-
1.
Design and conduct of the activated protein C and corticosteroids for human septic shock (APROCCHSS) trial
Annane D, Buisson CB, Cariou A, Martin C, Misset B, Renault A, Lehmann B, Millul V, Maxime V, Bellissant E
Annals of Intensive Care. 2016;6((1)):43.
Abstract
BACKGROUND We aimed at assessing the benefit-to-risk ratio of activated protein C (drotrecogin-alfa activated, DAA) and corticosteroids, given alone or in combination, in patients with septic shock. METHODS We implemented an investigator-led, publicly funded, multicenter, randomized according to a 2 x 2 factorial design, placebo-controlled, double-blind trial in four parallel groups in which adults with persistent septic shock and no contraindication to DAA were assigned to either DAA alone (24 mg/kg/h for 96 h), or hydrocortisone (50 mg intravenous bolus q6 for 7 days) and fludrocortisone (50 microg once daily through the nasogastric tube for 7 days) alone, or their respective combinations, or their respective placebos. Primary endpoint was 90-day mortality rate. Follow-up duration was 6 months. Statistical analysis was planned to be performed in intent-to-treat once after all participants completed 180-day follow-up and according to the 2 x 2 factorial design. RESULTS The first patient was recruited in September 2008. The trial was suspended on October 25, 2011, owing to the withdrawal from the market of DAA. At this time, 411 patients had been enrolled. On May 17, 2012, the continuation of the trial on two parallel groups was approved by all legal authorities with the aim of investigating the benefit-to-risk ratio of corticosteroids. On June 30, 2014, the trial was suspended again by the study sponsor upon request of the independent data and safety monitoring board. Recruitment restarted on October 7, 2014, after any safety concern was ruled out. Finally, the trial was completed on June 23, 2015, with the recruitment of 1241 patients. CONCLUSIONS This report details the design, statistical plan and conduct of a randomized controlled trial of hydrocortisone and fludrocortisone in septic shock. Trial registration The trial was registered at ClinicalTrials.gov under NCT00625209.
-
2.
A dream deferred: the rise and fall of recombinant activated protein C
Holder AL, Huang DT
Critical Care. 2013;17((2):):309.
Abstract
BACKGROUND There have been conflicting reports on the efficacy of recombinant human activated protein C, or drotrecogin alfa (activated) (DrotAA), for the treatment of patients with septic shock. METHODS RESULTS At 28 days, 223 of 846 patients (26.4%) in the DrotAA group and 202 of 834 (24.2%) in the placebo group had died (relative risk in the DrotAA group, 1.09; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.92 to 1.28; P = 0.31). At 90 days, 287 of 842 patients (34.1%) in the DrotAA group and 269 of 822 (32.7%) in the placebo group had died (relative risk, 1.04; 95% CI, 0.90 to 1.19; P = 0.56). Among patients with severe protein C deficiency at baseline, 98 of 342 (28.7%) in the DrotAA group had died at 28 days, as compared with 102 of 331 (30.8%) in the placebo group (risk ratio, 0.93; 95% CI, 0.74 to 1.17; P = 0.54). Similarly, rates of death at 28 and 90 days were not significantly different in other predefined subgroups, including patients at increased risk for death. Serious bleeding during the treatment period occurred in 10 patients in the DrotAA group and 8 in the placebo group (P = 0.81). CONCLUSIONS DrotAA did not significantly reduce mortality at 28 or 90 days, as compared with placebo, in patients with septic shock.
-
3.
Effectiveness and safety of drotrecogin alfa (activated) for severe sepsis: a meta-analysis and metaregression
Kalil AC, Larosa SP
The Lancet Infectious Diseases. 2012;12((9):):678-86.
