Cargando…

Use of the prognostic biomarker suPAR in the emergency department improves risk stratification but has no effect on mortality: a cluster-randomized clinical trial (TRIAGE III)

BACKGROUND: Risk stratification of patients in the emergency department can be strengthened using prognostic biomarkers, but the impact on patient prognosis is unknown. The aim of the TRIAGE III trial was to investigate whether the introduction of the prognostic and nonspecific biomarker: soluble ur...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Schultz, Martin, Rasmussen, Line Jee Hartmann, Andersen, Malene H., Stefansson, Jakob S., Falkentoft, Alexander C., Alstrup, Morten, Sandø, Andreas, Holle, Sarah L. K., Meyer, Jeppe, Törnkvist, Peter B. S., Høi-Hansen, Thomas, Kjøller, Erik, Jensen, Birgitte Nybo, Lind, Morten, Ravn, Lisbet, Kallemose, Thomas, Lange, Theis, Køber, Lars, Rasmussen, Lars Simon, Eugen-Olsen, Jesper, Iversen, Kasper Karmark
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2018
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6114851/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30153859
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13049-018-0539-5
_version_ 1783351271509458944
author Schultz, Martin
Rasmussen, Line Jee Hartmann
Andersen, Malene H.
Stefansson, Jakob S.
Falkentoft, Alexander C.
Alstrup, Morten
Sandø, Andreas
Holle, Sarah L. K.
Meyer, Jeppe
Törnkvist, Peter B. S.
Høi-Hansen, Thomas
Kjøller, Erik
Jensen, Birgitte Nybo
Lind, Morten
Ravn, Lisbet
Kallemose, Thomas
Lange, Theis
Køber, Lars
Rasmussen, Lars Simon
Eugen-Olsen, Jesper
Iversen, Kasper Karmark
author_facet Schultz, Martin
Rasmussen, Line Jee Hartmann
Andersen, Malene H.
Stefansson, Jakob S.
Falkentoft, Alexander C.
Alstrup, Morten
Sandø, Andreas
Holle, Sarah L. K.
Meyer, Jeppe
Törnkvist, Peter B. S.
Høi-Hansen, Thomas
Kjøller, Erik
Jensen, Birgitte Nybo
Lind, Morten
Ravn, Lisbet
Kallemose, Thomas
Lange, Theis
Køber, Lars
Rasmussen, Lars Simon
Eugen-Olsen, Jesper
Iversen, Kasper Karmark
author_sort Schultz, Martin
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Risk stratification of patients in the emergency department can be strengthened using prognostic biomarkers, but the impact on patient prognosis is unknown. The aim of the TRIAGE III trial was to investigate whether the introduction of the prognostic and nonspecific biomarker: soluble urokinase plasminogen activator receptor (suPAR) for risk stratification in the emergency department reduces mortality in acutely admitted patients. METHODS: The TRIAGE III trial was a cluster-randomized interventional trial conducted at emergency departments in the Capitol Region of Denmark. Eligible hospitals were required to have an emergency department with an intake of acute medical and surgical patients and no previous access to suPAR measurement. Three emergency departments were randomized; one withdrew shortly after the trial began. The inclusion period was from January through June of 2016 consisting of twelve cluster-periods of 3-weeks alternating between intervention and control and a subsequent follow-up of ten months. Patients were allocated to the intervention if they arrived in interventional periods, where suPAR measurement was routinely analysed at arrival. In the control periods suPAR measurement was not performed. The main outcome was all-cause mortality 10 months after arrival of the last patient in the inclusion period. Secondary outcomes included 30-day mortality. RESULTS: The trial enrolled a consecutive cohort of 16,801 acutely admitted patients; all were included in the analyses. The intervention group consisted of 6 cluster periods with 8900 patients and the control group consisted of 6 cluster periods with 7901 patients. After a median follow-up of 362 days, death occurred in 1241 patients (13.9%) in the intervention group and in 1126 patients (14.3%) in the control group. The weighted Cox model found a hazard ratio of 0.97 (95% confidence interval, 0.89 to 1.07; p = 0.57). Analysis of all subgroups and of 30-day all-cause mortality showed similar results. CONCLUSIONS: The TRIAGE III trial found no effect of introducing the nonspecific and prognostic biomarker suPAR in emergency departments on short- or long-term all-cause mortality among acutely admitted patients. Further research is required to evaluate how prognostic biomarkers can be implemented in routine clinical practice. TRIAL REGISTRATION: clinicaltrials.gov, NCT02643459. Registered 31 December 2015. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (10.1186/s13049-018-0539-5) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-6114851
