ArticleCurrent infectious disease reports2008
Current role of activated protein C therapy for severe sepsis and septic shock.
Article in Current infectious disease reports, 2008. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 9 citations in OpenAlex.
- Case report: perioperative use of protein c concentrate for protein C deficiency in THA.Clinical orthopaedics and related research · 2010Article
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 at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Drotrecogin alfa (activated) (DrotAA) has been approved for therapy of severe sepsis and septic shock for 7 years, but controversy persists regarding efficacy and safety. Only a single randomized, controlled trial (Recombinant Human Activated Protein C Worldwide Evaluation in Severe Sepsis; PROWESS) has shown evidence of efficacy, and the risk of complications (especially hemorrhage) is recognized. Moreover, subsequent prospective studies (albeit in children and lower-risk adult patient populations) have been nonconfirmatory. Opinion is polarized whether DrotAA is effective and should be used. Safety data are not in dispute (DrotAA therapy increases risk of bleeding complications), but controversy exists regarding efficacy, the ethics of marketing the drug, and the design and conduct of current and future trials designed to resolve efficacy questions. DrotAA is approved therapy in the United States, the European Union, and many other countries, and clinicians should keep the drug in their armamentarium, balancing risk and benefit, for therapy of patients with severe sepsis or septic shock who are at high risk of death until the controversy is resolved by randomized, prospective trials now in progress.
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.