Observational studyMedicine2021
A novel biomarker for predicting sepsis mortality: SCUBE-1.
Observational study in Medicine, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.
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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- SCUBE1 Promotes Gestational Diabetes Mellitus: A Bioinformatics and Experimental Investigation.Biochemical genetics · 2025Article
- C-reactive protein-to-albumin ratio as a biomarker in patients with sepsis: a novel LASSO-COX based prognostic nomogram.Scientific reports · 2023Article
- Basal procalcitonin, C-reactive protein, interleukin-6, and presepsin for prediction of mortality in critically ill septic patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Diagnostic and prognostic research · 2023Review
- Article
- Diagnostic value of serum signal peptide-CUB-EGF-like domain-containing protein 1 levels in patients with acute appendicitis.Revista da Associacao Medica Brasileira (1992) · 2023Article
- Discovering the Protective Effects of Resveratrol on Aflatoxin B1-Induced Toxicity: A Whole Transcriptomic Study in a Bovine Hepatocyte Cell Line.Antioxidants (Basel, Switzerland) · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
abstractThe mortality rate of patients diagnosed with sepsis is high. To date, many markers in sepsis patients have been studied to diagnose, determine their prognosis, and contribute to treatment. These studies were conducted in both experimental and clinical settings, but clinical trials remain limited. Therefore, more well-planned clinical studies are needed in patients with sepsis.The current study aimed to examine the prognostic role of signal peptide-CUB-epidermal growth factor-like domain-containing protein 1 (SCUBE-1) in sepsis and sepsis-related mortality. We also wanted to study its relationship with inflammatory markers and scoring systems.This prospective, cross-sectional, observational study included a total of 187 sepsis cases treated in the intensive care unit. Venous samples were obtained after diagnosis. The patients were separated into 2 groups: (1) the survivor group who were discharged or transferred within 28 days of the first diagnosis and (2) the nonsurvivor group who died within 28 days of the first diagnosis.The SCUBE-1, C-reactive protein, procalcitonin, creatinine, lactate values, acute physiology and chronic health evaluation 2, sequential organ failure assessment scores were significantly higher in the survivor group, and platelets were higher in the survivor group. In addition, SCUBE-1 positively correlated with the inflammatory markers C-reactive protein, lactate, sequential organ failure assessment, and acute physiology and chronic health evaluation 2. Additionally, the SCUBE-1 value predicts 28-day mortality, and the optimal cutoff value for predicting mortality is 4,73 pg/mL.Sepsis is a disease with high mortality. SCUBE-1 can be used as a new prognostic factor for sepsis patients.
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.