ReviewShock (Augusta, Ga.)2025
FUNCTIONAL IMMUNOPHENOTYPING FOR PRECISION THERAPIES IN SEPSIS.
Review in Shock (Augusta, Ga.), 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 2 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.
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, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- A bibliometric and visual analysis of research trends and hotspots in sepsis-related immunosuppression (2005-2025).Frontiers in pharmacology · 2026Pooled it
- Comparative efficacy and safety of immunomodulatory therapies for sepsis: a systematic review and network meta-analysis.Frontiers in medicine · 2026Pooled it
- Pathological Signal-Responsive Nanoplatforms for Sepsis: Integrating Biomarker Sensing With Spatiotemporal Drug Delivery and Immunomodulation.Advanced science (Weinheim, Baden-Wurttemberg, Germany) · 2026Review
- Early Immune Phenotype-Guided Immunomodulatory Strategies and Intensive Care Outcomes in Septic Shock: A Single-Center Retrospective Cohort Study.Shock (Augusta, Ga.) · 2026Observational
- CX3CR1-mediated immune networks in sepsis: implications for precision therapy.Cell death discovery · 2026Review
- Determining potential immunomodulatory drug efficacy in sepsis using ELISpot.Scientific reports · 2025Article
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.
Funding
Abstract
abstractSepsis remains a significant cause of morbidity and mortality worldwide. Although many more patients are surviving the acute event, a substantial number enters a state of persistent inflammation and immunosuppression, rendering them more vulnerable to infections. Modulating the host immune response has been a focus of sepsis research for the past 50 years, yet novel therapies have been few and far between. Although many septic patients have similar clinical phenotypes, pathways affected by the septic event differ not only between individuals but also within an individual over the course of illness. These differences ultimately impact overall immune function and response to treatment. Defining the immune state, or endotype, of an individual is critical to understanding which patients will respond to a particular therapy. In this review, we highlight current approaches to define the immune endotype and propose that these technologies may be used to "prescreen" individuals to determine which therapies are most likely to be beneficial.
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.