MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4413786028 · doi:10.1097/cce.0000000000001308

Organ Failure, Endotoxin Activity, and Mortality in Septic Shock

2025· article· en· W4413786028 on OpenAlexaff
Luca Molinari, Mark Tidswell, Ali Al‐Khafaji, Danielle Davison, Claude Galphin, Esha Kamaluddin, Debra Foster, John A. Kellum

Bibliographic record

VenueCritical Care Explorations · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldImmunology and Microbiology
TopicImmune Response and Inflammation
Canadian institutionsIridian Spectral Technologies (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineSeptic shockSOFA scoreSepsisOrgan dysfunctionShock (circulatory)Observational studyInternal medicineMultiple organ dysfunction syndromeMortality rate

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

IMPORTANCE: The relationship between endotoxin activity, organ failure, and mortality is not well understood. OBJECTIVE: To test whether the combination of endotoxin activity and organ failure identifies patients at higher risk of death from sepsis and determine the relationship to previously described sepsis phenotypes. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: Prospective observational study in four ICUs enrolling critically ill patients with septic shock. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: Endotoxin activity assay (EAA) results, Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA), and multiple organ dysfunction (MODS) and 28-day mortality. RESULTS: We enrolled 90 patients aged 25-95 years and set an EAA cutoff of greater than or equal to 0.6 together with SOFA greater than 11 or MODS greater than 9 to define endotoxic septic shock (ESS). At baseline mean EAA was 0.64 (sd = 0.19), whereas mean SOFA and MODS were 10.3 (sd 3.2) and 5.8 (sd 3.1), respectively. EAA greater than or equal to 0.6 and SOFA greater than 11 were present in 20 patients (23.3%) and these patients had 60% mortality. EAA greater than or equal to 0.6 and SOFA less than or equal to 11 occurred in 31 (36.0%) with mortality 12.9%. Of the 35 remaining patients with EAA less than 0.6, 29 (33.7%) had SOFA less than or equal to 11 and 5 of them (17.2%) died. Only six patients (7.0%) had EAA less than 0.6 and SOFA greater than 11 and none died (p < 0.001). All patients with MODS greater than 9 also had EAA greater than or equal to 0.6 (12 patients) with 75% mortality. EAA greater than or equal to 0.6 with MODS less than or equal to 9 occurred in 39 patients with 17.9% mortality (p < 0.001). ESS (EAA ≥ 0.6 together with SOFA > 11 or MODS > 9) occurred in 21 patients and they had significantly higher mortality (57.1% vs. 15.9%, p < 0.001) compared with non-ESS, with a relative risk for death of 3.58 (95% CI, 1.86-6.91). Among ESS patients, 7 (33.3%) had δ phenotype, whereas only 4 (5.8%) had δ among non-ESS (p = 0.001). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: ESS compromises patients with the highest mortality rate from sepsis. Such patients are most appropriate for trials testing anti-endotoxin therapy for improving survival.

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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.112
Threshold uncertainty score0.403

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.314
Teacher spread0.293 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
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

Citations3
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCritical Care ExplorationsSame topicImmune Response and InflammationFrench-language works237,207