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2018
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-61148512018-09-04 Use of the prognostic biomarker suPAR in the emergency department improves risk stratification but has no effect on mortality: a cluster-randomized clinical trial (TRIAGE III) Schultz, Martin Rasmussen, Line Jee Hartmann Andersen, Malene H. Stefansson, Jakob S. Falkentoft, Alexander C. Alstrup, Morten Sandø, Andreas Holle, Sarah L. K. Meyer, Jeppe Törnkvist, Peter B. S. Høi-Hansen, Thomas Kjøller, Erik Jensen, Birgitte Nybo Lind, Morten Ravn, Lisbet Kallemose, Thomas Lange, Theis Køber, Lars Rasmussen, Lars Simon Eugen-Olsen, Jesper Iversen, Kasper Karmark Scand J Trauma Resusc Emerg Med Original Research BACKGROUND: Risk stratification of patients in the emergency department can be strengthened using prognostic biomarkers, but the impact on patient prognosis is unknown. The aim of the TRIAGE III trial was to investigate whether the introduction of the prognostic and nonspecific biomarker: soluble urokinase plasminogen activator receptor (suPAR) for risk stratification in the emergency department reduces mortality in acutely admitted patients. METHODS: The TRIAGE III trial was a cluster-randomized interventional trial conducted at emergency departments in the Capitol Region of Denmark. Eligible hospitals were required to have an emergency department with an intake of acute medical and surgical patients and no previous access to suPAR measurement. Three emergency departments were randomized; one withdrew shortly after the trial began. The inclusion period was from January through June of 2016 consisting of twelve cluster-periods of 3-weeks alternating between intervention and control and a subsequent follow-up of ten months. Patients were allocated to the intervention if they arrived in interventional periods, where suPAR measurement was routinely analysed at arrival. In the control periods suPAR measurement was not performed. The main outcome was all-cause mortality 10 months after arrival of the last patient in the inclusion period. Secondary outcomes included 30-day mortality. RESULTS: The trial enrolled a consecutive cohort of 16,801 acutely admitted patients; all were included in the analyses. The intervention group consisted of 6 cluster periods with 8900 patients and the control group consisted of 6 cluster periods with 7901 patients. After a median follow-up of 362 days, death occurred in 1241 patients (13.9%) in the intervention group and in 1126 patients (14.3%) in the control group. The weighted Cox model found a hazard ratio of 0.97 (95% confidence interval, 0.89 to 1.07; p = 0.57). Analysis of all subgroups and of 30-day all-cause mortality showed similar results. CONCLUSIONS: The TRIAGE III trial found no effect of introducing the nonspecific and prognostic biomarker suPAR in emergency departments on short- or long-term all-cause mortality among acutely admitted patients. Further research is required to evaluate how prognostic biomarkers can be implemented in routine clinical practice. TRIAL REGISTRATION: clinicaltrials.gov, NCT02643459. Registered 31 December 2015. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (10.1186/s13049-018-0539-5) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users. BioMed Central 2018-08-28 /pmc/articles/PMC6114851/ /pubmed/30153859 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13049-018-0539-5 Text en © The Author(s). 2018 Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.
spellingShingle Original Research
Schultz, Martin
Rasmussen, Line Jee Hartmann
Andersen, Malene H.
Stefansson, Jakob S.
Falkentoft, Alexander C.
Alstrup, Morten
Sandø, Andreas
Holle, Sarah L. K.
Meyer, Jeppe
Törnkvist, Peter B. S.