Abstract
BACKGROUND Drotrecogin alfa (activated) was approved for use in severe sepsis in 2001 on the basis of the Recombinant Human Activated Protein C Worldwide Evaluation in Severe Sepsis (PROWESS) trial, but controversies about its effectiveness remain. We aimed to assess effectiveness and safety of use of this drug in the past 10 years and compare them with the original PROWESS results. METHODS We searched PubMed, Embase, Ovid, Cochrane Library, Evidence-Based Medicine, and the American College of Physicians Journal Club databases for experimental and analytical studies of drotrecogin alfa (activated) in adults with severe sepsis until Jan 31, 2012. We calculated adjusted risk ratios for effectiveness and safety outcomes with random-effects models. We did a metaregression to assess the effect of severity of illness on the risk of death and the risk of bleeding associated with drotrecogin alfa (activated). FINDINGS We included nine controlled trials (41[PUNCTUATION SPACE]401 patients) and 16 single-group studies (5822 patients) in effectiveness analyses and 20 studies (8245 patients) in safety analyses. Hospital mortality was reduced by 18% with drotrecogin alfa (activated) compared with controls (relative risk 0.822, 95% CI 0.779-0.867; p<0.0001; I(2)=40%). This mortality reduction was much the same as was noted in PROWESS (0.851, 0.740-0.979), but smaller than that of patients in PROWESS with high disease severity (0.708, 0.590-0.849). Propensity-adjusted studies also showed a significant mortality reduction with lower heterogeneity (0.844, 0.800-0.891; p<0.0001, I(2)=18%). These findings were not changed by the addition of PROWESS-SHOCK results. Metaregression showed greater benefits of drotrecogin alfa (activated) with increasing control mortality (p=0.01) and more severe disease (p=0.04). Hospital mortality for single-group studies of drotrecogin alfa (activated) was 41% (95% CI 35-48), and was higher than that noted in PROWESS at 31% (27-36; p<0.0001). The serious bleeding rate with drotrecogin alfa (activated) was 5.6% (4.5-6.9), which was higher than the 3.5% (2.5-5.0) noted in PROWESS (p=0.003), but similar to that reported in PROWESS high disease severity (p=0.073). INTERPRETATION Real-life use of drotrecrogin alfa (activated) was associated with significant reduction in hospital mortality and increased rates of bleeding in patients with severe sepsis. Our effectiveness findings were in line with the PROWESS trial but not with the PROWESS-SHOCK trial. FUNDING None. Copyright Copyright 2012 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
-
4.
Human recombinant protein C for severe sepsis and septic shock in adult and paediatric patients
Marti-Carvajal AJ, Sola I, Gluud C, Lathyris D, Cardona AF
Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews. 2012;12:CD004388.
Abstract
BACKGROUND Sepsis is a common and frequently fatal condition. Human recombinant activated protein C (APC) has been introduced to reduce the high risk of death associated with severe sepsis or septic shock. This systematic review is an update of a Cochrane review originally published in 2007. OBJECTIVES We assessed the benefits and harms of APC for patients with severe sepsis or septic shock. SEARCH METHODS We searched CENTRAL (The Cochrane Library 2012, Issue 6); MEDLINE (2010 to June 2012); EMBASE (2010 to June 2012); BIOSIS (1965 to June 2012); CINAHL (1982 to June 2012) and LILACS (1982 to June 2012). There was no language restriction. SELECTION CRITERIA We included randomized clinical trials assessing the effects of APC for severe sepsis or septic shock in adults and children. We excluded studies on neonates. We considered all-cause mortality at day 28 and at the end of study follow up, and hospital mortality as the primary outcomes. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS We independently performed trial selection, risk of bias assessment, and data extraction in duplicate. We estimated relative risks (RR) for dichotomous outcomes. We measured statistical heterogeneity using the I(2) statistic. We used a random-effects model. MAIN RESULTS We identified one new randomized clinical trial in this update which includes six randomized clinical trials involving 6781 participants in total, five randomized clinical trials in adult (N = 6307) and one randomized clinical trial in paediatric (N = 474) participants. All trials had high risk of bias and were sponsored by the pharmaceutical industry. APC compared with placebo did not significantly affect all-cause mortality at day 28 compared with placebo (780/3435 (22.7%) versus 767/3346 (22.9%); RR 1.00, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.86 to 1.16; I(2) = 56%). APC did not significantly affect in-hospital mortality (393/1767 (22.2%) versus 379/1710 (22.1%); RR 1.01, 95% CI 0.87 to 1.16; I(2) = 20%). APC was associated with an increased risk of serious bleeding (113/3424 (3.3%) versus 74/3343 (2.2%); RR 1.45, 95% CI 1.08 to 1.94; I(2) = 0%). APC did not significantly affect serious adverse events (463/3334 (13.9%) versus 439/3302 (13.2%); RR 1.04, 95% CI 0.92 to 1.18; I(2) = 0%). Trial sequential analyses showed that more trials do not seem to be needed for reliable conclusions regarding these outcomes. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS This updated review found no evidence suggesting that APC should be used for treating patients with severe sepsis or septic shock. APC seems to be associated with a higher risk of bleeding. The drug company behind APC, Eli Lilly, has announced the discontinuation of all ongoing clinical trials using this drug for treating patients with severe sepsis or septic shock. APC should not be used for sepsis or septic shock outside randomized clinical trials.
