Combining intermediate levels of the Endotoxin Activity Assay (EAA) with other biomarkers in the assessment of patients with sepsis: results of an observational study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: The Endotoxin Activity Assay (EAA) is a useful test to risk stratify patients with severe sepsis and assess for Gram negative infection. However, the significance of intermediate levels of EAA (0.4-0.59) at the bedside has not been well elucidated. The purpose of this study was to interpret intermediate EAA levels in clinical practice. METHODS: This retrospective observational study included all adult patients with suspected sepsis admitted to our medico-surgical intensive care unit (ICU) in whom EAA was measured from July 2008 to September 2011. Data collected included EAA, white blood cell (WBC) count and differential, C-reactive protein (CRP), procalcitonin (PCT) and bacterial cultures. Data were analyzed by comparative statistics. RESULTS: Two hundred and ten patients were studied. Ninety two (43%) patients had culture documented gram negative infection. Patients with Gram-negative organisms in cultures had significantly higher EAA levels (0.47, IQR 0.27) than those without any Gram-negative organisms in cultures (0.34, IQR 0.22) (p < 0.0001). For patients with intermediate EAA levels (0.40 to 0.59), PCT levels and presence of left shift of WBC significantly differed between patients with Gram negative organisms in their blood or other cultures and those who had no organisms in any of the cultures (4.9 versus 1.7 ng/mL, p < 0.05; 57.9 versus 18.9%, p < 0.0004, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: We confirm that high levels of EAA in our cohort of patients with suspected sepsis are strongly associated with gram negative infection. In those patients with intermediate elevation in EAA levels, use of PCT and WBC differential can provide additional diagnostic value to clinicians at the bedside.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".