Prospective evaluation of the efficacy, safety, and optimal biomarker enrichment strategy for nangibotide, a TREM-1 inhibitor, in patients with septic shock (ASTONISH): a double-blind, randomised, controlled, phase 2b trial

BACKGROUND

Activation of the triggering receptor expressed on myeloid cells-1 (TREM-1) pathway is associated with septic shock outcomes. Data suggest that modulation of this pathway in patients with activated TREM-1 might improve survival. Soluble TREM-1 (sTREM-1), a potential mechanism-based biomarker, might facilitate enrichment of patient selection in clinical trials of nangibotide, a TREM-1 modulator. In this phase 2b trial, we aimed to confirm the hypothesis that TREM1 inhibition might improve outcomes in patients with septic shock.

METHODS

This double-blind, randomised, placebo-controlled, phase 2b trial assessed the efficacy and safety of two different doses of nangibotide compared with placebo, and aimed to identify the optimum treatment population, in patients across 42 hospitals with medical, surgical, or mixed intensive care units (ICUs) in seven countries. Non-COVID-19 patients (18-85 years) meeting the standard definition of septic shock, with documented or suspected infection (lung, abdominal, or urinary [in patients ≥65 years]), were eligible within 24 h of vasopressor initiation for the treatment of septic shock. Patients were randomly assigned in a 1:1:1 ratio to intravenous nangibotide 0·3 mg/kg per h (low-dose group), nangibotide 1·0 mg/kg per h (high-dose group), or matched placebo, using a computer-generated block randomisation scheme (block size 3). Patients and investigators were masked to treatment allocation. Patients were grouped according to sTREM-1 concentrations at baseline (established from sepsis observational studies and from phase 2a change to data) into high sTREM-1 (≥ 400 pg/mL). The primary outcome was the mean difference in total Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA) score from baseline to day 5 in the low-dose and high-dose groups compared with placebo, measured in the predefined high sTREM-1 (≥ 400 pg/mL) population and in the overall modified intention-to-treat population. Secondary endpoints included all-cause 28-day mortality, safety, pharmacokinetics, and evaluation of the relationship between TREM-1 activation and treatment response. This study is registered with EudraCT, 2018-004827-36, and Clinicaltrials.gov, NCT04055909.

FINDINGS

Between Nov 14, 2019, and April 11, 2022, of 402 patients screened, 355 were included in the main analysis (116 in the placebo group, 118 in the low-dose group, and 121 in the high-dose group). In the preliminary high sTREM-1 population (total 253 [71%] of 355; placebo 75 [65%] of 116; low-dose 90 [76%] of 118; high-dose 88 [73%] of 121), the mean difference in SOFA score from baseline to day 5 was 0·21 (95% CI -1·45 to 1·87, p=0·80) in the low-dose group and 1·39 (-0·28 to 3·06, p=0·104) in the high-dose group versus placebo. In the overall population, the difference in SOFA score from baseline to day 5 between the placebo group and low-dose group was 0·20 (-1·09 to 1·50; p=0·76),and between the placebo group and the high-dose group was 1·06 (-0·23 to 2·35, p=0·108). In the predefined high sTREM-1 cutoff population, 23 (31%) patients in the placebo group, 35 (39%) in the low-dose group, and 25 (28%) in the high-dose group had died by day 28. In the overall population, 29 (25%) patients in the placebo, 38 (32%) in the low-dose, and 30 (25%) in the high-dose group had died by day 28. The number of treatment-emergent adverse events (111 [96%] patients in the placebo group, 113 [96%] in the low-dose group, and 115 [95%] in the high-dose group) and serious treatment-emergent adverse events (28 [24%], 26 [22%], and 31 [26%]) was similar between all three groups. High-dose nangibotide led to a clinically relevant improvement in SOFA score (of two points or more) from baseline to day 5 over placebo in those with higher cutoff concentrations (≥532 pg/mL) of sTREM-1 at baseline. Low dose nangibotide displayed a similar pattern with lower magnitude of effect across all cutoff values.

INTERPRETATION

This trial did not achieve the primary outcome of improvement in SOFA score at the predefined sTREM-1 value. Future studies are needed to confirm the benefit of nangibotide at higher concentrations of TREM-1 activation.

FUNDING

Inotrem.

Study protocol of a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, two-arm parallel-group, multi-centre phase 3 pivotal trial to investigate the efficacy and safety of recombinant human alkaline phosphatase for treatment of patients with sepsis-associated acute kidney injury

INTRODUCTION

Sepsis, the leading cause of acute kidney injury (AKI), is associated with a high morbidity and mortality. Alkaline phosphatase (ALP) is an endogenous detoxifying enzyme. A recombinant human ALP compound, ilofotase alfa, showed no safety or tolerability concerns in a phase 2 trial. Renal function improvement over 28 days was significantly greater in the ilofotase alfa group. Moreover, a significant relative reduction in 28-day all-cause mortality of >40% was observed. A follow-up trial has been designed to confirm these findings.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

