Trial reportCritical care (London, England)2017
Selepressin, a novel selective vasopressin V
Trial report in Critical care (London, England), 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT01000649 (Infusion Proof-of-concept Trial Investigating the Safety, Tolerability, Pharmacokinetics, and Pharmacodynamics of Ascending Doses of FE 202158 in Patients With Vasodilatory Hypotension in Early Septic Shock), which is not on this map. Cited by 39 papers, 9 of them syntheses 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.
Infusion Proof-of-concept Trial Investigating the Safety, Tolerability, Pharmacokinetics, and Pharmacodynamics of Ascending Doses of FE 202158 in Patients With Vasodilatory Hypotension in Early Septic Shock
Who cites it
39 citing papers in PubMed, 9 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 103 citations in OpenAlex.
- ADJUNCTIVE VASOPRESSORS AND SHORT-TERM MORTALITY IN ADULTS WITH SEPTIC SHOCK: A SYSTEMATIC REVIEW AND META-ANALYSIS.Shock (Augusta, Ga.) · 2025Pooled it
- Non-adrenergic vasopressors for vasodilatory shock or perioperative vasoplegia: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.Critical care (London, England) · 2024Pooled it
- Norepinephrine in Septic Shock: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.The western journal of emergency medicine · 2021Pooled it
- Canadian Critical Care Society clinical practice guideline: The use of vasopressin and vasopressin analogues in critically ill adults with distributive shock.Canadian journal of anaesthesia = Journal canadien d'anesthesie · 2020Guideline
- Clinical Efficiency of Vasopressin or Its Analogs in Comparison With Catecholamines Alone on Patients With Septic Shock: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2020Pooled it
- Comparative efficacy of vasoactive medications in patients with septic shock: a network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.Critical care (London, England) · 2019Pooled it
- The effects and safety of vasopressin receptor agonists in patients with septic shock: a meta-analysis and trial sequential analysis.Critical care (London, England) · 2019Pooled it
- Pooled it
- Unexplained mortality differences between septic shock trials: a systematic analysis of population characteristics and control-group mortality rates.Intensive care medicine · 2018Pooled it
- Vasopressin and its analogues in patients with septic shock: holy Grail or unfulfilled promise?Critical care (London, England) · 2025Review
- Haemodynamic management of septic shock.Burns & trauma · 2025Review
- Hemodynamic Management with Vasopressin for Cardiovascular Surgery.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2024Review
- Vasopressor Therapy.Journal of clinical medicine · 2024Review
- Efficacy and safety of phospholipid nanoparticles (VBI-S) in reversing intractable hypotension in patients with septic shock: a multicentre, open-label, repeated measures, phase 2a clinical pilot trial.EClinicalMedicine · 2024Article
- Management of Sepsis and Septic Shock: What Have We Learned in the Last Two Decades?Microorganisms · 2023Review
- Research Progress of Macromolecules in the Prevention and Treatment of Sepsis.International journal of molecular sciences · 2023Review
- Article
- Alternatives to norepinephrine in septic shock: Which agents and when?Journal of intensive medicine · 2022Review
- Vasopressin and Its Analogues: From Natural Hormones to Multitasking Peptides.International journal of molecular sciences · 2022Review
- Current practice and evolving concepts in septic shock resuscitation.Intensive care medicine · 2022Review
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 6 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundVasopressin is widely used for vasopressor support in septic shock patients, but experimental evidence suggests that selective V
methodsThis was a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled multicenter trial in 53 patients in early septic shock (aged ≥18 years, fluid resuscitation, requiring vasopressor support) who received selepressin 1.25 ng/kg/minute (n = 10), 2.5 ng/kg/minute (n = 19), 3.75 ng/kg/minute (n = 2), or placebo (n = 21) until shock resolution or a maximum of 7 days. If mean arterial pressure (MAP) ≥65 mmHg was not maintained, open-label norepinephrine was added. Co-primary endpoints were maintenance of MAP >60 mmHg without norepinephrine, norepinephrine dose, and proportion of patients maintaining MAP >60 mmHg with or without norepinephrine over 7 days. Secondary endpoints included cumulative fluid balance, organ dysfunction, pharmacokinetics, and safety.
resultsA higher proportion of the patients receiving 2.5 ng/kg/minute selepressin maintained MAP >60 mmHg without norepinephrine (about 50% and 70% at 12 and 24 h, respectively) vs. 1.25 ng/kg/minute selepressin and placebo (p < 0.01). The 7-day cumulative doses of norepinephrine were 761, 659, and 249 μg/kg (placebo 1.25 ng/kg/minute and 2.5 ng/kg/minute, respectively; 2.5 ng/kg/minute vs. placebo; p < 0.01). Norepinephrine infusion was weaned more rapidly in selepressin 2.5 ng/kg/minute vs. placebo (0.04 vs. 0.18 μg/kg/minute at 24 h, p < 0.001), successfully maintaining target MAP and reducing norepinephrine dose vs. placebo (first 24 h, p < 0.001). Cumulative net fluid balance was lower from day 5 onward in the selepressin 2.5 ng/kg/minute group vs. placebo (p < 0.05). The selepressin 2.5 ng/kg/minute group had a greater proportion of days alive and free of ventilation vs. placebo (p < 0.02). Selepressin (2.5 ng/kg/minute) was well tolerated, with a similar frequency of treatment-emergent adverse events for selepressin 2.5 ng/kg/minute and placebo. Two patients were infused at 3.75 ng/kg/minute, one of whom had the study drug infusion discontinued for possible safety reasons, with subsequent discontinuation of this dose group.
conclusionsIn septic shock patients, selepressin 2.5 ng/kg/minute was able to rapidly replace norepinephrine while maintaining adequate MAP, and it may improve fluid balance and shorten the time of mechanical ventilation.
trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov, NCT01000649 . Registered on September 30, 2009.
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.