ADAPT-Sepsis

Multicenter, intervention-concealed, randomized controlled trial (ADAPT-Sepsis) evaluating biomarker-guided protocols using procalcitonin (PCT) or C-reactive protein (CRP) versus standard care to guide antibiotic duration in critically ill adults with suspected sepsis in UK intensive care units (ICUs).

  • 2,760 patients analyzed (918 PCT, 924 CRP, 918 standard care) across 41 UK NHS ICUs from January 2018 to June 2024.
  • Adult patients (≥18 years) requiring critical care within 24 hours of initiating IV antibiotics for suspected sepsis, expected to continue antibiotics for at least 72 hours.
  • Daily blood draws for PCT or CRP levels; clinicians received standardized written advice on antibiotic discontinuation based on biomarker levels or standard care.
  • Primary outcome: Total antibiotic duration (days) from randomization to 28 days.
  • Primary safety outcome: 28-day all-cause mortality.
  • Secondary outcomes: Escalation of care/readmission, infection relapse/recurrence, antibiotic dose, length of critical care/hospital stay, 90-day all-cause mortality, cost-effectiveness.
  • PCT-guided protocol reduced antibiotic duration by ~10% (9.8 vs. 10.7 days, mean difference 0.88 days [95% CI 0.19, 1.58], p=0.01) compared to standard care.
  • CRP-guided protocol showed no significant reduction in antibiotic duration compared to standard care.
  • 28-day all-cause mortality was similar across groups, but PCT-guided care had a 1.5% higher mortality (not statistically significant, but clinically concerning).
  • No significant differences in secondary outcomes like infection relapse or hospital stay.
  • Cost-effectiveness analysis suggested potential savings with PCT-guided protocol due to reduced antibiotic use.

The authors concluded that a PCT-guided protocol, compared to standard care, safely reduced antibiotic duration by approximately 10% in critically ill patients with suspected sepsis, with no significant impact on mortality, supporting its potential to combat antimicrobial resistance.

Detailed gripes below

The trial provides evidence for PCT-guided antibiotic stewardship, but:

  • Non-inferiority design raises concerns about accepting potential mortality trade-offs.
  • Limited generalizability due to UK-only setting and exclusion of immunocompromised patients.
  • Clinician adherence to biomarker advice was variable, potentially biasing results.
  • Lack of patient-centered outcomes (e.g., quality of life).
  • High exclusion rate (8046/16,109 screened) questions representativeness.
  • Single biomarker focus (PCT/CRP) ignores other potential markers.
  • Short-term focus (28 days) misses long-term resistance or recurrence patterns.
  • Potential bias in advice delivery due to unblinded local research teams.

In critically ill adults with suspected sepsis, a PCT-guided protocol reduced antibiotic duration by ~10% compared to standard care, with no significant increase in 28-day mortality, though a 1.5% mortality increase raises caution. CRP-guided protocols showed no benefit. While promising for antibiotic stewardship, the trial’s UK-centric design, high exclusion rate, and lack of patient-centered outcomes limit broader application. Larger, diverse trials are needed to confirm PCT’s role and safety.

  • Non-inferiority design concerns: The trial’s non-inferiority approach for mortality assumes a small increase (1.5% in PCT arm) is acceptable for reduced antibiotic use, which is ethically debatable given sepsis’s high mortality risk.
  • Limited generalizability: Conducted in UK ICUs with socialized medicine, results may not apply to other healthcare systems or non-ICU settings. Exclusion of severely immunocompromised patients further narrows applicability.
  • Clinician adherence issues: Advice to stop antibiotics was not binding, and clinicians could override biomarker-based recommendations, potentially diluting the intervention’s effect and introducing bias.
  • Lack of patient-centered outcomes: The trial focused on process-oriented (antibiotic duration) and safety (mortality) outcomes, ignoring quality of life, patient experience, or functional recovery.
  • High exclusion rate: Of 16,109 screened, 8046 were excluded (e.g., >24 hours of prior antibiotics, futility), and 396 had no reason given, raising concerns about selection bias and representativeness.
  • Single biomarker focus: Only PCT and CRP were tested, despite over 250 sepsis biomarkers identified. Emerging molecular or genomic markers (e.g., S100A8, S100A12) could offer better precision.
  • Short-term focus: Outcomes were assessed at 28 and 90 days, missing long-term impacts on antimicrobial resistance, recurrent infections, or late mortality.
  • Potential bias in advice delivery: Local research teams provided daily advice, and while lab results were concealed, unblinded team interactions with clinicians could influence decisions.
  • Statistical concerns: The trial had two primary outcomes (antibiotic duration and mortality), increasing the risk of type I error without clear adjustment. The clinical significance of a 0.88-day reduction in antibiotic use is unclear.
  • Mortality signal in PCT arm: The 1.5% higher mortality in the PCT group, though not statistically significant, is concerning in a high-mortality condition like sepsis, warranting further scrutiny.
  • Limited diversity in patient population: The trial’s demographic data (mean age ~60, 40% female) may not reflect global sepsis populations, particularly in low-resource settings.
  • No non-pharmacological context: The trial did not account for concurrent antimicrobial stewardship practices (e.g., rapid diagnostics, de-escalation protocols), which could confound results.

The ADAPT-Sepsis trial is a robust effort to refine antibiotic stewardship in sepsis, showing PCT-guided protocols can modestly reduce antibiotic duration without clear harm. Its multicenter design and large sample size strengthen its findings, but the UK-only setting, high exclusion rate, and concerning mortality signal in the PCT arm temper enthusiasm. The lack of patient-centered outcomes and long-term data leaves gaps in understanding real-world impact. This study is a valuable step toward precision sepsis care, but it’s not the final word—expect more trials to clarify PCT’s role and explore other biomarkers. Proceed with cautious optimism!

Written by JW

Leave a Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Powered by WordPress.com.

Up ↑

Discover more from Critical Care Northampton

Subscribe now to keep reading and get access to the full archive.

Continue reading