Search

Background: Given the success of recent platform trials for COVID-19, Bayesian statistical methods have become an option for complex, heterogenous syndromes like sepsis. However, study design will require careful consideration of how statistical power varies using Bayesian methods across different choices for how historical data are incorporated through a prior distribution and how the analysis is ultimately conducted. Our objective with the current analysis is to assess how different uses of historical data through a prior distribution, and type of analysis influence results of a proposed trial that will be analyzed using Bayesian statistical methods., Methods: We conducted a simulation study incorporating historical data from a published multicenter, randomized clinical trial in the US and Canada of polymyxin B hemadsorption for treatment of endotoxemic septic shock. Historical data come from a 179-patient subgroup of the previous trial of adult critically ill patients with septic shock, multiple organ failure and an endotoxin activity of 0.60-0.89. The trial intervention consisted of two polymyxin B hemoadsorption treatments (2 h each) completed within 24 h of enrollment., Results: In our simulations for a new trial of 150 patients, a range of hypothetical results were observed. Across a range of baseline risks and treatment effects and four ways of including historical data, we demonstrate an increase in power with the use of clinically defensible incorporation of historical data. In one possible trial result, for example, with an observed reduction in risk of mortality from 44 to 37%, the probability of benefit is 96% with a fixed weight of 75% on prior data and 90% with a commensurate (adaptive-weighting) prior; the same data give an 80% probability of benefit if historical data are ignored., Conclusions: Using Bayesian methods and a biologically justifiable use of historical data in a prior distribution yields a study design with higher power than a conventional design that ignores relevant historical data. Bayesian methods may be a viable option for trials in critical care medicine where beneficial treatments have been elusive., (© 2023. The Author(s).)

Purpose: Sepsis-associated immunosuppression increases hospital-acquired infection and viral reactivation risk. A key underlying mechanism is programmed cell death protein-1 (PD-1)-mediated T-cell function impairment. This is one of the first clinical safety and pharmacokinetics (PK) assessments of the anti-PD-1 antibody nivolumab and its effect on immune biomarkers in sepsis., Methods: Randomized, double-blind, parallel-group, Phase 1b study in 31 adults at 10 US hospital ICUs with sepsis diagnosed ≥ 24 h before study treatment, ≥ 1 organ dysfunction, and absolute lymphocyte count ≤ 1.1 × 10 3 cells/μL. Participants received one nivolumab dose [480 mg (n = 15) or 960 mg (n = 16)]; follow-up was 90 days. Primary endpoints were safety and PK parameters., Results: Twelve deaths occurred [n = 6 per study arm; 40% (480 mg) and 37.5% (960 mg)]. Serious AEs occurred in eight participants [n = 1, 6.7% (480 mg); n = 7, 43.8% (960 mg)]. AEs considered by the investigator to be possibly drug-related and immune-mediated occurred in five participants [n = 2, 13.3% (480 mg); n = 3, 18.8% (960 mg)]. Mean ± SD terminal half-life was 14.7 ± 5.3 (480 mg) and 15.8 ± 7.9 (960 mg) days. All participants maintained > 90% receptor occupancy (RO) 28 days post-infusion. Median (Q1, Q3) mHLA-DR levels increased to 11,531 (6528, 19,495) and 11,449 (6225, 16,698) mAbs/cell in the 480- and 960-mg arms by day 14, respectively. Pro-inflammatory cytokine levels did not increase., Conclusions: In this sepsis population, nivolumab administration did not result in unexpected safety findings or indicate any 'cytokine storm'. The PK profile maintained RO > 90% for ≥ 28 days. Further efficacy and safety studies are warranted. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER (CLINICALTRIALS.GOV): NCT02960854.

