SynthesisFrontiers in immunology2026
Peripheral adaptive immune cell counts and mortality in adult sepsis: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis in Frontiers in immunology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Lower peripheral lymphocyte counts are associated with mortality in sepsis, but evidence across related adaptive immune-cell compartments has not been systematically quantified. Methods: Nine databases were searched from inception through 7 August 2026 using expanded controlled-vocabulary and free-text terms for sepsis, lymphocyte/T-cell subsets, absolute cell counts, and mortality. Observational studies comparing absolute peripheral CD4+ T-cell, CD8+ T-cell, CD3+ T-cell, or absolute lymphocyte counts (ALCs) between adult non-survivors and survivors were included. Random-effects mean differences (MDs) were estimated using restricted maximum likelihood with a modified Hartung-Knapp adjustment. Prediction intervals, restricted and leave-one-out analyses, ratio-of-means analyses, Egger tests, and exploratory meta-regression were also performed. Results: Thirteen studies were included. Counts were lower in non-survivors for CD4+ T cells (13 studies; MD = -86.06 cells/µL, 95% CI -127.29 to -44.83; I² = 77.0%), CD8+ T cells (11 studies; MD = -41.83, 95% CI -68.37 to -15.29; I² = 61.9%), CD3+ T cells (10 studies; MD = -133.99, 95% CI -220.41 to -47.56; I² = 88.3%), and ALCs (10 studies; MD = -201.46, 95% CI -323.04 to -79.88; I² = 71.7%). All prediction intervals crossed zero. CD4 remained lower after exclusion of studies classified as high risk in the descriptive QUIPS synthesis; corresponding CD8, CD3, and ALC estimates remained negative but were imprecise because only four, two, and three lower-risk studies remained. After excluding statistically converted data, CD8 was no longer significant and ALC evidence was based on only two studies. Adjusted analyses varied across studies and did not consistently support independent prognostic associations. Evidence robustness was greatest for CD4; CD8, CD3, and ALC were more sensitive to data conversion, heterogeneity, or sparse lower-risk evidence. Conclusion: Adult sepsis non-survivors had lower absolute counts across lymphocyte and T-cell compartments. The findings are most consistent for CD4, whereas CD8 and ALC estimates are more dependent on converted data. Heterogeneity, geographic concentration, and prediction intervals crossing zero limit direct clinical generalization and support the need for standardized longitudinal studies with severity-adjusted analyses. Systematic Review Registration: https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/, identifier CRD420261446443.
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.