Evidence map›Paper›PMID 21310070›Full record

SynthesisCritical care (London, England)2011

Granulocyte-colony stimulating factor (G-CSF) and granulocyte-macrophage colony stimulating factor (GM-CSF) for sepsis: a meta-analysis.

Lulong Bo, Fei Wang, Jiali Zhu, Jinbao Li, Xiaoming Deng

Open access · goldAbstract readMeta-AnalysisReview
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Critical care (London, England), 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 112 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
112citing papers in PubMed, 4 pooled it
8.6field-weighted citation impact, top 2% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

112 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 210 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Trial
  6. [Pharmacological immunomodulation in sepsis].Medizinische Klinik, Intensivmedizin und Notfallmedizin · 2026
    Review
  7. Article
  8. Myeloid-derived suppressor cells in sepsis: drivers of persistent immunosuppression and targets for precision immunotherapy.Inflammation research : official journal of the European Histamine Research Society ... [et al.] · 2026
    Review
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Sepsis and heatstroke: overlapping and distinct mechanisms of systemic inflammation.Inflammation research : official journal of the European Histamine Research Society ... [et al.] · 2025
    Review
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Persistent inflammation, immunosuppression, and catabolism syndrome and sepsis in pediatric burns.Burns : journal of the International Society for Burn Injuries · 2025
    Article
  16. Review
  17. Review
  18. Review
  19. Observational
  20. Observational

52 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Lulong BoDepartment of Anesthesiology, Changhai Hospital, Second Military Medical University, 168 Changhai Road, Shanghai 200433, PR China.
Fei Wang
Jiali Zhu
Jinbao Li
Xiaoming Deng
Changhai Hospital · CNSecond Military Medical University · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionTo investigate the effects of G-CSF or GM-CSF therapy in non-neutropenic patients with sepsis.

methodsA systematic literature search of Medline, Embase and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials was conducted using specific search terms. A manual review of references was also performed. Eligible studies were randomized control trials (RCTs) that compared granulocyte-colony stimulating factor (G-CSF) or granulocyte-macrophage colony stimulating factor (GM-CSF) therapy with placebo for the treatment of sepsis in adults. Main outcome measures were all-cause mortality at 14 days and 28 days after initiation of G-CSF or GM-CSF therapy, in-hospital mortality, reversal rate from infection, and adverse events.

resultsTwelve RCTs with 2,380 patients were identified. In regard to 14-day mortality, a total of 9 death events occurred among 71 patients (12.7%) in the treatment group compared with 13 events among 67 patients (19.4%) in the placebo groups. Meta-analysis showed there was no significant difference in 28-day mortality when G-CSF or GM-CSF were compared with placebo (relative risks (RR) = 0.93, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.79 to 1.11, P = 0.44; P for heterogeneity = 0.31, I2 = 15%). Compared with placebo, G-CSF or GM-CSF therapy did not significantly reduce in-hospital mortality (RR = 0.97, 95% CI: 0.69 to 1.36, P = 0.86; P for heterogeneity = 0.80, I2 = 0%). However, G-CSF or GM-CSF therapy significantly increased the reversal rate from infection (RR = 1.34, 95% CI: 1.11 to 1.62, P = 0.002; P for heterogeneity = 0.47, I2 = 0%). No significant difference was observed in adverse events between groups (RR = 0.93, 95% CI: 0.70 to 1.23, P = 0.62; P for heterogeneity = 0.03, I2 = 58%). Sensitivity analysis by excluding one trial did not significantly change the results of adverse events (RR = 1.05, 95% CI: 0.84 to 1.32, P = 0.44; P for heterogeneity = 0.17, I2 = 36%).

conclusionsThere is no current evidence supporting the routine use of G-CSF or GM-CSF in patients with sepsis. Large prospective multicenter clinical trials investigating monocytic HLA-DR (mHLA-DR)-guided G-CSF or GM-CSF therapy in patients with sepsis-associated immunosuppression are warranted.

Indexed as

Anti-Infective AgentsGranulocyte Colony-Stimulating FactorGranulocyte-Macrophage Colony-Stimulating FactorHospital MortalityHumansRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicSepsisTreatment OutcomeAnti-Infective AgentsGranulocyte Colony-Stimulating FactorGranulocyte-Macrophage Colony-Stimulating Factor

Identifiers

PMID21310070
PMCPMC3221991
OpenAlexW2113960157

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.