-
5.
Recombinant human activated protein C for severe sepsis in neonates
Kylat RI, Ohlsson A
Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews.. 2012;:CD005385.
Abstract
BACKGROUND Sepsis is a common problem in preterm and term infants. The incidence of neonatal sepsis has declined, but mortality remains high. Recombinant human activated protein C (rhAPC) possess a broad spectrum of activity modulating coagulation and inflammation. In septic adults it may reduce mortality, but no significant benefit has been reported in children with severe sepsis. OBJECTIVES To determine whether treatment with rhAPC reduces mortality and/or morbidity in neonatal sepsis. SEARCH METHODS For this update searches were carried out in May 2011 of the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (The Cochrane Library), MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, and abstracts of annual meetings of the Pediatric Academic Societies. Doctoral dissertations, theses and the Science Citation Index for articles on activated protein C were searched. No language restriction was applied. SELECTION CRITERIA Randomized or quasi-randomized trials, assessing the efficacy of rhAPC compared to placebo or no intervention as an adjunct to antibiotic therapy of suspected or confirmed severe sepsis in term and preterm infants less than 28 days old. Eligible trials should report at least one of the following outcomes: mortality during initial hospital stay, neurodevelopmental assessment at two years of age or later, length of hospital stay, duration of ventilation, chronic lung disease, periventricular leukomalacia, intraventricular haemorrhage, necrotizing enterocolitis, bleeding, and any other adverse events. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS Review authors were to independently evaluate the articles for inclusion criteria and quality, and abstract information for the outcomes of interest. Differences were to be resolved by consensus. The statistical methods were to include relative risk, risk difference, number needed to treat to benefit or number needed to treat to harm for dichotomous and weighed mean difference for continuous outcomes reported with 95% confidence intervals. A fixed effect model was to be used for meta-analysis. Heterogeneity tests, including the I(2) statistic, were to be performed to assess the appropriateness of pooling the data. MAIN RESULTS No eligible trials were identified. In October 2011 rhAPC (Xigris[REGISTERED]) was withdrawn from the market by Eli Lilly due to a higher mortality in a trial among adults. Xigris[REGISTERED] (DrotAA)( rhAPC) should no longer be used in any age category and the product should be returned to the distributor. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS Despite the scientific rationale for its use, there is insufficient data to use rhAPC for the management of severe sepsis in newborn infants. Due to the results among adults with lack of efficacy, an increase in bleeding and resulting withdrawal of rhAPC from the market, neonates should not be treated with rhAPC and further trials should not be conducted.
-
6.
Drotrecogin alfa (activated) in adults with septic shock
Ranieri VM, Thompson BT, Barie PS, Dhainaut JF, Douglas IS, Finfer S, GĂ„rdlund B, Marshall JC, Rhodes A, Artigas A, et al
The New England Journal of Medicine. 2012;366((22):):2055-64.
Abstract
BACKGROUND There have been conflicting reports on the efficacy of recombinant human activated protein C, or drotrecogin alfa (activated) (DrotAA), for the treatment of patients with septic shock. METHODS In this randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, multicenter trial, we assigned 1697 patients with infection, systemic inflammation, and shock who were receiving fluids and vasopressors above a threshold dose for 4 hours to receive either DrotAA (at a dose of 24 ?g per kilogram of body weight per hour) or placebo for 96 hours. The primary outcome was death from any cause 28 days after randomization. RESULTS At 28 days, 223 of 846 patients (26.4%) in the DrotAA group and 202 of 834 (24.2%) in the placebo group had died (relative risk in the DrotAA group, 1.09; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.92 to 1.28; P=0.31). At 90 days, 287 of 842 patients (34.1%) in the DrotAA group and 269 of 822 (32.7%) in the placebo group had died (relative risk, 1.04; 95% CI, 0.90 to 1.19; P=0.56). Among patients with severe protein C deficiency at baseline, 98 of 342 (28.7%) in the DrotAA group had died at 28 days, as compared with 102 of 331 (30.8%) in the placebo group (risk ratio, 0.93; 95% CI, 0.74 to 1.17; P=0.54). Similarly, rates of death at 28 and 90 days were not significantly different in other predefined subgroups, including patients at increased risk for death. Serious bleeding during the treatment period occurred in 10 patients in the DrotAA group and 8 in the placebo group (P=0.81). CONCLUSIONS DrotAA did not significantly reduce mortality at 28 or 90 days, as compared with placebo, in patients with septic shock. (Funded by Eli Lilly; PROWESS-SHOCK ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00604214.).
