基于基因表达的氢化可的松在感染性休克患者中的精准应用肾上腺试验的二次分析

IF 1.4 4区 医学 Q3 CRITICAL CARE MEDICINE
Balasubramanian Venkatesh MD , Diego Ariel Rey PhD , David M. Evans PhD , Lijing Yao PhD , Simon Finfer MD , Rinaldo Bellomo PhD , Tiago Chedraoui Silva PhD , Jeremy Cohen PhD , Yu Qiu PhD , Wellington dos Reis Lucena PhD , Naomi Hammond PhD , John Myburgh PhD , Qiang Li PhD , Lucas Petri Damiani PhD , Anthony Devaux PhD , Rodrigo Octavio Deliberato PhD
{"title":"基于基因表达的氢化可的松在感染性休克患者中的精准应用肾上腺试验的二次分析","authors":"Balasubramanian Venkatesh MD ,&nbsp;Diego Ariel Rey PhD ,&nbsp;David M. Evans PhD ,&nbsp;Lijing Yao PhD ,&nbsp;Simon Finfer MD ,&nbsp;Rinaldo Bellomo PhD ,&nbsp;Tiago Chedraoui Silva PhD ,&nbsp;Jeremy Cohen PhD ,&nbsp;Yu Qiu PhD ,&nbsp;Wellington dos Reis Lucena PhD ,&nbsp;Naomi Hammond PhD ,&nbsp;John Myburgh PhD ,&nbsp;Qiang Li PhD ,&nbsp;Lucas Petri Damiani PhD ,&nbsp;Anthony Devaux PhD ,&nbsp;Rodrigo Octavio Deliberato PhD","doi":"10.1016/j.ccrj.2025.100109","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Background</h3><div>Small observational studies suggest the effect of corticosteroids in patients with vasodilatory shock vary depending on endotypes determined by gene expression. We sought to replicate these findings in a larger cohort from a randomised clinical trial.</div></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><div>In a cross-sectional substudy of the Adjunctive Glucocorticoid Therapy In Septic Shock (ADRENAL) trial, patients were classified as one of two immune endotypes using predefined gene expression signatures: immune adaptive-prevalent (IA-P) or immune innate-prevalent (IN-P). We compared the outcomes of the two endotypes using a Bayesian analysis. The primary outcome was Day-28 mortality.</div></div><div><h3>Findings</h3><div>Of 540 patients, 267 (49.4%) were classified as IA-P and 273 (50.6%) as IN-P. In a Bayesian analysis using noninformative priors, there was no difference in the effect of hydrocortisone on 28-day mortality (odds ratio [OR] 1.43, 95% credible intervals [CrI] 0.72–2.87) and OR 1.39, 95% CrI 0.74–2.61, between the IA-P and IN-P groups, respectively. In the subgroup of patients with more severe shock (n = 215/540, 40%), the corresponding figures for IA-P and IN-P were 1.21, 95% CrI (0.31–4.74) and OR 0.72 (95% CrI 0.30–1.67), respectively. In the subgroup of patients with pulmonary sepsis (232/540, 43%), IA-P patients treated with hydrocortisone had increased mortality (OR 5.55, 95% CrI 1.81–21.2).</div></div><div><h3>Interpretation</h3><div>Gene expression data from patients with septic shock reveal distinct immune endotypes. There was no evidence of a heterogeneity of treatment effect of hydrocortisone on mortality in the 2 endotypes or in the subgroup with severe shock. Patients with the IA-P endotype and pulmonary sepsis appear to be harmed by corticosteroids.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":49215,"journal":{"name":"Critical Care and Resuscitation","volume":"27 2","pages":"Article 100109"},"PeriodicalIF":1.4000,"publicationDate":"2025-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"A gene expression-based approach for the precision use of hydrocortisone in septic shock patients; a secondary analysis of the ADRENAL trial\",\"authors\":\"Balasubramanian Venkatesh MD ,&nbsp;Diego Ariel Rey PhD ,&nbsp;David M. Evans PhD ,&nbsp;Lijing Yao PhD ,&nbsp;Simon Finfer MD ,&nbsp;Rinaldo Bellomo PhD ,&nbsp;Tiago Chedraoui Silva PhD ,&nbsp;Jeremy Cohen PhD ,&nbsp;Yu Qiu PhD ,&nbsp;Wellington dos Reis Lucena PhD ,&nbsp;Naomi Hammond PhD ,&nbsp;John Myburgh PhD ,&nbsp;Qiang Li PhD ,&nbsp;Lucas Petri Damiani PhD ,&nbsp;Anthony Devaux PhD ,&nbsp;Rodrigo Octavio Deliberato PhD\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.ccrj.2025.100109\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><h3>Background</h3><div>Small observational studies suggest the effect of corticosteroids in patients with vasodilatory shock vary depending on endotypes determined by gene expression. We sought to replicate these findings in a larger cohort from a randomised clinical trial.</div></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><div>In a cross-sectional substudy of the Adjunctive Glucocorticoid Therapy In Septic Shock (ADRENAL) trial, patients were classified as one of two immune endotypes using predefined gene expression signatures: immune adaptive-prevalent (IA-P) or immune innate-prevalent (IN-P). We compared the outcomes of the two endotypes using a Bayesian analysis. The primary outcome was Day-28 mortality.</div></div><div><h3>Findings</h3><div>Of 540 patients, 267 (49.4%) were classified as IA-P and 273 (50.6%) as IN-P. In a Bayesian analysis using noninformative priors, there was no difference in the effect of hydrocortisone on 28-day mortality (odds ratio [OR] 1.43, 95% credible intervals [CrI] 0.72–2.87) and OR 1.39, 95% CrI 0.74–2.61, between the IA-P and IN-P groups, respectively. In the subgroup of patients with more severe shock (n = 215/540, 40%), the corresponding figures for IA-P and IN-P were 1.21, 95% CrI (0.31–4.74) and OR 0.72 (95% CrI 0.30–1.67), respectively. In the subgroup of patients with pulmonary sepsis (232/540, 43%), IA-P patients treated with hydrocortisone had increased mortality (OR 5.55, 95% CrI 1.81–21.2).</div></div><div><h3>Interpretation</h3><div>Gene expression data from patients with septic shock reveal distinct immune endotypes. There was no evidence of a heterogeneity of treatment effect of hydrocortisone on mortality in the 2 endotypes or in the subgroup with severe shock. Patients with the IA-P endotype and pulmonary sepsis appear to be harmed by corticosteroids.</div></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":49215,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Critical Care and Resuscitation\",\"volume\":\"27 2\",\"pages\":\"Article 100109\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-06-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Critical Care and Resuscitation\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1441277225000134\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"CRITICAL CARE MEDICINE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Critical Care and Resuscitation","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1441277225000134","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"CRITICAL CARE MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:小型观察性研究表明,皮质类固醇对血管扩张性休克患者的影响取决于基因表达决定的内源性类型。我们试图在一个更大的随机临床试验队列中重复这些发现。方法在一项脓毒性休克辅助糖皮质激素治疗(ADRENAL)试验的横断面亚研究中,使用预先定义的基因表达特征将患者分为两种免疫内型:免疫适应性流行型(IA-P)或免疫先天流行型(In -p)。我们使用贝叶斯分析比较了两种内型的结果。主要终点为第28天死亡率。540例患者中,267例(49.4%)为IA-P, 273例(50.6%)为IN-P。在使用非信息先验的贝叶斯分析中,氢化可的松对28天死亡率的影响在IA-P组和In - p组之间分别没有差异(比值比[OR] 1.43, 95%可信区间[CrI] 0.72-2.87)和OR 1.39, 95%可信区间[CrI] 0.74-2.61)。在较重度休克患者亚组(n = 215/540, 40%), IA-P和In - p对应的数值分别为1.21、95% CrI(0.31-4.74)和OR 0.72 (95% CrI 0.30-1.67)。在肺脓毒症患者亚组中(232/540,43%),接受氢化可的松治疗的IA-P患者死亡率增加(OR 5.55, 95% CrI 1.81-21.2)。感染性休克患者的基因表达数据显示不同的免疫内型。没有证据表明氢化可的松对两种内源性或严重休克亚组死亡率的治疗效果存在异质性。IA-P内型和肺脓毒症患者似乎受到皮质类固醇的伤害。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
A gene expression-based approach for the precision use of hydrocortisone in septic shock patients; a secondary analysis of the ADRENAL trial