Høi-Hansen, Thomas
Kjøller, Erik
Jensen, Birgitte Nybo
Lind, Morten
Ravn, Lisbet
Kallemose, Thomas
Lange, Theis
Køber, Lars
Rasmussen, Lars Simon
Eugen-Olsen, Jesper
Iversen, Kasper Karmark
Use of the prognostic biomarker suPAR in the emergency department improves risk stratification but has no effect on mortality: a cluster-randomized clinical trial (TRIAGE III)
title Use of the prognostic biomarker suPAR in the emergency department improves risk stratification but has no effect on mortality: a cluster-randomized clinical trial (TRIAGE III)
title_full Use of the prognostic biomarker suPAR in the emergency department improves risk stratification but has no effect on mortality: a cluster-randomized clinical trial (TRIAGE III)
title_fullStr Use of the prognostic biomarker suPAR in the emergency department improves risk stratification but has no effect on mortality: a cluster-randomized clinical trial (TRIAGE III)
title_full_unstemmed Use of the prognostic biomarker suPAR in the emergency department improves risk stratification but has no effect on mortality: a cluster-randomized clinical trial (TRIAGE III)
title_short Use of the prognostic biomarker suPAR in the emergency department improves risk stratification but has no effect on mortality: a cluster-randomized clinical trial (TRIAGE III)
title_sort use of the prognostic biomarker supar in the emergency department improves risk stratification but has no effect on mortality: a cluster-randomized clinical trial (triage iii)
topic Original Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6114851/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30153859
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13049-018-0539-5
work_keys_str_mv AT schultzmartin useoftheprognosticbiomarkersuparintheemergencydepartmentimprovesriskstratificationbuthasnoeffectonmortalityaclusterrandomizedclinicaltrialtriageiii
AT rasmussenlinejeehartmann useoftheprognosticbiomarkersuparintheemergencydepartmentimprovesriskstratificationbuthasnoeffectonmortalityaclusterrandomizedclinicaltrialtriageiii
AT andersenmaleneh useoftheprognosticbiomarkersuparintheemergencydepartmentimprovesriskstratificationbuthasnoeffectonmortalityaclusterrandomizedclinicaltrialtriageiii
AT stefanssonjakobs useoftheprognosticbiomarkersuparintheemergencydepartmentimprovesriskstratificationbuthasnoeffectonmortalityaclusterrandomizedclinicaltrialtriageiii
AT falkentoftalexanderc useoftheprognosticbiomarkersuparintheemergencydepartmentimprovesriskstratificationbuthasnoeffectonmortalityaclusterrandomizedclinicaltrialtriageiii
AT alstrupmorten useoftheprognosticbiomarkersuparintheemergencydepartmentimprovesriskstratificationbuthasnoeffectonmortalityaclusterrandomizedclinicaltrialtriageiii
AT sandøandreas useoftheprognosticbiomarkersuparintheemergencydepartmentimprovesriskstratificationbuthasnoeffectonmortalityaclusterrandomizedclinicaltrialtriageiii
AT hollesarahlk useoftheprognosticbiomarkersuparintheemergencydepartmentimprovesriskstratificationbuthasnoeffectonmortalityaclusterrandomizedclinicaltrialtriageiii
AT meyerjeppe useoftheprognosticbiomarkersuparintheemergencydepartmentimprovesriskstratificationbuthasnoeffectonmortalityaclusterrandomizedclinicaltrialtriageiii
AT tornkvistpeterbs useoftheprognosticbiomarkersuparintheemergencydepartmentimprovesriskstratificationbuthasnoeffectonmortalityaclusterrandomizedclinicaltrialtriageiii
AT høihansenthomas useoftheprognosticbiomarkersuparintheemergencydepartmentimprovesriskstratificationbuthasnoeffectonmortalityaclusterrandomizedclinicaltrialtriageiii
AT kjøllererik useoftheprognosticbiomarkersuparintheemergencydepartmentimprovesriskstratificationbuthasnoeffectonmortalityaclusterrandomizedclinicaltrialtriageiii
AT jensenbirgittenybo useoftheprognosticbiomarkersuparintheemergencydepartmentimprovesriskstratificationbuthasnoeffectonmortalityaclusterrandomizedclinicaltrialtriageiii
AT lindmorten useoftheprognosticbiomarkersuparintheemergencydepartmentimprovesriskstratificationbuthasnoeffectonmortalityaclusterrandomizedclinicaltrialtriageiii
AT ravnlisbet useoftheprognosticbiomarkersuparintheemergencydepartmentimprovesriskstratificationbuthasnoeffectonmortalityaclusterrandomizedclinicaltrialtriageiii
AT kallemosethomas useoftheprognosticbiomarkersuparintheemergencydepartmentimprovesriskstratificationbuthasnoeffectonmortalityaclusterrandomizedclinicaltrialtriageiii
AT langetheis useoftheprognosticbiomarkersuparintheemergencydepartmentimprovesriskstratificationbuthasnoeffectonmortalityaclusterrandomizedclinicaltrialtriageiii
AT køberlars useoftheprognosticbiomarkersuparintheemergencydepartmentimprovesriskstratificationbuthasnoeffectonmortalityaclusterrandomizedclinicaltrialtriageiii
AT rasmussenlarssimon useoftheprognosticbiomarkersuparintheemergencydepartmentimprovesriskstratificationbuthasnoeffectonmortalityaclusterrandomizedclinicaltrialtriageiii
AT eugenolsenjesper useoftheprognosticbiomarkersuparintheemergencydepartmentimprovesriskstratificationbuthasnoeffectonmortalityaclusterrandomizedclinicaltrialtriageiii
AT iversenkasperkarmark useoftheprognosticbiomarkersuparintheemergencydepartmentimprovesriskstratificationbuthasnoeffectonmortalityaclusterrandomizedclinicaltrialtriageiii