MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4399070722 · doi:10.1186/s13054-024-04964-6

Towards personalized medicine: a scoping review of immunotherapy in sepsis

2024· review· en· W4399070722 on OpenAlexaff
Marleen A. Slim, Niels van Mourik, Lieke Bakkerus, Katherine Fuller, Lydia S Acharya, Tatiana Giannidis, Joanna C. Dionne, Simon Oczkowski, Mihai G. Netea, Peter Pickkers, Evangelos J. Giamarellos‐Bourboulis, Marcella C.A. Müller, Tom van der Poll, W. Joost Wiersinga, Bart Jan Kullberg, Aline H. de Nooijer, Frank L. van de Veerdonk, Jaap ten Oever, Jacobien J. Hoogerwerf, Marlies Hulscher, Anke Oerlemans, Athanasios Ziogas, Julie Swillens, Lisa Berg, N. Bos, Matthijs Kox, Leda Estratiou, Antigoni Kotsaki, Antonakos Nikolaos, Gregoriadis Spyros, Thierry Calandra, Sylvain Meylan, Tiia Snäkä, Thierry Roger, Michael Bauer, Frank M. Brunkhorst, Frank Bloos, Sebastian Weis, Willy Hartman, M. Slim, Lonneke A. van Vught, Alexander P. J. Vlaar, M. Müller, Mihaela Lupșe, Grigore Santamarean, Thomas Rimmelé, Filippo Conti, Guillaume Monneret, Anna C. Aschenbrenner, Joachim L. Schultze, Martina van Uelft, Christoph Bock, Robert terHorst, Irit Gat‐Viks, Einat Ron, Gal Yunkovitz, Sophie Ablott, Estelle Peronnet, Margaux Balezeaux, Adrien Saliou, Julie Hart

Bibliographic record

VenueCritical Care · 2024
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSepsis Diagnosis and Treatment
Canadian institutionsSt. Joseph’s Healthcare HamiltonImpactMcMaster University
FundersHorizon 2020European CommissionAmsterdam University Medical Centers
KeywordsMedicineSepsisPersonalized medicineObservational studyImmunotherapyIntensive care medicineClinical trialRandomized controlled trialPrecision medicineBiomarkerInternal medicineImmune systemOncologyImmunologyBioinformaticsPathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Despite significant progress in our understanding of the pathophysiology of sepsis and extensive clinical research, there are few proven therapies addressing the underlying immune dysregulation of this life-threatening condition. The aim of this scoping review is to describe the literature evaluating immunotherapy in adult patients with sepsis, emphasizing on methods providing a "personalized immunotherapy" approach, which was defined as the classification of patients into a distinct subgroup or subphenotype, in which a patient's immune profile is used to guide treatment. Subgroups are subsets of sepsis patients, based on any cut-off in a variable. Subphenotypes are subgroups that can be reliably discriminated from other subgroup based on data-driven assessments. Included studies were randomized controlled trials and cohort studies investigating immunomodulatory therapies in adults with sepsis. Studies were identified by searching PubMed, Embase, Cochrane CENTRAL and ClinicalTrials.gov, from the first paper available until January 29th, 2024. The search resulted in 15,853 studies. Title and abstract screening resulted in 1409 studies (9%), assessed for eligibility; 771 studies were included, of which 282 (37%) were observational and 489 (63%) interventional. Treatment groups included were treatments targeting the innate immune response, the complement system, coagulation and endothelial dysfunction, non-pharmalogical treatment, pleiotropic drugs, immunonutrition, concomitant treatments, Traditional Chinese Medicine, immunostimulatory cytokines and growth factors, intravenous immunoglobulins, mesenchymal stem cells and immune-checkpoint inhibitors. A personalized approach was incorporated in 70 studies (9%). Enrichment was applied using cut-offs in temperature, laboratory, biomarker or genetic variables. Trials often showed conflicting results, possibly due to the lack of patient stratification or the potential influence of severity and timing on immunomodulatory therapy results. When a personalized approach was applied, trends of clinical benefit for several interventions emerged, which hold promise for future clinical trials using personalized immunotherapy.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: Systematic review
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.397
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0040.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.238
GPT teacher head0.535
Teacher spread0.296 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designSystematic review
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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".

Quick stats

Citations55
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCritical CareSame topicSepsis Diagnosis and TreatmentFrench-language works237,207