Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38807151›Full record

ArticleCritical care (London, England)2024

Towards personalized medicine: a scoping review of immunotherapy in sepsis.

Marleen A Slim, Niels van Mourik, Lieke Bakkerus, Katherine Fuller, Lydia Acharya, Tatiana Giannidis, Joanna C Dionne, Simon J W Oczkowski, Mihai G Netea, Peter Pickkers and 7 more

Abstract readScoping Review
In one paragraph

Article in Critical care (London, England), 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 47 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
47citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

47 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. The calcium-sensing receptor in sepsis and septic shock, mechanistic pathways and translational perspectives: a systematic review.Inflammation research : official journal of the European Histamine Research Society ... [et al.] · 2026
    Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Hour-1 Sepsis Bundle: Updated Evidence.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026
    Review
  4. Update on sepsis treatment.Journal of intensive care · 2026
    Review
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Myeloid-derived suppressor cells in sepsis: drivers of persistent immunosuppression and targets for precision immunotherapy.Inflammation research : official journal of the European Histamine Research Society ... [et al.] · 2026
    Review
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Review
  16. Review
  17. Review
  18. Review
  19. Review
  20. Review
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

17 authors.

Marleen A Slim *Department of Intensive Care Medicine, Amsterdam University Medical Center, Meibergdreef 9, Room G3-220, 1105 AZ, Amsterdam, The Netherlands. m.a.slim@amsterdamumc.nl.
Niels van Mourik *Department of Intensive Care Medicine, Amsterdam University Medical Center, Meibergdreef 9, Room G3-220, 1105 AZ, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Lieke BakkerusDepartment of Internal Medicine and Radboud Center for Infectious Diseases, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, The Netherlands.
Katherine FullerDepartment of Medicine, McMaster University, Hamilton, Canada.
Lydia AcharyaDepartment of Medicine, McMaster University, Hamilton, Canada.
Tatiana GiannidisDepartment of Medicine, McMaster University, Hamilton, Canada.
Joanna C DionneDepartment of Medicine, McMaster University, Hamilton, Canada.
Simon J W OczkowskiDepartment of Medicine, McMaster University, Hamilton, Canada.
Mihai G NeteaDepartment of Internal Medicine and Radboud Center for Infectious Diseases, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, The Netherlands.
Peter PickkersDepartment of Intensive Care Medicine, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, The Netherlands.
Evangelos J Giamarellos-Bourboulis4th Department of Internal Medicine, Medical School, National and Kapodistrian University of Athens, Athens, Greece.
Marcella C A MüllerDepartment of Intensive Care Medicine, Amsterdam University Medical Center, Meibergdreef 9, Room G3-220, 1105 AZ, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Tom van der PollCenter for Experimental and Molecular Medicine, Amsterdam University Medical Center, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
W Joost WiersingaCenter for Experimental and Molecular Medicine, Amsterdam University Medical Center, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
ImmunoSep Consortium
Alexander P J Vlaar *Department of Intensive Care Medicine, Amsterdam University Medical Center, Meibergdreef 9, Room G3-220, 1105 AZ, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Lonneke A van Vught *Department of Intensive Care Medicine, Amsterdam University Medical Center, Meibergdreef 9, Room G3-220, 1105 AZ, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.

Funding

Horizon 2020 847422
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Despite significant progress in our understanding of the pathophysiology of sepsis and extensive clinical research, there are few proven therapies addressing the underlying immune dysregulation of this life-threatening condition. The aim of this scoping review is to describe the literature evaluating immunotherapy in adult patients with sepsis, emphasizing on methods providing a "personalized immunotherapy" approach, which was defined as the classification of patients into a distinct subgroup or subphenotype, in which a patient's immune profile is used to guide treatment. Subgroups are subsets of sepsis patients, based on any cut-off in a variable. Subphenotypes are subgroups that can be reliably discriminated from other subgroup based on data-driven assessments. Included studies were randomized controlled trials and cohort studies investigating immunomodulatory therapies in adults with sepsis. Studies were identified by searching PubMed, Embase, Cochrane CENTRAL and ClinicalTrials.gov, from the first paper available until January 29th, 2024. The search resulted in 15,853 studies. Title and abstract screening resulted in 1409 studies (9%), assessed for eligibility; 771 studies were included, of which 282 (37%) were observational and 489 (63%) interventional. Treatment groups included were treatments targeting the innate immune response, the complement system, coagulation and endothelial dysfunction, non-pharmalogical treatment, pleiotropic drugs, immunonutrition, concomitant treatments, Traditional Chinese Medicine, immunostimulatory cytokines and growth factors, intravenous immunoglobulins, mesenchymal stem cells and immune-checkpoint inhibitors. A personalized approach was incorporated in 70 studies (9%). Enrichment was applied using cut-offs in temperature, laboratory, biomarker or genetic variables. Trials often showed conflicting results, possibly due to the lack of patient stratification or the potential influence of severity and timing on immunomodulatory therapy results. When a personalized approach was applied, trends of clinical benefit for several interventions emerged, which hold promise for future clinical trials using personalized immunotherapy.

Indexed as

ImmunotherapyPrecision MedicineSepsisHumansEnrichmentImmunomodulationImmunotherapyPersonalizedSepsis

Identifiers

PMID38807151
PMCPMC11134696

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.