Can 1 μg of Cosyntropin Be Used to Evaluate Adrenal Insufficiency in Critically Ill Patients?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the utility of cosyntropin 1 microg in assessing adrenal function in critically ill patients. DATA SOURCES: A computerized literature search using MEDLINE, EMBASE, International Pharmaceutical Abstracts, and the Cochrane Database (1966-August 2004) was undertaken for trials evaluating cosyntropin 1 mug using the following search terms: adrenocorticotropin-releasing hormone (ACTH), cosyntropin, adrenal insufficiency, cortisol, corticosteroids, glucocorticoids, sepsis, septic shock, diagnosis, critically ill, intensive care, and critical care. STUDY SELECTION AND DATA SYNTHESIS: Identifying patients with sepsis with relative adrenal insufficiency (AI) using cosyntropin testing may identify those likely to benefit from corticosteroids. The results of 5 heterogeneous studies in non-intensive care unit (ICU) patients suggest that both 1 microg and 250 microg of cosyntropin stimulate similar cortisol responses and that testing using both doses correlates well with results from insulin tolerance testing. Some data from non-ICU patients suggest that the 1-microg test may be more sensitive to detect AI; 3 heterogeneous studies in ICU patients confirmed the improved sensitivity of the 1-microg test. CONCLUSIONS: Use of cosyntropin 1 microg should detect AI in all patients who would have been diagnosed using 250 microg. Unfortunately, all of the clinical trials evaluating the role of corticosteroids in septic shock that used the cosyntropin stimulation test administered 250 microg. Extrapolation of the existing guidelines to treat patients with septic shock testing positive for relative AI using the 1-microg test may provide effective therapy to appropriate patients not diagnosed by the 250-microg testing or may introduce additional adverse effects in patients who should not receive corticosteroids. Large-scale, head-to-head comparison data of steroid effectiveness after 1- and 250-microg ACTH stimulation tests are needed to expand upon these promising results.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.006 | 0.048 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".