MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4412836048 · doi:10.1101/2025.07.31.25332174

Midodrine for the early liberation from vasopressor support in the ICU (LIBERATE): A Vanguard Randomized Clinical Trial

2025· preprint· en· W4412836048 on OpenAlexaffabout
Fadi Hammal, Deborah J. Cook, Stephanie Sibley, Sean M. Bagshaw, Oleksa Rewa

Bibliographic record

VenuemedRxiv · 2025
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSepsis Diagnosis and Treatment
Canadian institutionsUniversity of CalgaryKingston Health Sciences CentreAlberta Health ServicesQueen's UniversityMcMaster UniversityAlberta HealthNiagara Health SystemRegional Municipality of NiagaraUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsVanguardMidodrineRandomized controlled trialMedicineSurgeryInternal medicineHistoryBlood pressure

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ABSTRACT Background Intravenous (IV) vasopressors are the mainstay of hemodynamic physiological support for critically ill patients. However, the role of oral vasopressors in the management of IV vasopressor-dependent shock remains unclear. The LIBERATE body of work aims to examine the role of midodrine as an IV vasopressor sparing agent for critically ill patients with IV vasopressor dependent shock. The objective of the LIBERATE internal randomized controlled trial was to evaluate the implementation of the LIBERATE protocol in a multi-centre randomized control trial setting. Methods We conducted a pilot multi-centre, concealed-allocation, parallel-group, blinded randomized controlled trial (RCT) evaluating the effect of midodrine 10mg q8h versus placebo on the duration of IV vasopressor-dependent shock in the intensive care unit (ICU) on the first 200 of planned sample size for the LIBERATE trial. The study was performed in 9 Alberta and Ontario medical centres between September 16, 2022 and January 22, 2025. We included patients aged 18 years or older admitted to the ICU receiving ongoing IV vasopressor support. Patients were randomly assigned 1:1 to enteral midodrine or an identical placebo and received the study treatment until 24 hours after discontinuation of their IV vasopressor therapy. The primary endpoints were study feasibility and included: recruitment rate (monthly enrollment per study site), screening and enrollment characteristics, protocol adherence, retention rate, data completeness, and safety (adverse event reporting), Secondary endpoints focused on aggregate patient-centered outcomes. Results There were 200 patients who fulfilled eligibility criteria and were enrolled in the trial. The mean age was 61.7 (SD 15.0), and 80 (40.1%) were female. The mean Acute Physiology and Health Evaluation (APACHE II) score at ICU admission was 23.7 (SD 7.6) and the mean Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA) score at the time of study enrollment was 10.1 (SD 2.9). Sepsis was the most common cause of shock in both groups. Average recruitment was 1.4 participants (range 0.3 to 3.0) per study site per month, protocol adherence was 84.5%, retention rate was 97.0%, and there were no reports of unblinding of treatment allocation by the study sites. Two adverse events were reported and resolved with no sequelae. Conclusion The LIBERATE internal randomized controlled trial is feasible and safe, supporting a larger trial to investigate the utility of midodrine in critically ill patients with IV vasopressor-dependent shock. Trial Registration Registered September 28, 2021. https://clinicaltrials.gov/study/ NCT05058612 Key messages regarding feasibility It was previously unknown if recruitment rates, protocol adherence and safety of midodrine would remain in effect across multiple centres This internal randomized controlled trial across 9 sites established sufficient feasibility outcomes with recruitment rates of 1.4 participants per site per month, protocol adherence of 84.5%, retention rates of 97.0%, data completeness of 96.0% and adverse event rate attributable to study medication of 0%. The results of this trial will be used to inform and proceed with the LIBERATE RCT.

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)0.009
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: Randomized trial
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.040

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0040.003
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0100.001

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 head0.169
GPT teacher head0.434
Teacher spread0.265 · 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 designRandomized trial
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuemedRxiv→Same topicSepsis Diagnosis and Treatment→French-language works237,207→