Observational studyRevista espanola de quimioterapia : publicacion oficial de la Sociedad Espanola de Quimioterapia2022
[Prognostic power of soluble urokinase plasminogen activator receptor (suPAR) for short-term mortality in patients seen in Emergency Departments due to infections].
Observational study in Revista espanola de quimioterapia : publicacion oficial de la Sociedad Espanola de Quimioterapia, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 16 citations in OpenAlex.
- qSOFA combined with suPAR for early risk detection and guidance of antibiotic treatment in the emergency department: a randomized controlled trial.Critical care (London, England) · 2024Trial
- Soluble Urokinase Plasminogen Activator Receptor (suPAR): Role in the Risk Stratification of Potentially Infected Patients Presenting at the Emergency Department.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Models for bacteraemia risk prediction. Clinical implications.Revista espanola de quimioterapia : publicacion oficial de la Sociedad Espanola de Quimioterapia · 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
12 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo analyse and compare 30-day mortality prognostic power of several biomarkers (C-reactive protein, procalcitonin, lactate and suPAR) in patients seen in emergency departments (ED) due to infections. Secondly, if these could improve the accuracy of systemic inflammatory response syndrome (SIRS) and quick Sepsis-related Organ Failure Assessment (qSOFA).
methodsA prospective, observational and analytical study was carried out on patients who were treated in an ED of one of the eight participating hospitals. An assessment was made of 32 independent variables that could influence mortality at 30 days. They covered epidemiological, comorbidity, functional, clinical and analytical factors.
resultsThe study included 347 consecutive patients, 54 (15.6%) of whom died within 30 days of visiting the ED. SUPAR has got the best biomarker area under the curve (AUC)-ROC to predict mortality at 30 days of 0.836 (95% CI: 0.765-0.907; P <.001) with a cut-off > 10 ng/mL who had a sensitivity of 70% and a specificity of 86%. The score qSOFA ≥ 2 had AUC-ROC of 0.707 (95% CI: 0.621-0.793; P < .001) with sensitivity of 53% and a specificity of 89%. The mixed model (suPAR > 10 ng/mL plus qSOFA ≥ 2) has improved the AUC-ROC to 0.853 [95% CI: 0.790-0.916; P < .001] with the best prognostic performance: sensitivity of 39% and a specificity of 97% with a negative predictive value of 90%.
conclusionssuPAR showed better performance for 30-day mortality prognostic power from several biomarkers in the patients seen in ED due to infections. Score qSOFA has better performance that SRIS and the mixed model (qSOFA ≥ 2 plus suPAR > 10 ng/mL) increased the ability of qSOFA.
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.