This is a phase 3, global, multi-centre, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, sequential design trial in which patients are randomly assigned to either placebo or 1.6 mg/kg ilofotase alfa. Randomisation is stratified by baseline modified Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (mSOFA) score and trial site. The primary objective is to confirm the survival benefit with ilofotase alfa by demonstrating a reduction in 28-day all-cause mortality in patients with sepsis-associated AKI requiring vasopressors. A maximum of 1400 patients will be enrolled at ∼120 sites in Europe, North America, Japan, Australia and New Zealand. Up to four interim analyses will take place. Based on predefined decision rules, the trial may be stopped early for futility or for effectiveness. In addition, patients with COVID-19 disease and patients with 'moderate to severe' chronic kidney disease are analysed as 2 separate cohorts of 100 patients each. An independent Data Monitoring Committee evaluates safety data at prespecified intervals throughout the trial.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

The trial is approved by relevant institutional review boards/independent ethics committees and is conducted in accordance with the ethical principles of the Declaration of Helsinki, guidelines of Good Clinical Practice, Code of Federal Regulations and all other applicable regulations. Results of this study will determine the potential of ilofotase alfa to reduce mortality in critically ill patients with sepsis-associated AKI and will be published in a peer-reviewed scientific journal.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

EudraCT CT Number 2019-0046265-24. US IND Number 117 605 Pre-results.

CLINICALTRIALS

gov number: NCT04411472.

Haloperidol vs. placebo for the treatment of delirium in ICU patients: a pre-planned, secondary Bayesian analysis of the AID–ICU trial

PURPOSE

The AID-ICU trial was a randomised, blinded, placebo-controlled trial investigating effects of haloperidol versus placebo in acutely admitted, adult patients admitted in intensive care unit (ICU) with delirium. This pre-planned Bayesian analysis facilitates probabilistic interpretation of the AID-ICU trial results.

METHODS

We used adjusted Bayesian linear and logistic regression models with weakly informative priors to analyse all primary and secondary outcomes reported up to day 90, and with sensitivity analyses using other priors. The probabilities for any benefit/harm, clinically important benefit/harm, and no clinically important differences with haloperidol treatment according to pre-defined thresholds are presented for all outcomes.

RESULTS

The mean difference for days alive and out of hospital to day 90 (primary outcome) was 2.9 days (95% credible interval (CrI) - 1.1 to 6.9) with probabilities of 92% for any benefit and 82% for clinically important benefit. The risk difference for mortality was - 6.8 percentage points (95% CrI - 12.8 to - 0.8) with probabilities of 99% for any benefit and 94% for clinically important benefit. The adjusted risk difference for serious adverse reactions was 0.3 percentage points (95% CrI - 1.3 to 1.9) with 98% probability of no clinically important difference. Results were consistent across sensitivity analyses using different priors, with more than 83% probability of benefit and less than 17% probability of harm with haloperidol treatment.

CONCLUSIONS

We found high probabilities of benefits and low probabilities of harm with haloperidol treatment compared with placebo in acutely admitted, adult ICU patients with delirium for the primary and most secondary outcomes.

Platelet transfusions and thrombocytopenia in intensive care units: protocol for an international inception cohort study (PLOT‐ICU)

Introduction

Thrombocytopenia is frequent in intensive care unit (ICU) patients and has been associated with worse outcome. Platelet transfusions are often used in the management of ICU patients with severe thrombocytopenia. However, the reported frequencies of thrombocytopenia and platelet transfusion practices in the ICU vary considerably. Therefore, we aim to provide contemporary epidemiological data on thrombocytopenia and platelet transfusion practices in the ICU.

Methods

We will conduct an international inception cohort, including at least 1000 acutely admitted adult ICU patients. Routinely available data will be collected at baseline (ICU admission), and daily during ICU stay up to a maximum of 90 days. The primary outcome will be the number of patients with thrombocytopenia (a recorded platelet count < 150 × 10⁹/L) at baseline and/or during ICU stay. Secondary outcomes include mortality, days alive and out of hospital, days alive without life‐support, the number of patients with at least one bleeding episode, at least one thromboembolic event and at least one platelet transfusion in the ICU, the number of platelet transfusions and the indications for transfusion. The primary and secondary outcomes will be presented descriptively. In addition, we will assess risk factors for developing thrombocytopenia during ICU stay and the association between thrombocytopenia at baseline and 90‐day mortality using logistic regression analyses.

Conclusion

The outlined international PLOT‐ICU cohort study will provide contemporary epidemiological data on the burden and clinical significance of thrombocytopenia in adult ICU patients and describe the current platelet transfusion practice.

The effect of prostacyclin (Iloprost) infusion at a dose of 1 ng/kg/min for 72 hours compared to placebo in mechanically ventilated patients with COVID-19: A structured summary of a study protocol for a randomized controlled trial

OBJECTIVES

To investigate the effect of continuous infusion of the potential endothelial cytoprotective agent prostacyclin (Iloprost) 1 ng/kg/min vs. placebo for 72 hours on pulmonary endotheliopathy in mechanically ventilated COVID-19 patients.

TRIAL DESIGN

A multicenter, randomized (1:1, active: placebo), blinded, parallel group exploratory trial PARTICIPANTS: Inclusion criteria are: Adult patients (>18 years); Confirmed COVID-19 infection; Need for mechanical interventions; Endothelial biomarker soluble thrombomodulin >4ng/ml.

EXCLUSION CRITERIA

Withdrawal from active therapy; Pregnancy (non-pregnancy confirmed by patient being postmenopausal (age 60 or above) or having a negative urine- or plasma-hCG); Known hypersensitivity to iloprost or to any of the other ingredients; Previously included in this trial or a prostacyclin trial within 30 days; Consent cannot be obtained; Life-threatening bleeding defined by the treating physician; Known severe heart failure (NYHA class IV); Suspected acute coronary syndrome The study is conducted at five intensive care units in the Capital Region of Denmark at Rigshospitalet, Herlev Hospital, Hvidovre Hospital, Bispebjerg Hospital, Nordsjællands Hospital.

