Systemic Host Responses in Severe Sepsis Analyzed by Causative Microorganism and Treatment Effects of Drotrecogin Alfa (Activated)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Clinical trials with novel therapeutic agents for severe sepsis have suggested that patients might respond differently depending on causative microorganism. Data from a large, placebo-controlled trial of recombinant human drotrecogin alfa (activated) (DrotAA) were analyzed by type of causative microorganism for treatment-associated differences in mortality, coagulopathy, and inflammatory response. Compared with placebo, mortality rates associated with DrotAA were consistently reduced for each microorganism group (gram-positive bacteria, gram-negative bacteria, mixed bacteria, fungi, other, and unknown microbial etiology), with a stratified relative risk (RR) of 0.80 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.69-0.94). The greatest reduction in the mortality rate was for Streptococcus pneumoniae infection (RR, 0.56; 95% CI, 0.35-0.88). Levels of coagulation and inflammation biomarkers varied with different pathogens at study entry. Results demonstrate that DrotAA, administered as an adjunct to standard anti-infective therapy, can improve the rate of survival for patients who develop severe sepsis regardless of causative microorganism.
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 | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".