-
7.
Prevalence of serious bleeding events and intracranial hemorrhage in patients receiving activated protein C: a systematic review and meta-analysis
Khan A, Agarwal R, Aggarwal AN, Gupta D
Respiratory Care. 2010;55((7):):901-10.
Abstract
BACKGROUND Activated protein C reduces 28-day mortality in patients with severe sepsis, but its anticoagulant properties entail a risk of bleeding. OBJECTIVE The aim of this systematic review was to evaluate the prevalence of serious bleeding events in patients receiving activated protein C. METHODS We searched the MEDLINE and EMBASE databases for studies that described the prevalence of serious bleeding events and intracranial hemorrhage in patients receiving activated protein C. We calculated the bleeding rates by calculating proportions and 95% CIs for each study, and then pooled the data to derive a pooled proportion and 95% CI. RESULTS Our search yielded 17 studies, which included 10,679 patients. The occurrence of serious bleeding events in patients receiving activated protein C ranged from 0.5% to 9.6%, and the pooled prevalence was 3.3% (95% CI 2.4-4.4%) by the random effects model. The occurrence of intracranial hemorrhage ranged from 0% to 1.4%, and the pooled prevalence was 0.44% (95% CI 0.31-0.6%). Sensitivity analysis showed a higher prevalence of bleeding in the observational studies than in the randomized controlled trials. There was substantial clinical and statistical heterogeneity, but no evidence of publication bias. CONCLUSIONS Activated protein C is associated with significant risk of bleeding, so strict inclusion and exclusion criteria should be set prior to administering activated protein C.
-
8.
Effects of recombinant human activated protein C on the fibrinolytic system of patients undergoing conventional or tight glycemic control
Polli F, Savioli M, Cugno M, Taccone P, Bellani G, Spanu P, Pesenti A, Iapichino G, Gattinoni L
Minerva Anestesiologica. 2009;75((7-8):):417-26.
Abstract
AIM: Recombinant human activated protein C (rh-APC) and tight glycemic control (TGC) have been shown to reduce mortality in septic patients. Both interventions can reduce the plasma concentration and/or activity of the most powerful suppressor of fibrinolysis, plasminogen activator inhibitor-1 (PAI-1). Our aim was to evaluate the effects on the fibrinolytic system after the administration of rh-APC in septic patients undergoing conventional or TGC. METHODS Posthoc analysis of data was collected from 90 patients with severe sepsis/septic shock, randomized to either conventional or TGC groups. Independent of these treatments, patients with at least two organ dysfunctions simultaneously received rh-APC. Plasma levels of multiple biochemical markers for fibrinolysis, coagulation, and inflammation were determined every day for the 1st week and then on study days 9, 11, 13, 18, 23, and 28. Clinical data and sepsis-related organ failure assessment (SOFA) scores were also recorded. RESULTS Patients who had received rh-APC exhibited significantly more impairments in fibrinolysis at baseline (PAI-1 activity 49. 76 [24. 61-71. 82] vs 21. 92 [6. 47-55-83] IU/mL, P=0. 03). The reductions in plasma PAI-1 activity over time associated with rh-APC treatment were different according to whether the treatment was administered to patients undergoing conventional or TGC (P=0. 01). However, the most prominent reductions were in patients undergoing conventional glycemic control. Significant interactions between the two study interventions were also found for PAI-1 concentration (P<0. 001), C-reactive protein (P=0. 02), and interleukin-6 levels (P<0. 001). CONCLUSIONS Both rh-APC and TGC appear to improve fibrinolysis in septic patients. The reduction in the impairment of fibrinolysis associated with rh-APC treatment seems greater in patients undergoing conventional glycemic control than in those undergoing TGC.
-
9.
Meta-analysis: intravenous immunoglobulin in critically ill adult patients with sepsis
Turgeon AF, Hutton B, Fergusson DA, McIntyre L, Tinmouth AA, Cameron DW, Hebert PC
Annals of Internal Medicine. 2007;146((3):):193-203.