INTERVENTION AND COMPARATOR

The patients are randomized to 72-hours continuous infusion of either prostacyclin (Iloprost/Ilomedin) at a dose of 1 ng/kg/min or Placebo (normal saline).

MAIN OUTCOMES

Primary endpoint: Days alive without mechanical ventilation in the intensive care units within 28 days RANDOMISATION: The randomisation sequence is performed in permuted blocks of variable sizes stratified for trial site using centralised, concealed allocation. The randomisation sequence is generated 1:1 (active/placebo) using the online randomisation software 'Sealed Envelope' ( https://www.sealedenvelope.com/ ). Once generated the randomisation sequence is formatted and uploaded into Research Electronic Data Capture system (REDCap) to facilitate centralised, web-based allocation according to local written instruction.

BLINDING (MASKING)

The following are blinded: all clinicians, patients, investigators, and those assessing the outcomes including the statisticians.

NUMBERS TO BE RANDOMISED (SAMPLE SIZE)

Forty patients are planned to be randomized to each group, with a total sample size of 80 patients.

TRIAL STATUS

Protocol version 1.4 dated May 25, 2020. Recruitment is ongoing. The recruitment was started June 15, 2020 and the anticipated finish of recruitment is February 28, 2021 with 90 days follow up hereafter.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Trial registration at clinicaltrialregisters.eu; EudraCT no. 2020-001296-33 on 3 April 2020 and at ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04420741 on 9 June 2020 FULL PROTOCOL: The full protocol is attached as an additional file, accessible from the Trials website (Additional file 1).In the interest in expediting dissemination of this material, the familiar formatting has been eliminated; this Letter serves as a summary of the key elements of the full protocol.

Biomarker-assisted identification of sepsis-related acute liver impairment: a frequent and deadly condition in critically ill patients

Background The prognostic impact of mild/moderate liver impairment among critically ill patients is not known. We aimed to determine whether acute liver impairment, as measured by several biomarkers, (i) is frequent, (ii) influences prognosis and (iii) to determine whether such an effect is specific for infected critically ill patients. Methods A biomarker and clinical cohort study based on a randomized controlled trial. All-cause mortality was the primary endpoint. Biomarkers hyaluronic acid (HA), bilirubin, albumin, alkaline phosphatase and the international normalized ratio (INR) were determined. Multivariable statistics were applied to estimate risk increase according to liver biomarker increase at baseline and the model was adjusted for age, APACHE II, severe sepsis/septic shock vs. milder infection, chronic alcohol abuse Charlson's co-morbidity index, cancer disease, surgical or medical patient, body mass index, sex, estimated glomerular filtration rate, mechanical ventilation and the other biomarkers. Time-to-event graphs were used. The patients were critically ill patients (n = 1096) from nine mixed medical/surgical intensive care units without known hepatobiliary disease. Results HA levels differed between infected patients (median 210.8 ng/mL [IQR: 93.2-556.6]) vs. the non-infected (median 56.8 ng/mL [IQR: 31.9-116.8], p < 0.001). Serum HA quartiles 2, 3 and 4 were independent predictors of 90-day all-cause mortality for the entire population (infected and non-infected). However, the signal was driven by the infected patients (positive interaction test, no signal in non-infected patients). Among infected patients, HA quartiles corresponded directly to the 90-day risk of dying: 1st quartile: 57/192 = 29.7%, 2nd quartile: 84/194 = 43.3%, 3rd quartile: 90/193 = 46.6%, 4th quartile: 101/192 = 52.3 %, p for trend: <0.0001. This finding was confirmed in adjusted analyses: hazard ratio vs. 1st quartile: 2nd quartile: 1.3 [0.9-1.8], p = 0.14, 3rd quartile: 1.5 [1.1-2.2], p = 0.02, 4th quartile: 1.9 [1.3-2.6], p < 0.0001). High bilirubin was also an independent predictor of mortality. Conclusions Among infected critically ill patients, subtle liver impairment, (elevated HA and bilirubin), was associated with a progressive and highly increased risk of death for the patient; this was robust to adjustment for other predictors of mortality. HA can identify patients at high risk.

Adjusting Early Warning Score by clinical assessment: a study protocol for a Danish cluster-randomised, multicentre study of an Individual Early Warning Score (I-EWS)

INTRODUCTION

Track and trigger systems (TTSs) based on vital signs are implemented in hospitals worldwide to identify patients with clinical deterioration. TTSs may provide prognostic information but do not actively include clinical assessment, and their impact on severe adverse events remain uncertain. The demand for prospective, multicentre studies to demonstrate the effectiveness of TTSs has grown the last decade. Individual Early Warning Score (I-EWS) is a newly developed TTS with an aggregated score based on vital signs that can be adjusted according to the clinical assessment of the patient. The objective is to compare I-EWS with the existing National Early Warning Score (NEWS) algorithm regarding clinical outcomes and use of resources.