Importance: Eritoran is a synthetic lipid A antagonist that blocks lipopolysaccharide (LPS) from binding at the cell surface MD2-TLR4 receptor. LPS is a major component of the outer membrane of gram-negative bacteria and is a potent activator of the acute inflammatory response., Objective: To determine if eritoran, a TLR4 antagonist, would significantly reduce sepsis-induced mortality., Design, Setting, and Participants: We performed a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, multinational phase 3 trial in 197 intensive care units. Patients were enrolled from June 2006 to September 2010 and final follow-up was completed in September 2011., Interventions: Patients with severe sepsis (n = 1961) were randomized and treated within 12 hours of onset of first organ dysfunction in a 2:1 ratio with a 6-day course of either eritoran tetrasodium (105 mg total) or placebo, with n = 1304 and n = 657 patients, respectively., Main Outcome Measures: The primary end point was 28-day all-cause mortality. The secondary end points were all-cause mortality at 3, 6, and 12 months after beginning treatment., Results: Baseline characteristics of the 2 study groups were similar. In the modified intent-to-treat analysis (randomized patients who received at least 1 dose) there was no significant difference in the primary end point of 28-day all-cause mortality with 28.1% (366/1304) in the eritoran group vs 26.9% (177/657) in the placebo group (P = .59; hazard ratio, 1.05; 95% CI, 0.88-1.26; difference in mortality rate, -1.1; 95% CI, -5.3 to 3.1) or in the key secondary end point of 1-year all-cause mortality with 44.1% (290/657) in the eritoran group vs 43.3% (565/1304) in the placebo group, Kaplan-Meier analysis of time to death by 1 year, P = .79 (hazard ratio, 0.98; 0.85-1.13). No significant differences were observed in any of the prespecified subgroups. Adverse events, including secondary infection rates, did not differ between study groups., Conclusions and Relevance: Among patients with severe sepsis, the use of eritoran, compared with placebo, did not result in reduced 28-day mortality., Trial Registration: clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT00334828.

The human innate immune system initiates inflammation in response to bacterial molecules, particularly Gram-negative bacterial endotoxin. The steps by which endotoxin exposure leads to systemic inflammation include binding to Toll-like receptor-4 that specifically recognizes endotoxin and subsequently triggers cellular and molecular inflammatory responses. Severe sepsis is a systemic inflammatory response to infection that induces organ dysfunction and threatens a person's survival. Severe sepsis is frequently associated with increased blood levels of endotoxin. It is a significant medical problem that effects approximately 700,000 patients every year in the USA, resulting in 250,000 deaths. Eritoran tetrasodium is a nonpathogenic analog of bacterial endotoxin that antagonizes inflammatory signaling by the immune receptor Toll-like receptor-4. Eritoran is being evaluated for the treatment of patients with severe sepsis.

Objectives: Endotoxin is a potent stimulus of proinflammatory response and systemic coagulation in patients with severe sepsis. Endotoxin is a component of Gram-negative bacteria that triggers an innate immune response through Toll-like receptor 4 signaling pathways in myeloid cells. We evaluated safety and tolerability of two dose regimens of eritoran tetrasodium (E5564), a synthetic Toll-like receptor 4 antagonist, and explored whether it decreases 28-day mortality rate in subjects with severe sepsis., Design: Prospective, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, multicenter, ascending-dose phase II trial., Setting: Adult intensive care units in the United States and Canada., Patients: Three hundred adults within 12 hrs of recognition of severe sepsis, with Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation (APACHE) II-predicted risk of mortality between 20% and 80%., Interventions: Intravenous eritoran tetrasodium (total dose of either 45 mg or 105 mg) or placebo administered every 12 hrs for 6 days., Measurements and Main Results: Prevalence of adverse events was similar among subjects treated with 45 mg or 105 mg of eritoran tetrasodium or with placebo. For modified intent-to-treat subjects, 28-day all-cause mortality rates were 26.6% (eritoran tetrasodium 105 mg), 32.0% (eritoran tetrasodium 45 mg), and 33.3% in the placebo group. Mortality rate in the eritoran tetrasodium 105-mg group was not significantly different from placebo (p = .335). In prespecified subgroups, subjects at highest risk of mortality by APACHE II score quartile had a trend toward lower mortality rate in the eritoran tetrasodium 105-mg group (33.3% vs. 56.3% placebo group, p = .105). A trend toward a higher mortality rate was observed in subjects in the lowest APACHE II score quartile for the eritoran 105-mg group (12.0% vs. 0.0% placebo group, p = .083)., Conclusions: Eritoran tetrasodium treatment appears well tolerated. The observed trend toward a lower mortality rate at the 105-mg dose, in subjects with severe sepsis and high predicted risk of mortality, should be further investigated.