Laterre Pierre-Francois, Berry Scott M, Blemings Allan, Carlsen Jan E, François Bruno, Graves Todd, Jacobsen Karsten, Lewis Roger J, Opal Steven M, Perner Anders, Pickkers Peter, Russell James A, Windeløv Nis A, Yealy Donald M, Asfar Pierre, Bestle Morten H, Muller Grégoire, Bruel Cédric, Brulé Noëlle, Decruyenaere Johan, Dive Alain-Michel, Dugernier Thierry, Krell Kenneth, Lefrant Jean-Yves, Megarbane Bruno, Mercier Emmanuelle, Mira Jean-Paul, Quenot Jean-Pierre, Rasmussen Bodil Steen, Thorsen-Meyer Hans-Christian, Vander Laenen Margot, Vang Marianne Lauridsen, Vignon Philippe, Vinatier Isabelle, Wichmann Sine, Wittebole Xavier, Kjølbye Anne Louise, Angus Derek C
Department of Critical Care Medicine, St. Luc University Hospital, Université Catholique de Louvain, Brussels, Belgium.
Berry Consultants LLC, Austin, Texas.
JAMA. 2019 Oct 15;322(15):1476-1485. doi: 10.1001/jama.2019.14607.
Norepinephrine, the first-line vasopressor for septic shock, is not always effective and has important catecholaminergic adverse effects. Selepressin, a selective vasopressin V1a receptor agonist, is a noncatecholaminergic vasopressor that may mitigate sepsis-induced vasodilatation, vascular leakage, and edema, with fewer adverse effects.
To test whether selepressin improves outcome in septic shock.
DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: An adaptive phase 2b/3 randomized clinical trial comprising 2 parts that included adult patients (n = 868) with septic shock requiring more than 5 μg/min of norepinephrine. Part 1 used a Bayesian algorithm to adjust randomization probabilities to alternative selepressin dosing regimens and to trigger transition to part 2, which would compare the best-performing regimen with placebo. The trial was conducted between July 2015 and August 2017 in 63 hospitals in Belgium, Denmark, France, the Netherlands, and the United States, and follow-up was completed by May 2018.
Random assignment to 1 of 3 dosing regimens of selepressin (starting infusion rates of 1.7, 2.5, and 3.5 ng/kg/min; n = 585) or to placebo (n = 283), all administered as continuous infusions titrated according to hemodynamic parameters.
Primary end point was ventilator- and vasopressor-free days within 30 days (deaths assigned zero days) of commencing study drug. Key secondary end points were 90-day mortality, kidney replacement therapy-free days, and ICU-free days.
Among 868 randomized patients, 828 received study drug (mean age, 66.3 years; 341 [41.2%] women) and comprised the primary analysis cohort, of whom 562 received 1 of 3 selepressin regimens, 266 received placebo, and 817 (98.7%) completed the trial. The trial was stopped for futility at the end of part 1. Median study drug duration was 37.8 hours (IQR, 17.8-72.4). There were no significant differences in the primary end point (ventilator- and vasopressor-free days: 15.0 vs 14.5 in the selepressin and placebo groups; difference, 0.6 [95% CI, -1.3 to 2.4]; P = .30) or key secondary end points (90-day mortality, 40.6% vs 39.4%; difference, 1.1% [95% CI, -6.5% to 8.8%]; P = .77; kidney replacement therapy-free days: 18.5 vs 18.2; difference, 0.3 [95% CI, -2.1 to 2.6]; P = .85; ICU-free days: 12.6 vs 12.2; difference, 0.5 [95% CI, -1.2 to 2.2]; P = .41). Adverse event rates included cardiac arrhythmias (27.9% vs 25.2% of patients), cardiac ischemia (6.6% vs 5.6%), mesenteric ischemia (3.2% vs 2.6%), and peripheral ischemia (2.3% vs 2.3%).
Among patients with septic shock receiving norepinephrine, administration of selepressin, compared with placebo, did not result in improvement in vasopressor- and ventilator-free days within 30 days. Further research would be needed to evaluate the potential role of selepressin for other patient-centered outcomes in septic shock.
ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02508649.
去甲肾上腺素是感染性休克的一线血管升压药,但并非总是有效,且具有重要的儿茶酚胺能不良反应。塞利加压素是一种选择性血管加压素V1a受体激动剂,是一种非儿茶酚胺能血管升压药,可能减轻脓毒症引起的血管扩张、血管渗漏和水肿,不良反应较少。
测试塞利加压素是否能改善感染性休克的预后。
设计、设置和参与者:一项适应性2b/3期随机临床试验,包括2个部分,纳入了需要去甲肾上腺素剂量超过5μg/分钟的感染性休克成年患者(n = 868)。第1部分使用贝叶斯算法调整随机化概率,以选择塞利加压素的替代给药方案,并触发向第2部分的过渡,第2部分将比较表现最佳的方案与安慰剂。该试验于2015年7月至2017年8月在比利时、丹麦、法国、荷兰和美国的63家医院进行,随访于2018年5月完成。
随机分配至塞利加压素的3种给药方案之一(起始输注速率为1.7、2.5和3.5 ng/kg/分钟;n = 585)或安慰剂组(n = 283),所有药物均作为持续输注给药,并根据血流动力学参数进行滴定。
主要终点是开始研究药物后30天内无呼吸机和血管升压药支持的天数(死亡患者计为0天)。关键次要终点是90天死亡率、无需肾脏替代治疗的天数和无需入住重症监护病房的天数。
在868例随机分组的患者中,828例接受了研究药物治疗(平均年龄66.3岁;341例[41.2%]为女性),构成主要分析队列,其中562例接受了3种塞利加压素方案中的1种,266例接受了安慰剂,817例(98.7%)完成了试验。该试验在第1部分结束时因无效而停止。研究药物的中位使用时间为37.8小时(IQR,17.8 - 72.4)。主要终点(无呼吸机和血管升压药支持的天数:塞利加压素组为15.0天,安慰剂组为14.5天;差异为0.6[95%CI,-1.3至2.4];P = 0.30)或关键次要终点(90天死亡率,40.6%对39.4%;差异为1.1%[95%CI,-6.5%至8.8%];P = 0.77;无需肾脏替代治疗的天数:18.5天对18.2天;差异为0.3[95%CI,-2.1至2.6];P = 0.85;无需入住重症监护病房的天数:12.6天对12.2天;差异为0.5[95%CI,-1.2至2.2];P = 0.41)均无显著差异。不良事件发生率包括心律失常(患者比例分别为27.9%和25.2%)、心肌缺血(6.6%对5.6%)、肠系膜缺血(3.2%对2.6%)和外周缺血(2.3%对2.3%)。
在接受去甲肾上腺素治疗的感染性休克患者中,与安慰剂相比,给予塞利加压素并未使患者在30天内无血管升压药和无呼吸机支持的天数得到改善。需要进一步研究以评估塞利加压素在感染性休克中对其他以患者为中心的结局的潜在作用。
ClinicalTrials.gov标识符:NCT02508649。