METHOD AND ANALYSIS

In a prospective, multicentre, cluster-randomised, crossover, non-inferiority study. Eight hospitals are randomised to use either NEWS in combination with the Capital Region of Denmark NEWS Override System (CROS) or implement I-EWS for 6.5 months, followed by a crossover. Based on their clinical assessment, the nursing staff can adjust the aggregated score with a maximum of -4 or +6 points. We expect to include 150 000 unique patients. The primary endpoint is all-cause mortality at 30 days. Coprimary endpoint is the average number of times per day a patient is NEWS/I-EWS-scored, and secondary outcomes are all-cause mortality at 48 hours and at 7 days as well as length of stay.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

The study was presented for the Regional Ethics committee who decided that no formal approval was needed according to Danish law (J.no. 1701733). The I-EWS study is a large prospective, randomised multicentre study that investigates the effect of integrating a clinical assessment performed by the nursing staff in a TTS, in a head-to-head comparison with the internationally used NEWS with the opportunity to use CROS.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

NCT03690128.

Agents intervening against delirium in the intensive care unit (AID-ICU) - Protocol for a randomised placebo-controlled trial of haloperidol in patients with delirium in the ICU

BACKGROUND

Delirium among patients in the intensive care unit (ICU) is a common condition associated with increased morbidity and mortality. Haloperidol is the most frequently used pharmacologic intervention, but its use is not supported by firm evidence. Therefore, we are conducting Agents Intervening against Delirium in the Intensive Care Unit (AID-ICU) trial to assess the benefits and harms of haloperidol for the treatment of ICU-acquired delirium.

METHODS

AID-ICU is an investigator-initiated, pragmatic, international, randomised, blinded, parallel-group, trial allocating adult ICU patients with manifest delirium 1:1 to haloperidol or placebo. Trial participants will receive intravenous 2.5 mg haloperidol three times daily or matching placebo (isotonic saline 0.9%) if they are delirious. If needed, a maximum of 20 mg/daily haloperidol/placebo is given. An escape protocol, not including haloperidol, is part of the trial protocol. The primary outcome is days alive out of the hospital within 90 days post-randomisation. Secondary outcomes are number of days without delirium or coma, serious adverse reactions to haloperidol, usage of escape medication, number of days alive without mechanical ventilation; mortality, health-related quality-of-life and cognitive function at 1-year follow-up. A sample size of 1000 patients is required to detect a 7-day improvement or worsening of the mean days alive out of the hospital, type 1 error risk of 5% and power 90%.

PERSPECTIVE

The AID-ICU trial is based on gold standard methodology applied to a large sample of clinically representative patients and will provide pivotal high-quality data on the benefits and harms of haloperidol for the treatment ICU-acquired delirium.

Pantoprazole in ICU patients at risk for gastrointestinal bleeding-1-year mortality in the SUP-ICU trial

BACKGROUND

The long-term effects of stress ulcer prophylaxis with pantoprazole are unknown in ICU patients. We report 1-year mortality outcome in the Stress Ulcer Prophylaxis in the Intensive Care Unit (SUP-ICU) trial.

METHODS

In the SUP-ICU trial, acutely admitted adult ICU patients at risk of gastrointestinal bleeding were randomised to intravenous pantoprazole 40 mg vs placebo (saline) once daily during their ICU stay. We assessed mortality at 1 year and did sensitivity analyses according to the trial protocol and statistical analysis plan.

RESULTS

A total of 3261 of the 3291 patients with available data (99.1%) were followed up at 1 year after randomisation; 1635 were allocated to pantoprazole and 1626 to placebo. At 1 year after randomisation, 610 of 1635 patients (37.3%) had died in the pantoprazole group as compared with 601 of 1626 (37.0%) in the placebo group (relative risk, 1.01; 95% confidence interval 0.92-1.10). The results were consistent in the sensitivity analysis adjusted for baseline risk factors and in those of the per-protocol population. We did not observe heterogeneity in the effect of pantoprazole vs placebo on 1-year mortality in the predefined subgroups, that is, patients with and without shock, mechanical ventilation, liver disease, coagulopathy, high disease severity (SAPS II > 53) or in medical vs surgical ICU patients.

CONCLUSION

We did not observe a difference in 1-year mortality among acutely admitted adult ICU patients with risk factors for gastrointestinal bleeding allocated to stress ulcer prophylaxis with pantoprazole or placebo during the ICU stay. (The SUP-ICU trial was funded by Innovation Fund Denmark and others; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02467621).

Induced hypothermia in patients with septic shock and respiratory failure (CASS): a randomised, controlled, open-label trial

BACKGROUND

Animal models of serious infection suggest that 24 h of induced hypothermia improves circulatory and respiratory function and reduces mortality. We tested the hypothesis that a reduction of core temperature to 32-34°C attenuates organ dysfunction and reduces mortality in ventilator-dependent patients with septic shock.

METHODS

In this randomised, controlled, open-label trial, we recruited patients from ten intensive care units (ICUs) in three countries in Europe and North America. Inclusion criteria for patients with severe sepsis or septic shock were a mean arterial pressure of less than 70 mm Hg, mechanical ventilation in an ICU, age at least 50 years, predicted length of stay in the ICU at least 24 h, and recruitment into the study within 6 h of fulfilling inclusion criteria. Exclusion criteria were uncontrolled bleeding, clinically important bleeding disorder, recent open surgery, pregnancy or breastfeeding, or involuntary psychiatric admission. We randomly allocated patients 1:1 (with variable block sizes ranging from four to eight; stratified by predictors of mortality, age, Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation II score, and study site) to routine thermal management or 24 h of induced hypothermia (target 32-34°C) followed by 48 h of normothermia (36-38°C). The primary endpoint was 30 day all-cause mortality in the modified intention-to-treat population (all randomly allocated patients except those for whom consent was withdrawn or who were discovered to meet an exclusion criterion after randomisation but before receiving the trial intervention). Patients and health-care professionals giving the intervention were not masked to treatment allocation, but assessors of the primary outcome were. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01455116.

