Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30064991›Full record

Trial reportThorax2018

Randomised controlled trial of GM-CSF in critically ill patients with impaired neutrophil phagocytosis.

Emma M Pinder, Anthony J Rostron, Thomas P Hellyer, Marie-Helene Ruchaud-Sparagano, Jonathan Scott, James G Macfarlane, Sarah Wiscombe, John D Widdrington, Alistair I Roy, Vanessa C Linnett and 11 more

Open access · hybridAbstract readClinical Trial, Phase IIMulticenter StudyRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in Thorax, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 49 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
49citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
6.4field-weighted citation impact, top 3% 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

49 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 69 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Monocytes in pneumonia: Functional plasticity and innate memory (Review).International journal of molecular medicine · 2026
    Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Inflammatory Stewardship-A Perspective for Active Management of Acute Inflammation.FASEB journal : official publication of the Federation of American Societies for Experimental Biology · 2026
    Article
  7. Review
  8. Observational
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Review
  13. Review
  14. Targeting sepsis through inflammation and oxidative metabolism.World journal of critical care medicine · 2025
    Review
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. Observational
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

21 authors at 7 institutions in 1 country.

Emma M Pinder *Institute of Cellular Medicine, Newcastle University, Newcastle upon Tyne, UK.
Anthony J Rostron *Institute of Cellular Medicine, Newcastle University, Newcastle upon Tyne, UK.
Thomas P HellyerInstitute of Cellular Medicine, Newcastle University, Newcastle upon Tyne, UK.ORCID 0000-0001-5346-7411
Marie-Helene Ruchaud-SparaganoInstitute of Cellular Medicine, Newcastle University, Newcastle upon Tyne, UK.
Jonathan ScottInstitute of Cellular Medicine, Newcastle University, Newcastle upon Tyne, UK.
James G MacfarlaneInstitute of Cellular Medicine, Newcastle University, Newcastle upon Tyne, UK.
Sarah WiscombeInstitute of Cellular Medicine, Newcastle University, Newcastle upon Tyne, UK.
John D WiddringtonInstitute of Cellular Medicine, Newcastle University, Newcastle upon Tyne, UK.
Alistair I RoyIntegrated Critical Care Unit, Sunderland Royal Hospital, Sunderland, UK.
Vanessa C LinnettIntensive Care Unit, Queen Elizabeth Hospital, Gateshead, UK.
Simon V BaudouinIntensive Care Unit, Royal Victoria Infirmary, Newcastle upon Tyne, UK.
Stephen E WrightIntensive Care Unit, Freeman Hospital, Newcastle upon Tyne, UK.
Thomas ChadwickInstitute of Health and Society, Newcastle University, Newcastle upon Tyne, UK.
Tony FouweatherInstitute of Health and Society, Newcastle University, Newcastle upon Tyne, UK.
Jatinder K JussDepartment of Medicine, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK.
Edwin R ChilversDepartment of Medicine, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK.
Susan A BowettNewcastle Clinical Trials Unit, Newcastle University, Newcastle upon Tyne, UK.
Jennie ParkerNewcastle Clinical Trials Unit, Newcastle University, Newcastle upon Tyne, UK.
Daniel F McAuleyCentre for Experimental Medicine, Queen's University Belfast, Belfast, UK.
Andrew Conway MorrisDivision of Anaesthesia, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-3211-3216
A John SimpsonInstitute of Cellular Medicine, Newcastle University, Newcastle upon Tyne, UK.ORCID 0000-0003-4731-7294
Newcastle University · GBUniversity of Cambridge · GBFreeman Hospital · GBQueen Elizabeth Hospital · GBQueen's University Belfast · GBRoyal Victoria Infirmary · GBSunderland Royal Hospital · GB

Funding

Department of HealthMedical Research Council G1100233Medical Research Council MC_PC_17208Medical Research Council MR/J00345X/1Medical Research Council MR/N02995X/1Wellcome Trust 205214/Z/16/Z
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundCritically ill patients with impaired neutrophil phagocytosis have significantly increased risk of nosocomial infection. Granulocyte-macrophage colony-stimulating factor (GM-CSF) improves phagocytosis by neutrophils ex vivo. This study tested the hypothesis that GM-CSF improves neutrophil phagocytosis in critically ill patients in whom phagocytosis is known to be impaired.

methodsThis was a multicentre, phase IIa randomised, placebo-controlled clinical trial. Using a personalised medicine approach, only critically ill patients with impaired neutrophil phagocytosis were included. Patients were randomised 1:1 to subcutaneous GM-CSF (3 μg/kg/day) or placebo, once daily for 4 days. The primary outcome measure was neutrophil phagocytosis 2 days after initiation of GM-CSF. Secondary outcomes included neutrophil phagocytosis over time, neutrophil functions other than phagocytosis, monocyte HLA-DR expression and safety.

resultsThirty-eight patients were recruited from five intensive care units (17 randomised to GM-CSF). Mean neutrophil phagocytosis at day 2 was 57.2% (SD 13.2%) in the GM-CSF group and 49.8% (13.4%) in the placebo group, p=0.73. The proportion of patients with neutrophil phagocytosis≥50% at day 2, and monocyte HLA-DR, appeared significantly higher in the GM-CSF group. Neutrophil functions other than phagocytosis did not appear significantly different between the groups. The most common adverse event associated with GM-CSF was fever.

conclusionsGM-CSF did not improve mean neutrophil phagocytosis at day 2, but was safe and appeared to increase the proportion of patients with adequate phagocytosis. The study suggests proof of principle for a pharmacological effect on neutrophil function in a subset of critically ill patients.

Indexed as

AdultAgedAged, 80 and overCritical IllnessFemaleGranulocyte-Macrophage Colony-Stimulating FactorHLA-DR AntigensHumansMaleMiddle AgedMonocytesNeutrophilsPhagocytosisTreatment OutcomeGranulocyte-Macrophage Colony-Stimulating FactorHLA-DR Antigensbacterial infectiongm-csfneutrophil biology

Identifiers

PMID30064991
PMCPMC6166597
OpenAlexW2800388792

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.