OBJECTIVE: Group IIA secretory phospholipase A2 (sPLA2-IIA), released during inflammation, is increased in severe sepsis, and plasma levels are inversely related to survival. In a previous study, a selective inhibitor of sPLA2-IIA (LY315920NA/S-5920) was well tolerated and appeared to improve survival in a subgroup of patients who received the drug within 24 hrs of first sepsis-induced organ failure. This study was designed to determine whether improvement in survival could be confirmed in a larger patient population meeting the characteristics of that subgroup. DESIGN: Multicenter, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel-group clinical trial of LY315920NA/S-5920 in patients with severe sepsis. SETTING: Seventy-five institutions worldwide. PATIENTS: A total of 373 patients with at least two sepsis-induced organ failures. INTERVENTIONS: Patients were randomized 1:1 to receive LY315920NA/S-5920 (target plasma concentration of 800 ng/mL; n = 188) or placebo (n = 185). Study medication was administered as a continuous intravenous infusion for 168 hrs. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: The study was terminated after data on 250 patients suggested a significant improvement in 28-day all-cause mortality would not be found if the trial continued as planned. The mortality rate was 39.4% in the LY315920NA/S-5920 group, compared with 31.9% in the placebo group (p = .092). The negative trend in mortality was most pronounced among patients with cardiovascular failure at baseline (41.6% vs. 28.7%; p = .008) and patients whose culture data at baseline were negative (42.9% vs. 22.7%; p = .045). The negative trend in mortality is not explained by adverse events, microbiology, or laboratory data. CONCLUSIONS: Continuous 7-day infusion of an inhibitor of sPLA2-IIA had no beneficial effect on 28-day all-cause mortality among severe sepsis patients with at least two organ failures. This study did not confirm earlier promising subgroup results with LY315920NA/S-5920, which provides a reminder that subgroup effects should be viewed cautiously, especially when primary effects are not significant.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Zeiher et al. (2005) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: