Trial reportCritical care (London, England)2015
Clinical impact of stress dose steroids in patients with septic shock: insights from the PROWESS-Shock trial.
Trial report in Critical care (London, England), 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to 2 registered trials, which are not on this map. Cited by 4 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.
A Randomized, Double-blind, Placebo-controlled, Multicenter, Phase 3 Study of Drotrecogin Alfa (Activated) Administered as a Continuous 96-hr Infusion to Adult Patients With Septic Shock
Improving the Assessment of Microcirculatory Dysfunction in Septic Shock Patients Using Optical Coherence Tomography Angiography at the Bedside
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 22 citations in OpenAlex.
- Reevaluating the Role of Corticosteroids in Septic Shock: An Updated Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials.BioMed research international · 2019Pooled it
- Time-dependent variation in immunoparalysis biomarkers among patients with sepsis and critical illness.Frontiers in immunology · 2024Article
- Aspirin as a potential treatment in sepsis or acute respiratory distress syndrome.Critical care (London, England) · 2015Review
- It's About Time ….Pediatric critical care medicine : a journal of the Society of Critical Care Medicine and the World Federation of Pediatric Intensive and Critical Care Societies · 2015Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors at 8 institutions in 5 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionThe aim of our study was to evaluate the clinical impact of the administration of intravenous steroids, alone or in conjunction with drotrecogin-alfa (activated) (DrotAA), on the outcomes in septic shock patients.
methodsWe performed a sub-study of the PROWESS-Shock trial (septic shock patients who received fluids and vasopressors above a predefined threshold for at least 4 hours were randomized to receive either DrotAA or placebo for 96 hours). A propensity score for the administration of intravenous steroids for septic shock at baseline was constructed using multivariable logistic regression. Cox proportional hazards model using inverse probability of treatment weighting of the propensity score was used to estimate the effect of intravenous steroids, alone or in conjunction with DrotAA, on 28-day and 90-day all-cause mortality.
resultsA total of 1695 patients were enrolled of which 49.5% received intravenous steroids for treatment of septic shock at baseline (DrotAA + steroids N = 436; DrotAA + no steroids N = 414; placebo + steroids N = 403; placebo + no steroids N = 442). The propensity weighted risk of 28-day as well as 90-day mortality in those treated vs. those not treated with steroids did not differ among those randomized to DrotAA vs. placebo (interaction p-value = 0.38 and p = 0.27, respectively) nor was a difference detected within each randomized treatment. Similarly, the course of vasopressor use and cardiovascular SOFA did not appear to be influenced by steroid therapy. In patients with lung infection (N = 744), abdominal infection (N = 510), Gram-positive sepsis (N = 420) and Gram-negative sepsis (N = 461), the propensity weighted risk of 28-day as well as 90-day mortality in those treated vs. those not treated with steroids did not differ among those randomized to DrotAA vs. placebo nor was a difference detected within each randomized treatment.
conclusionsIn the present study of septic shock patients, after adjustment for treatment selection bias, we were unable to find noticeable positive impact from intravenous steroids for treatment of septic shock at baseline either in patients randomized for DrotAA or placebo.
trial registrationClinicaltrials.gov NCT00604214 . Registered 24 January 2008.
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.