MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4408345274 · doi:10.1159/000544989

Targeted Rapid Endotoxin Adsorption (TREA): can we bring precision medicine to sepsis?

2025· review· en· W4408345274 on OpenAlexaff
John A. Kellum, Esha Kamaluddin, Debra Foster

Bibliographic record

VenueBlood Purification · 2025
Typereview
Languageen
FieldImmunology and Microbiology
TopicImmune Response and Inflammation
Canadian institutionsTornado Spectral Systems (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHemofiltrationSepsisSeptic shockMedicineIntensive care medicineExtracorporealImmunologyHemodialysisInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Historically, extracorporeal blood purification (EBP) treatment for sepsis was mainly used as an adjunctive therapy for the management of multiple organ failure rather than targeting the removal of toxins from the body that are contributing to the disease state. Approximately 10-15% of sepsis cases, or approximately one-third to half of patients with septic shock, exhibit high levels of endotoxin activity in their blood. Humans are exquisitely sensitive to endotoxin making endotoxic septic shock (ESS) particularly deadly. Today, we have an emerging class of EBP that is specific to endotoxin - targeted rapid endotoxin adsorption (TREA) - that can be used for the treatment of ESS. SUMMARY: In septic patients, evidence for the use of hemofiltration and therapeutic plasma exchange, the two most prevalent forms of EBP, has been difficult to obtain. Additionally, broad-spectrum EBP therapies that target multiple solutes for removal have struggled to identify the right patients. There is significant clinical heterogeneity of the innate immune response across patients with sepsis. In contrast, targeted EBP therapies, which involve measuring a single solute, then choosing appropriate therapy to target its removal, allow for the specific selection of a suitable patient. Unfortunately, measuring the target can prove challenging. Endotoxin can be measured in whole blood using the endotoxin activity assay. However, owing to the size of intact endotoxin molecule, it cannot be filtered using hemofiltration membranes. Adsorption, which only requires the contact of blood or plasma with a sorbent, is therefore a suitable model to target its removal. TREA technologies include devices that specifically target endotoxin (Alteco LPS Adsorber, MATISSE adsorber, Toraymyxin 20R, Toxipak sorption column) and those for which endotoxin removal is included in a more broad-spectrum device (Efferon LPS, oXiris). KEY MESSAGES: While only a small number of devices are currently available in the TREA class of EBP, there is an opportunity here to bring precision medicine to sepsis.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.007
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.012
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.037

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.012
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.005
Scholarly communication0.0050.009
Open science0.0020.003
Research integrity0.0070.010
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0100.004

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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.297
Teacher spread0.271 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
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

Citations6
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBlood PurificationSame topicImmune Response and InflammationFrench-language works237,207