Background

Small observational studies suggest the effect of corticosteroids in patients with vasodilatory shock vary depending on endotypes determined by gene expression. We sought to replicate these findings in a larger cohort from a randomised clinical trial.

Methods

In a cross-sectional substudy of the Adjunctive Glucocorticoid Therapy In Septic Shock (ADRENAL) trial, patients were classified as one of two immune endotypes using predefined gene expression signatures: immune adaptive-prevalent (IA-P) or immune innate-prevalent (IN-P). We compared the outcomes of the two endotypes using a Bayesian analysis. The primary outcome was Day-28 mortality.

Findings

Of 540 patients, 267 (49.4%) were classified as IA-P and 273 (50.6%) as IN-P. In a Bayesian analysis using noninformative priors, there was no difference in the effect of hydrocortisone on 28-day mortality (odds ratio [OR] 1.43, 95% credible intervals [CrI] 0.72–2.87) and OR 1.39, 95% CrI 0.74–2.61, between the IA-P and IN-P groups, respectively. In the subgroup of patients with more severe shock (n = 215/540, 40%), the corresponding figures for IA-P and IN-P were 1.21, 95% CrI (0.31–4.74) and OR 0.72 (95% CrI 0.30–1.67), respectively. In the subgroup of patients with pulmonary sepsis (232/540, 43%), IA-P patients treated with hydrocortisone had increased mortality (OR 5.55, 95% CrI 1.81–21.2).

Interpretation

Gene expression data from patients with septic shock reveal distinct immune endotypes. There was no evidence of a heterogeneity of treatment effect of hydrocortisone on mortality in the 2 endotypes or in the subgroup with severe shock. Patients with the IA-P endotype and pulmonary sepsis appear to be harmed by corticosteroids.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Critical Care and Resuscitation
Critical Care and Resuscitation CRITICAL CARE MEDICINE-
CiteScore
7.70
自引率
3.40%
发文量
44
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: ritical Care and Resuscitation (CC&R) is the official scientific journal of the College of Intensive Care Medicine (CICM). The Journal is a quarterly publication (ISSN 1441-2772) with original articles of scientific and clinical interest in the specialities of Critical Care, Intensive Care, Anaesthesia, Emergency Medicine and related disciplines. The Journal is received by all Fellows and trainees, along with an increasing number of subscribers from around the world. The CC&R Journal currently has an impact factor of 3.3, placing it in 8th position in world critical care journals and in first position in the world outside the USA and Europe.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信