Abstract
BACKGROUND Intravenous immunoglobulin therapy has been proposed as an adjuvant treatment for sepsis. Yet, its benefit remains unclear, and its use is not currently recommended. PURPOSE To evaluate the effect of polyclonal intravenous immunoglobulin therapy on death in critically ill adult patients with sepsis. DATA SOURCES MEDLINE (1966 to May 2006) and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (May 2006 edition). STUDY SELECTION All randomized, controlled trials of critically ill adult patients with sepsis, severe sepsis, or septic shock who received polyclonal intravenous immunoglobulin therapy or placebo or no intervention were selected. No restrictions were made for study language or type of publication. Data extraction: Data were independently extracted by 2 investigators using a standardized form. DATA SYNTHESIS The literature search identified 4096 articles, of which 33 were deemed to be potentially eligible. Twenty trials (n = 2621) met eligibility criteria and were included in the analysis. Polyclonal intravenous immunoglobulin therapy was associated with an overall survival benefit (risk ratio, 0.74 (95% CI, 0.62 to 0.89)) compared with placebo or no intervention. In sensitivity analyses, documented survival improved when the analysis was limited to published, peer-reviewed trials (risk ratio, 0.72 (CI, 0.58 to 0.89)) (17 trials (n = 1865)) and blinded trials (risk ratio, 0.61 (CI, 0.40 to 0.93) (7 trials (n = 896)). Severe sepsis or septic shock (risk ratio, 0.64 (CI, 0.52 to 0.79)) (11 trials (n = 689)), receiving a total dose regimen of 1 gram or more per kilogram of body weight (risk ratio, 0.61 (CI, 0.40 to 0.94)) (7 trials (n = 560)), and receiving therapy for longer than 2 days (risk ratio, 0.66 (CI, 0.53 to 0.82)) (17 trials (n = 1847)) were strongly associated with this survival benefit. LIMITATIONS Most trials were published before new developments modifying the care and outcome of critically ill patients with sepsis including early goal-directed therapy and activated protein C treatment, were introduced. CONCLUSIONS A survival benefit was observed for patients with sepsis who received polyclonal intravenous immunoglobulin therapy compared with those who received placebo or no intervention. A large, randomized, controlled trial of polyclonal intravenous immunoglobulin therapy should be performed on the basis of the methodological limitations of the current literature, the potential benefit from this therapy in more severely ill patients, and the potential effect of dosage and duration of this therapy.
-
10.
Drotrecogin alfa (activated) in severe sepsis: A systematic review and new cost-effectiveness analysis
Costa V, Brophy JM
BMC Anesthesiology. 2007;7((5):)
Abstract
Background: Activated drotrecogin alfa (human activated protein C, rh APC), is produced by recombinant DNA technology, and purports to improve clinical outcomes by counteracting the inflammatory and thrombotic consequences of severe sepsis. Controversy exists around the clinical benefits of this drug and an updated economic study that considers this variability is needed. Methods: A systematic literature review was performed using Medline, Embase and the International Network of Agencies for Health Technology Assessment (INAHTA) databases to determine efficacy, safety and previous economic studies. Our economic model was populated with systematic estimates of these parameters and with population life tables for longer term survival information. Monte Carlo simulations were used to estimate the incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) and variance for the decision analytic models. Results: Two randomized clinical trials (RCTS) of drotrecogin alfa in adults with severe sepsis and 8 previous economic studies were identified. Although associated with statistical heterogeneity, a pooled analysis of the RCTs did not show a statistically significant 28-day mortality benefit for drotrecogin alfa compared to placebo either for all patients (RR: 0.93, 95% CI: 0.69, 1.26) or those at highest risk as measured by APACHE II (greater-than or equal to 25 (RR: 0.90, 95% CI: 0.54, 1.49). Our economic analysis based on the totality of the available clinical evidence suggests that the cost-effectiveness of drotrecogin alfa is uncertain (< 59% probability that incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) life year gained (LYG) (less-than or equal to) $50,000/LYG) when applied to all patients with severe sepsis. The economic attractiveness of this therapy improves when administered to those at highest risk as assessed by APACHE II (greater-than or equal to 25 (93% probability ICER (less-than or equal to) $50,000/ LYG) but these results are not robust to different measures of disease severity. Conclusion: The evidence supporting the clinical and economic attractiveness of drotrecogin alfa is not conclusive and further research appears to be indicated.