FINDINGS

Between Nov 1, 2011, and Nov 4, 2016, we screened 5695 patients. After recruitment of 436 of the planned 560 participants, the trial was terminated for futility (220 [50%] randomly allocated to hypothermia and 216 [50%] to routine thermal management). In the hypothermia group, 96 (44·2%) of 217 died within 30 days versus 77 (35·8%) of 215 in the routine thermal management group (difference 8·4% [95% CI -0·8 to 17·6]; relative risk 1·2 [1·0-1·6]; p=0·07]).

INTERPRETATION

Among patients with septic shock and ventilator-dependent respiratory failure, induced hypothermia does not reduce mortality. Induced hypothermia should not be used in patients with septic shock.

FUNDING

Trygfonden, Lundbeckfonden, and the Danish National Research Foundation.

Induced Hypothermia in Patients with Septic Shock and Ventilator-demanding Respiratory Failure

Background

Animal models of serious infection suggest that 24 hours of induced hypothermia improves circulatory and respiratory characteristics and enhances survival, but whether therapeutic mild hypothermia in such conditions is of clinical benefit remains unknown. We, therefore, tested whether reducing core temperature to 32–34^oC in critically ill patients with septic shock and ventilator-demanding respiratory failure improves survival and reduces organ dysfunction.

Methods

In this multi-national trial, patients with septic shock were enrolled within 6 hours of onset of septic shock and ventilator-demanding respiratory failure and randomized 1:1, stratified by site (target sample = 560), to routine thermal management or 24 hours of induced hypothermia (target 32–34°C) followed by 48 hours of normothermia. Other aspects of care were per routine in each participating center. The primary endpoint was 30-day all-cause mortality.

Results

At the third ordinary interim analysis, after recruitment of 432 participants, the Data and Safety Monitoring Board recommended the trial be terminated for futility; the conditional power for rejection of the null hypothesis in favor of efficacy was null. In the induced hypothermia group, target temperature was reached within median 3.2 hours [IQR: 2.2, 4.8], and maintained for 24 hours [IQR: 24, 24] (Figure 1). There was no evidence for a difference in 30-day mortality risk in patients randomized to hypothermia (96/217) vs. routine thermal management (77/215): relative risk 1.24 [95% CI: 0.98, 1.56] (Figure 2). At the end of the temperature intervention (72 hours), more patients assigned to hypothermia were in continued shock (vasoactive medication 71% vs. 58%; P = 0.01), and fewer cooled patients had inflammatory control (32% vs. 47% had CRP decline of >30%, P = 0.005). More harm from cooling was seen in patients entering the trial with normal renal function and with normal platelet count (P for interaction < 0.05).

Conclusion

Among patients with septic shock and ventilator-demanding respiratory failure, induced hypothermia did not improve survival, but adversely affected the duration of shock, and inflammatory control. Induced hypothermia should not routinely be used in patients with septic shock.

Disclosures

All authors: No reported disclosures.

Forced fluid removal versus usual care in intensive care patients with high-risk acute kidney injury and severe fluid overload (FFAKI): study protocol for a randomised controlled pilot trial

Background

Intravenous administration of fluids is an essential part of critical care. While some fluid administration is likely beneficial, there is increasing observational evidence that the development of fluid overload is associated with increased mortality. There are no randomised trials to confirm this association in patients with acute kidney injury. We aim to perform a pilot trial to test the feasibility of forced fluid removal compared to standard care in patients with acute kidney injury and severe fluid overload, the FFAKI trial.

Methods

Then FFAKI trial is a pilot, multicentre, randomised clinical trial recruiting adult intensive care patients with acute kidney injury and fluid overload, defined as more than 10% of ideal bodyweight. Patients are randomised with concealed allocation to either standard care or forced fluid removal with a therapeutic target of negative net fluid balance ≥1 mL/kg/h. The safety of fluid removal is continually evaluated according to predefined criteria of hypoperfusion: lactate ≥4 mmol/L, mean arterial pressure <50 mmHg or mottling beyond the edge of the kneecaps. If patients fulfil one of these criteria, fluid removal is suspended until hypoperfusion has resolved. The primary outcome measure is fluid balance at 5 days after randomisation and secondary outcomes include mean daily fluid balance, fluid balance at discharge from the intensive care unit, time to neutral fluid balance, number of serious adverse reactions and number of protocol violations. All patients are followed for 90 days.

Discussion

The FFAKI trial started in October 2015 and, when completed, will provide data to evaluate whether a large trial of forced fluid removal in critically ill patients is feasible. Our primary outcome will show if the experimental intervention leads to a clinically relevant difference in fluid balance, which could prove beneficial in intensive care patients with acute kidney injury.

