Low-dose steroids for septic shock and severe sepsis: the use of Bayesian statistics to resolve clinical trial controversies
- 764 Downloads
Low-dose steroids have shown contradictory results in trials and three recent meta-analyses. We aimed to assess the efficacy and safety of low-dose steroids for severe sepsis and septic shock by Bayesian methodology.
Randomized trials from three published meta-analyses were reviewed and entered in both classic and Bayesian databases to estimate relative risk reduction (RRR) for 28-day mortality, and relative risk increase (RRI) for shock reversal and side effects.
In septic shock trials only (Marik meta-analysis; N = 965), the probability that low-dose steroids decrease mortality by more than 15% (i.e., RRR > 15%) was 0.41 (0.24 for RRR > 20% and 0.14 for RRR > 25%). For severe sepsis and septic shock trials combined, the results were as follows: (1) for the Annane meta-analysis (N = 1,228), the probabilities were 0.57 (RRR > 15%), 0.32 (RRR > 20%), and 0.13 (RRR > 25%); (2) for the Minneci meta-analysis (N = 1,171), the probability was 0.57 to achieve mortality RRR > 15%, 0.32 (RRR > 20%), and 0.14 (RRR > 25%). The removal of the Sprung trial from each analysis did not change the overall results. The probability of achieving shock reversal ranged from 65 to 92%. The probability of developing steroid-induced side effects was as follows: for gastrointestinal bleeding (N = 924), there was a 0.73 probability of steroids causing an RRI > 1%, 0.70 for RRI > 2%, and 0.67 for RRI > 5%; for superinfections (N = 964), probabilities were 0.81 (RRI > 1%), 0.76 (RRI > 2%), and 0.70 (RRI > 5%); and for hyperglycemia (N = 540), 0.99 (RRI > 1%), 0.97 (RRI > 2%), and 0.94 (RRI > 5%).
Based on clinically meaningful thresholds (RRR > 15–25%) for mortality reduction in severe sepsis or septic shock, the Bayesian approach to all three meta-analyses consistently showed that low-dose steroids were not associated with survival benefits. The probabilities of developing steroid-induced side effects (superinfections, bleeding, and hyperglycemia) were high for all analyses.
KeywordsSteroids Sepsis Shock
The authors thank Ms. Elaine Litton and Ms. Ashley Calhoon for providing outstanding administrative support.
Conflict of interest
Andre Kalil has received research grants from Eisai and Astra Zeneca. Junfeng Sun has no conflicts to report.
- 6.Briegel J, Forst H, Haller M, Schelling G, Kilger E, Kuprat G, Hemmer B, Hummel T, Lenhart A, Heyduck M, Stoll C, Peter K (1999) Stress doses of hydrocortisone reverse hyperdynamic septic shock: a prospective, randomized, double-blind, single-center study. Crit Care Med 27:723–732CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 10.Annane D, Sébille V, Charpentier C, Bollaert PE, François B, Korach JM, Capellier G, Cohen Y, Azoulay E, Troché G, Chaumet-Riffaud P, Bellissant E (2002) Effect of treatment with low doses of hydrocortisone and fludrocortisone on mortality in patients with septic shock. JAMA 288:862–871CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 11.Sprung CL, Annane D, Keh D, Moreno R, Singer M, Freivogel K, Weiss YG, Benbenishty J, Kalenka A, Forst H, Laterre PF, Reinhart K, Cuthbertson BH, Payen D, Briegel J, CORTICUS Study Group (2008) Hydrocortisone therapy for patients with septic shock. N Engl J Med 358:111–124CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 14.Marik PE, Pastores SM, Annane D, Meduri GU, Sprung CL, Arlt W, Keh D, Briegel J, Beishuizen A, Dimopoulou I, Tsagarakis S, Singer M, Chrousos GP, Zaloga G, Bokhari F, Vogeser M, American College of Critical Care Medicine (2008) Recommendations for the diagnosis and management of corticosteroid insufficiency in critically ill adult patients: consensus statements from an international task force by the American College of Critical Care Medicine. Crit Care Med 36:1937–1949CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 15.Bernard GR, Vincent JL, Laterre PF, LaRosa SP, Dhainaut JF, Lopez-Rodriguez A, Steingrub JS, Garber GE, Helterbrand JD, Ely EW, Fisher CJ Jr, Recombinant Human Protein C Worldwide Evaluation in Severe Sepsis (PROWESS) Study Group (2001) Efficacy and safety of recombinant human activated protein C for severe sepsis. N Engl J Med 344:699–709CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 17.Center for Drug Evaluation and Research (CDER) (2005) Reviewer guidance on conducting a clinical safety review of a new product application and preparing a report on the review. US FDA, Rockville, MDGoogle Scholar
- 23.Spiegelhatler DJ, Abrams KR, Myles JP (eds) (2004) Bayesian approaches to clinical trials and health-care evaluation. Wiley,West Sussex, p 170Google Scholar
- 36.Levy MM, Dellinger RP, Townsend SR, Linde-Zwirble WT, Marshall JC, Bion J, Schorr C, Artigas A, Ramsay G, Beale R, Parker MM, Gerlach H, Reinhart K, Silva E, Harvey M, Regan S, Angus DC (2010) The Surviving Sepsis Campaign: results of an international guideline-based performance improvement program targeting severe sepsis. Intensive Care Med 36:222–231CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 41.Bakker J, Grover R, McLuckie A, Holzapfel L, Andersson J, Lodato R, Watson D, Grossman S, Donaldson J, Takala J, Glaxo Wellcome International Septic Shock Study Group (2004) Administration of the nitric oxide synthase inhibitor NG-methyl-l-arginine hydrochloride (546C88) by intravenous infusion for up to 72 hours can promote the resolution of shock in patients with severe sepsis: results of a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled multicenter study (study no. 144–002). Crit Care Med 32:1–12CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 42.López A, Lorente JA, Steingrub J, Bakker J, McLuckie A, Willatts S, Brockway M, Anzueto A, Holzapfel L, Breen D, Silverman MS, Takala J, Donaldson J, Arneson C, Grove G, Grossman S, Grover R (2004) Multiple-center, randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind study of the nitric oxide synthase inhibitor 546C88: effect on survival in patients with septic shock. Crit Care Med 32:21–30CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 45.Tandan SM, Guleria R, Gupta N (2005) Low dose steroids and adrenocortical insufficiency in septic shock: a double-blind randomised controlled trial from India. Am J Respir Crit Care Med 171:A24Google Scholar