The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Endocan, a new endothelial marker in human sepsis*
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: a) To evaluate in septic patients the blood levels of endocan, a circulating proteoglycan, which regulates leukocyte function-associated antigen-1/intercellular adhesion molecule-1 interactions in vitro; b) to determine whether endocan could be used as a diagnostic and prognostic marker in sepsis in the intensive care unit; and c) to study kinetics of endocan secretion by endothelial cells in vitro after stimulation by soluble mediators involved in sepsis. DESIGN: Prospective observational study. SETTING: Intensive care unit of the University Hospitals of Lille, France, and Geneva, Switzerland. PATIENTS: All patients admitted to the intensive care unit over a 6-month period with clinical evidence of severe sepsis or septic shock. INTERVENTIONS: None. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: In vitro, we showed a sustained endocan secretion by endothelial cells after stimulation by lipopolysaccharide and tumor necrosis factor-alpha. Circulating levels of endocan measured in 63 patients admitted to the intensive care unit with sepsis were significantly elevated compared with 20 healthy donors and seven patients with systemic inflammatory response syndrome: 2.71 +/- 4.88 ng/mL vs. 0.77 +/- 0.44 ng/mL vs. 0.68 +/- 1.03 ng/mL (median +/- interquartile range, p < .001). Endocan levels were higher in patients with septic shock (6.11 +/- 12.99 ng/mL, n = 22) than in patients with severe sepsis (1.97 +/- 7.8 ng/mL, n = 12) or sepsis (1.95 +/- 1.63 ng/mL, n = 29). Measurement of endocan at intensive care unit admission revealed higher levels in nonsurvivors (n = 12) than in patients still alive 10 days later (n = 51, 6.98 +/- 13.8 vs. 2.45 +/- 4.09, p < .01). CONCLUSIONS: These results suggest that in septic patients, endocan blood level is related to the severity of illness and the outcome of the patient and may represent a novel endothelial cell dysfunction marker.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
STATISTICAL METHODS FOR ASSESSING AGREEMENT BETWEEN TWO METHODS OF CLINICAL MEASUREMENT
Martin Bland, J., & Altman, D. (1986) · The Lancet · doi:10.1016/s0140-6736(86)90837-8 · Cited by 47,965
Cited by
Pierrakos, C., & Vincent, J.-L. (2010) · Critical Care · doi:10.1186/cc8872 · Cited by 1,377
The effects of sepsis on endothelium and clinical implications
Dolmatova, E. V., Wang, K., Mandavilli, R., & Griendling, K. K. (2021) · Cardiovascular Research · doi:10.1093/cvr/cvaa070 · Cited by 317
Metadata
- Authors
- Scherpereel, A., Depontieu, F., Grigoriu, B., Cavestri, B., Tsicopoulos, A., Gentina, T., Jourdain, M., Pugin, J., Tonnel, A.-B., & Lassalle, P.
- Venue
- Critical Care Medicine
- Published
- 2006-02
- Volume
- 34
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 532-537
- ISSN
- 0090-3493 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2020861620
- Cited by
- 249
- References
- 1
- FWCI
- 4.21
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Endocan, a new endothelial marker in human sepsis*. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1097/01.ccm.0000198525.82124.74
- The paper
- Scherpereel, A., Depontieu, F., Grigoriu, B., Cavestri, B., Tsicopoulos, A., Gentina, T., Jourdain, M., Pugin, J., Tonnel, A.-B., & Lassalle, P. (2006). Endocan, a new endothelial marker in human sepsis*. Critical Care Medicine. https://doi.org/10.1097/01.ccm.0000198525.82124.74
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.