Trial registration

EudraCT, identifier: 2015-001701-13. Registered on 19 September 2015;

ClinicalTrials.gov, identifier: NCT02458157. Registered on 21 May 2015;

Danish Ethics Committee, identifier: H-15009589H. Registered on 22 September 2015; Danish Health and Medicines Authority, identifier: 2015070013. Registered on 11 August 2015.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s13063-017-1935-2) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Effects of fluid restriction on measures of circulatory efficacy in adults with septic shock

BACKGROUND

The haemodynamic consequences of fluid resuscitation in septic shock have not been fully elucidated. Therefore, we assessed circulatory effects in the first 24 h of restriction of resuscitation fluid as compared to standard care in intensive care unit (ICU) patients with septic shock.

METHODS

This was a post-hoc analysis of the multicentre CLASSIC randomised trial in which patients with septic shock, who had received the initial fluid resuscitation, were randomised to a protocol restricting resuscitation fluid or a standard care protocol in nine ICUs. The highest plasma lactate, highest dose of noradrenaline, and the urinary output were recorded in five time frames in the first 24 h after randomisation. We used multiple linear mixed effects models to compare the two groups.

RESULTS

We included all 151 randomised patients; the cumulated fluid resuscitation volume in the first 24 h after randomisation was median 500 ml (Interquartile range (IQR) 0-1500) and 1250 ml (500-2500) in the fluid restriction group and standard care group, respectively. The estimated differences in the fluid restriction group vs. the standard care group were 0.1 mM (95% confidence interval -0.7 to 0.9; P = 0.86) for lactate, 0.01 μg/kg/min (-0.02 to 0.05; P = 0.48) for dose of noradrenaline, and -0.1 ml/kg/h (-0.3 to 0.2; P = 0.70) for urinary output during the first 24 h after randomisation.

CONCLUSIONS

We observed no indications of worsening of measures of circulatory efficacy in the first 24 h of restriction of resuscitation fluid as compared with standard care in adults with septic shock who had received initial resuscitation.

[Successful treatment of severe dabigatran intoxication with idarucizumab in a patient with acute kidney injury]

In the course of an uncomplicated sigmoidostomy a 63-year-old male who had severe comorbidity developed a critical bleeding due to dabigatran intoxication induced by acute kidney injury. Massive blood transfusions, tranexamic acid, Octaplex and haemodialysis were not effective. Administration of idarucizumab induced immediate clinical and paraclinical improvement. Dabigatran should be carefully administrated in patients who have any degree of renal insufficiency. Idarucizumab may be effective in severe bleeding caused by dabigatran.

Randomized multicentre feasibility trial of intermediate care versus standard ward care after emergency abdominal surgery (InCare trial)

Background

Emergency abdominal surgery carries a considerable risk of death and postoperative complications. Early detection and timely management of complications may reduce mortality. The aim was to evaluate the effect and feasibility of intermediate care compared with standard ward care in patients who had emergency abdominal surgery.

Methods

This was a randomized clinical trial carried out in seven Danish hospitals. Eligible for inclusion were patients with an Acute Physiology And Chronic Health Evaluation (APACHE) II score of at least 10 who were ready to be transferred to the surgical ward within 24 h of emergency abdominal surgery. Participants were randomized to either intermediate care or standard surgical ward care after surgery. The primary outcome was 30-day mortality.

Results

In total, 286 patients were included in the modified intention-to-treat analysis. The trial was terminated after the interim analysis owing to slow recruitment and a lower than expected mortality rate. Eleven (7·6 per cent) of 144 patients assigned to intermediate care and 12 (8·5 per cent) of 142 patients assigned to ward care died within 30 days of surgery (odds ratio 0·91, 95 per cent c.i. 0·38 to 2·16; P = 0·828). Thirty (20·8 per cent) of 144 patients assigned to intermediate care and 37 (26·1 per cent) of 142 assigned to ward care died within the total observation period (hazard ratio 0·78, 95 per cent c.i. 0·48 to 1·26; P = 0·310).

Conclusion

Postoperative intermediate care had no statistically significant effect on 30-day mortality after emergency abdominal surgery, nor any effect on secondary outcomes. The trial was stopped prematurely owing to slow recruitment and a much lower than expected mortality rate among the enrolled patients. Registration number: NCT01209663 (http://www.clinicaltrials.gov).

Red blood cell transfusion in septic shock - clinical characteristics and outcome of unselected patients in a prospective, multicentre cohort

Background

Treating anaemia with red blood cell (RBC) transfusion is frequent, but controversial, in patients with septic shock. Therefore we assessed characteristics and outcome associated with RBC transfusion in this group of high risk patients.

Methods

We did a prospective cohort study at 7 general intensive care units (ICUs) including all adult patients with septic shock in a 5-month period.

Results

Ninety-five of the 213 included patients (45%) received median 3 (interquartile range 2–5) RBC units during shock. The median pre-transfusion haemoglobin level was 8.1 (7.4–8.9) g/dl and independent of shock day and bleeding. Patients with cardiovascular disease were transfused at higher haemoglobin levels. Transfused patients had higher Simplified Acute Physiology Score (SAPS) II (56 (45-69) vs. 48 (37-61), p = 0.0005), more bleeding episodes, lower haemoglobin levels days 1 to 5, higher Sepsis-related Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA) scores (days 1 and 5), more days in shock (5 (3-10) vs. 2 (2-4), p = 0.0001), more days in ICU (10 (4-19) vs. 4 (2-8), p = 0.0001) and higher 90-day mortality (66 vs. 43%, p = 0.001). The latter association was lost after adjustment for admission category and SAPS II and SOFA-score on day 1.

Conclusions

The decision to transfuse patients with septic shock was likely affected by disease severity and bleeding, but haemoglobin level was the only measure that consistently differed between transfused and non-transfused patients.

