ArticleCritical care (London, England)2025
Biomarkers in acute kidney injury settings to predict interventions and outcomes: the MARKISIO study.
Article in Critical care (London, England), 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Lactate in acute kidney injury: pathobiology, risk stratification, and clinical interpretation.Renal failure · 2026Review
- Biomarkers and the prediction of acute kidney injury and renal replacement therapy initiation: a dream within a dream.Intensive care medicine · 2026Article
- Prognosis of critically ill patients with severe acute kidney injury and high circulating dipeptidyl peptidase 3: a post hoc analysis of the AKIKI 2 trial.Critical care (London, England) · 2026Article
- Early biomarker detection: fundamentally disputable?Intensive care medicine · 2026Article
- One Enzyme, Many Faces: The Expanding Role of DPP3 in Cardiovascular and Critical Care.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
32 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionPredicting the need for renal replacement therapy (RRT) in acute kidney injury (AKI) remains challenging. The utility of biomarkers was explored during previous studies which were biased as RRT indications relied on clinician opinion rather than evidence. Those studies preceded trials that clarified RRT initiation criteria. We aimed to assess biomarkers in predicting criteria for RRT initiation in severe AKI patients. MATERIAL AND
methodsThis is an ancillary study of the AKIKI2 trial. Patients with severe AKI (stage 3) receiving invasive mechanical ventilation and/or vasopressors were included. Blood and urine samples were collected within 12 h after the occurrence of severe AKI when feasible, depending on the availability of trained research staff and appropriate sample storage infrastructure. The primary endpoint was the onset of precise criteria for RRT initiation within 72 h after severe AKI. We analyzed routine serum biomarkers (pH, serum potassium, serum creatinine) and novel urinary and serum biomarkers (CCL14, KIM1, nicotinamide and its metabolites, cDPP3, plasma proenkephalin A 119-159).
resultsAmong the 256 patients, 101 (39%) met at least one criterion for RRT initiation or died within 72 h. No biomarker demonstrated satisfactory predictive performance for the primary endpoint. No novel biomarker was significantly associated with the occurrence of MAKE
conclusionNeither routine nor novel biomarkers demonstrated conclusive predictive accuracy for the need for RRT in severe AKI patients. Given evidence-based criteria for initiating RRT, the tested biomarkers may not effectively guide RRT initiation.
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.