The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Risk and the Efficacy of Antiinflammatory Agents: Retrospective and Confirmatory Studies of Sepsis
Abstract
We investigated whether a relationship between risk of death and treatment effect could explain the disparate results between the preclinical and clinical sepsis trials of antiinflammatory agents over the last decade. A metaregression analysis of cited preclinical studies showed that the treatment effects of these agents were highly dependent on risk of death (p = 0.0001) and that animals were studied at significantly higher control mortality rates than humans (median [25th-75th quartile], 88% [79-96%] versus 39% [32-42%], p = 0.0001). An analysis of the clinical trials showed that antiinflammatory agents were also significantly more efficacious in septic patients with higher risk of death (p = 0.002) and were harmful in those with low risk. To test this relationship prospectively, we studied antiinflammatory agents in models employing differing doses of bacterial challenge to produce the full range of risk of death. We found that the efficacy of these agents, although very beneficial at high control mortality rates, was much reduced (p = 0.0001) and similar to those in human trials at moderate control mortality rates (i.e., 30 to 40%). The efficacy of antiinflammatory agents during sepsis is dependent on the risk of death, an observation that explains the apparent contradiction between preclinical and clinical trial results. Accounting for this relationship may be necessary for the safe and effective development of antiinflammatory therapies for sepsis.
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
Anti-cachectin/TNF monoclonal antibodies prevent septic shock during lethal bacteraemia
Tracey, K. J., Fong, Y., Hesse, D. G., Manogue, K. R., Lee, A. T., Kuo, G. C., Lowry, S. F., & Cerami, A. (1987) · Nature · doi:10.1038/330662a0 · Cited by 2,448
Cited by
Interleukin-1 in the pathogenesis and treatment of inflammatory diseases
Dinarello, C. A. (2011) · Blood · doi:10.1182/blood-2010-07-273417 · Cited by 2,248
Anti-inflammatory Agents: Present and Future
Dinarello, C. A. (2010) · Cell · doi:10.1016/j.cell.2010.02.043 · Cited by 1,095
Russell, J. A. (2006) · New England Journal of Medicine · doi:10.1056/nejmra043632 · Cited by 1,048
Advances in the understanding and treatment of sepsis-induced immunosuppression
Venet, F., & Monneret, G. (2018) · Nature Reviews Nephrology · doi:10.1038/nrneph.2017.165 · Cited by 981
Historical insights into cytokines
Dinarello, C. A. (2007) · European Journal of Immunology · doi:10.1002/eji.200737772 · Cited by 926
Metadata
- Authors
- Eichacker, P. Q., Parent, C., Kalil, A., Esposito, C., Cui, X., Banks, S. M., Gerstenberger, E. P., Fitz, Y., Danner, R. L., & Natanson, C.
- Venue
- American Journal of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine
- Publisher
- Oxford University Press (OUP)
- Published
- 2002-11-01
- Volume
- 166
- Issue
- 9
- Pages
- 1197-1205
- ISSN
- 1073-449X (ISSN-L)
- 1535-4970
- OpenAlex
- W2103336162
- Cited by
- 341
- References
- 2
- FWCI
- 18.77
- 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: Risk and the Efficacy of Antiinflammatory Agents: Retrospective and Confirmatory Studies of Sepsis. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1164/rccm.200204-302oc
- The paper
- Eichacker, P. Q., Parent, C., Kalil, A., Esposito, C., Cui, X., Banks, S. M., Gerstenberger, E. P., Fitz, Y., Danner, R. L., & Natanson, C. (2002). Risk and the Efficacy of Antiinflammatory Agents: Retrospective and Confirmatory Studies of Sepsis. American Journal of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine. https://doi.org/10.1164/rccm.200204-302oc
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.