Effect of intermediate care on mortality following emergency abdominal surgery. The InCare trial: study protocol, rationale and feasibility of a randomised multicentre trial

Background

Emergency abdominal surgery carries a 15% to 20% short-term mortality rate. Postoperative medical complications are strongly associated with increased mortality. Recent research suggests that timely recognition and effective management of complications may reduce mortality. The aim of the present trial is to evaluate the effect of postoperative intermediate care following emergency major abdominal surgery in high-risk patients.

Methods and design

The InCare trial is a randomised, parallel-group, non-blinded clinical trial with 1:1 allocation. Patients undergoing emergency laparotomy or laparoscopic surgery with a perioperative Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation II score of 10 or above, who are ready to be transferred to the surgical ward within 24 h of surgery are allocated to either intermediate care for 48 h, or surgical ward care. The primary outcome measure is all-cause 30-day mortality. We aim to enrol 400 patients in seven Danish hospitals. The sample size allows us to detect or refute a 34% relative risk reduction of mortality with 80% power.

Discussion

This trial evaluates the benefits and possible harm of intermediate care. The results may potentially influence the survival of many high-risk surgical patients. As a pioneer trial in the area, it will provide important data on the feasibility of future large-scale randomised clinical trials evaluating different levels of postoperative care.

Trial registration

Clinicaltrials.gov identifier: NCT01209663

Hydroxyethyl starch 130/0.42 versus Ringer's acetate in severe sepsis

BACKGROUND

Hydroxyethyl starch (HES) [corrected] is widely used for fluid resuscitation in intensive care units (ICUs), but its safety and efficacy have not been established in patients with severe sepsis.

METHODS

In this multicenter, parallel-group, blinded trial, we randomly assigned patients with severe sepsis to fluid resuscitation in the ICU with either 6% HES 130/0.42 (Tetraspan) or Ringer's acetate at a dose of up to 33 ml per kilogram of ideal body weight per day. The primary outcome measure was either death or end-stage kidney failure (dependence on dialysis) at 90 days after randomization.

RESULTS

Of the 804 patients who underwent randomization, 798 were included in the modified intention-to-treat population. The two intervention groups had similar baseline characteristics. At 90 days after randomization, 201 of 398 patients (51%) assigned to HES 130/0.42 had died, as compared with 172 of 400 patients (43%) assigned to Ringer's acetate (relative risk, 1.17; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.01 to 1.36; P=0.03); 1 patient in each group had end-stage kidney failure. In the 90-day period, 87 patients (22%) assigned to HES 130/0.42 were treated with renal-replacement therapy versus 65 patients (16%) assigned to Ringer's acetate (relative risk, 1.35; 95% CI, 1.01 to 1.80; P=0.04), and 38 patients (10%) and 25 patients (6%), respectively, had severe bleeding (relative risk, 1.52; 95% CI, 0.94 to 2.48; P=0.09). The results were supported by multivariate analyses, with adjustment for known risk factors for death or acute kidney injury at baseline.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients with severe sepsis assigned to fluid resuscitation with HES 130/0.42 had an increased risk of death at day 90 and were more likely to require renal-replacement therapy, as compared with those receiving Ringer's acetate. (Funded by the Danish Research Council and others; 6S ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00962156.).

Comparing the effect of hydroxyethyl starch 130/0.4 with balanced crystalloid solution on mortality and kidney failure in patients with severe sepsis (6S--Scandinavian Starch for Severe Sepsis/Septic Shock trial): study protocol, design and rationale for a double-blinded, randomised clinical trial

Background

By tradition colloid solutions have been used to obtain fast circulatory stabilisation in shock, but high molecular weight hydroxyethyl starch (HES) may cause acute kidney failure in patients with severe sepsis. Now lower molecular weight HES 130/0.4 is the preferred colloid in Scandinavian intensive care units (ICUs) and 1^st choice fluid for patients with severe sepsis. However, HES 130/0.4 is largely unstudied in patients with severe sepsis.

Methods/Design

The 6S trial will randomise 800 patients with severe sepsis in 30 Scandinavian ICUs to masked fluid resuscitation using either 6% HES 130/0.4 in Ringer's acetate or Ringer's acetate alone. The composite endpoint of 90-day mortality or end-stage kidney failure is the primary outcome measure. The secondary outcome measures are severe bleeding or allergic reactions, organ failure, acute kidney failure, days alive without renal replacement therapy or ventilator support and 28-day and 1/2- and one-year mortality. The sample size will allow the detection of a 10% absolute difference between the two groups in the composite endpoint with a power of 80%.

Discussion

The 6S trial will provide important safety and efficacy data on the use of HES 130/0.4 in patients with severe sepsis. The effects on mortality, dialysis-dependency, time on ventilator, bleeding and markers of resuscitation, metabolism, kidney failure, and coagulation will be assessed.

Trial Registration

ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT00962156

The Procalcitonin And Survival Study (PASS) - a randomised multi-center investigator-initiated trial to investigate whether daily measurements biomarker Procalcitonin and pro-active diagnostic and therapeutic responses to abnormal Procalcitonin levels, can improve survival in intensive care unit patients. Calculated sample size (target population): 1000 patients

BACKGROUND

Sepsis and complications to sepsis are major causes of mortality in critically ill patients. Rapid treatment of sepsis is of crucial importance for survival of patients. The infectious status of the critically ill patient is often difficult to assess because symptoms cannot be expressed and signs may present atypically. The established biological markers of inflammation (leucocytes, C-reactive protein) may often be influenced by other parameters than infection, and may be unacceptably slowly released after progression of an infection. At the same time, lack of a relevant antimicrobial therapy in an early course of infection may be fatal for the patient. Specific and rapid markers of bacterial infection have been sought for use in these patients.

