and severe sepsis: Changed scenario after PROWESS SHOCK trial.Indian journal of anaesthesia · 2012Article
- Pneumonia in adults: the practical emergency department perspective.Emergency medicine clinics of North America · 2012Article
- Advances in the management of sepsis and the understanding of key immunologic defects.Anesthesiology · 2011Review
- Targeting inflammation to prevent bronchopulmonary dysplasia: can new insights be translated into therapies?Pediatrics · 2011Review
- Role of human recombinant activated protein C and low dose corticosteroid therapy in sepsis.Indian journal of anaesthesia · 2010Article
- An update on activated protein C (xigris) in the management of sepsis.P & T : a peer-reviewed journal for formulary management · 2010Article
- Adjunct therapy for sepsis: how early?Current infectious disease reports · 2010Article
- Activated protein C action in inflammation.British journal of haematology · 2010Review
- Blood coagulation disorders in septic patients.Wiener medizinische Wochenschrift (1946) · 2010Review
- Immature dendritic cell-derived exosomes rescue septic animals via milk fat globule epidermal growth factor-factor VIII [corrected].Journal of immunology (Baltimore, Md. : 1950) · 2009Article
- Current status of minimally invasive necrosectomy for post-inflammatory pancreatic necrosis.HPB : the official journal of the International Hepato Pancreato Biliary Association · 2009Article
- Hsp70 and cardiac surgery: molecular chaperone and inflammatory regulator with compartmentalized effects.Cell stress & chaperones · 2009Review
- Anticoagulant therapy in acute lung injury: a useful tool without proper operating instruction?Critical care (London, England) · 2008Article
Corrections and comments
- Updated by
- Update of
Authors and funding
3 authors at 3 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundSepsis is a common, expensive and frequently fatal condition. There is an urgent need for developing new therapies to further reduce severe sepsis-induced mortality. One of those approaches is the use of human recombinant activated protein C (APC).
objectivesWe assessed the clinical effectiveness of APC for the treatment of patients with severe sepsis or septic shock. SEARCH STRATEGY: We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (The Cochrane Library 2005, Issue 2); MEDLINE (1966 to 2005); EMBASE (1980 to 2005) and LILACS (1982 to 2005). We contacted researchers and organizations working in the field. We did not have any language restriction. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) assessing the effects of APC for severe sepsis in adults and children. We excluded studies on neonates. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We independently performed study selection, quality assessment and data extraction. We estimated relative risks (RR) for dichotomous outcomes. We measured statistical heterogeneity using I-squared (I(2)). We used a random-effects model. MAIN
resultsWe included four studies involving 4911 participants (4434 adults and 477 paediatric patients). For 28-day mortality, APC did not reduce the risk of death in adult participants with severe sepsis (pooled RR 0.92, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.72 to 1.18; P = 0.50, I(2) = 72%). The effectiveness of APC did not seem to be associated with the degree of severity of sepsis (two studies): for an APACHE II score less than 25 the RR was 1.04 (95% CI 0.89 to 1.21; P = 0.70), and in participants with an APACHE II score of 25 or more the RR was 0.90 (95% CI 0.54 to 1.49; P = 0.68). APC use was, however, associated with a higher risk of bleeding (RR 1.48 (95% CI 1.07 to 2.06; P = 0.02, I(2) = 8%). Two studies were stopped early because there was little chance of reaching the efficacy endpoint by completion of the trial. AUTHORS'
conclusionsThis updated review found no evidence suggesting that APC should be used for treating patients with severe sepsis or septic shock. Additionally, APC seems to be associated with a higher risk of bleeding. Unless additional RCTs provide evidence of a treatment effect, policy-makers, clinicians and academics should not promote the use of APC.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.