The Host Response in Patients with Sepsis Developing Intensive Care Unit–acquired Secondary Infections
Bibliographic record
Abstract
RATIONALE: Sepsis can be complicated by secondary infections. We explored the possibility that patients with sepsis developing a secondary infection while in the intensive care unit (ICU) display sustained inflammatory, vascular, and procoagulant responses. OBJECTIVES: To compare systemic proinflammatory host responses in patients with sepsis who acquire a new infection with those who do not. METHODS: Consecutive patients with sepsis with a length of ICU stay greater than 48 hours were prospectively analyzed for the development of ICU-acquired infections. Twenty host response biomarkers reflective of key pathways implicated in sepsis pathogenesis were measured during the first 4 days after ICU admission and at the day of an ICU-acquired infection or noninfectious complication. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Of 1,237 admissions for sepsis (1,089 patients), 178 (14.4%) admissions were complicated by ICU-acquired infections (at Day 10 [6-13], median with interquartile range). Patients who developed a secondary infection showed higher disease severity scores and higher mortality up to 1 year than those who did not. Analyses of biomarkers in patients who later went on to develop secondary infections revealed a more dysregulated host response during the first 4 days after admission, as reflected by enhanced inflammation, stronger endothelial cell activation, a more disturbed vascular integrity, and evidence for enhanced coagulation activation. Host response reactions were similar at the time of ICU-acquired infectious or noninfectious complications. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with sepsis who developed an ICU-acquired infection showed a more dysregulated proinflammatory and vascular host response during the first 4 days of ICU admission than those who did not develop a secondary infection.
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 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| 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".