METHODS

Multi-centre randomized controlled interventional trial. Powered for superiority and non-inferiority on all measured end points. Complies with, "Good Clinical Practice" (ICH-GCP Guideline (CPMP/ICH/135/95, Directive 2001/20/EC)). Inclusion: 1) Age > or = 18 years of age, 2) Admitted to the participating intensive care units, 3) Signed written informed consent.Exclusion: 1) Known hyper-bilirubinaemia. or hypertriglyceridaemia, 2) Likely that safety is compromised by blood sampling, 3) Pregnant or breast feeding. Computerized Randomisation: Two arms (1:1), n = 500 per arm: Arm 1: standard of care. Arm 2: standard of care and Procalcitonin guided diagnostics and treatment of infection. Primary Trial Objective: To address whether daily Procalcitonin measurements and immediate diagnostic and therapeutic response on day-to-day changes in procalcitonin can reduce the mortality of critically ill patients.

DISCUSSION

For the first time ever, a mortality-endpoint, large scale randomized controlled trial with a biomarker-guided strategy compared to the best standard of care, is conducted in an Intensive care setting. Results will, with a high statistical power answer the question: Can the survival of critically ill patients be improved by actively using biomarker procalcitonin in the treatment of infections? 700 critically ill patients are currently included of 1000 planned (June 2008). Two interim analyses have been passed without any safety or futility issues, and the third interim analysis is soon to take place. Trial registration number at clinicaltrials.gov: Id. nr.: NCT00271752).

Effect of perioperative beta blockade in patients with diabetes undergoing major non-cardiac surgery: randomised placebo controlled, blinded multicentre trial

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the long term effects of perioperative beta blockade on mortality and cardiac morbidity in patients with diabetes undergoing major non-cardiac surgery.

DESIGN

Randomised placebo controlled and blinded multicentre trial. Analyses were by intention to treat.

SETTING

University anaesthesia and surgical centres and one coordinating centre.

PARTICIPANTS

921 patients aged > 39 scheduled for major non-cardiac surgery.

INTERVENTIONS

100 mg metoprolol controlled and extended release or placebo administered from the day before surgery to a maximum of eight perioperative days.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

The composite primary outcome measure was time to all cause mortality, acute myocardial infarction, unstable angina, or congestive heart failure. Secondary outcome measures were time to all cause mortality, cardiac mortality, and non-fatal cardiac morbidity.

RESULTS

Mean duration of intervention was 4.6 days in the metoprolol group and 4.9 days in the placebo group. Metoprolol significantly reduced the mean heart rate by 11% (95% confidence interval 9% to 13%) and mean blood pressure by 3% (1% to 5%). The primary outcome occurred in 99 of 462 patients in the metoprolol group (21%) and 93 of 459 patients in the placebo group (20%) (hazard ratio 1.06, 0.80 to 1.41) during a median follow-up of 18 months (range 6-30). All cause mortality was 16% (74/462) in the metoprolol group and 16% (72/459) in the placebo group (1.03, 0.74 to 1.42). The difference in risk for the proportion of patients with serious adverse events was 2.4% (- 0.8% to 5.6%).

CONCLUSIONS

Perioperative metoprolol did not significantly affect mortality and cardiac morbidity in these patients with diabetes. Confidence intervals, however, were wide, and the issue needs reassessment.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN58485613.

Mechanisms of inhibition of vasopressin release during moderate antiorthostatic posture change in humans

The hypothesis was tested that the carotid baroreceptor stimulation caused by a posture change from upright seated with legs horizontal (Seat) to supine (Sup) participates in the suppression of arginine vasopressin (AVP) release. Ten healthy males underwent this posture change for 30 min without or with simultaneous application of lower body negative pressure (LBNP) adjusted to maintain left atrial diameter (LAD) at the Seat level. Throughout Sup, mean arterial pressure and heart rate decreased from 98 +/- 2 to 91 +/- 2 mmHg and from 63 +/- 2 to 55 +/- 2 beats/min (P < 0.05), respectively, whereas the corresponding decreases during Sup + LBNP were attenuated and of shorter duration (98 +/- 2 to 93 +/- 2 mmHg and 62 +/- 2 to 58 +/- 3 beats/min, P < 0.05). During Sup, LAD increased from 30 +/- 1 to 33 +/- 1 mm, and arterial pulse pressure (PP) increased from 40 +/- 2 to 47 +/- 2 mmHg, whereas plasma AVP decreased from 0.9 +/- 0.2 to 0.5 +/- 0.1 pg/ml (P < 0.05), and plasma norepinephrine (NE) decreased from 176 +/- 20 to 125 +/- 16 pg/ml (P < 0.05). During Sup + LBNP, there were no changes in LAD, PP, plasma AVP, or NE. In conclusion, vasopressin secretion is suppressed during an antiorthostatic posture change, which increases carotid sinus pressure, PP, and LAD. The suppression is absent when PP and LAD are prevented from increasing and is thus critically dependent on at least one of these stimuli.