SepsisDigiSepNCT04571801
Optimization of Sepsis Therapy Based on Patient-specific Digital Precision Diagnostics
A study testing Standard diagnostics and Next Generation Sequencing (NGS) in people with Sepsis and Septic Shock, run by University Hospital, Essen at 22 sites in Germany.
Trial summary
Sepsis is triggered by an infection and represents one of the greatest challenges of modern intensive care medicine. With regard to a targeted antimicrobial treatment strategy, the earliest possible pathogen detection is of crucial importance. Read more about this study
- Who is it for?
- Ages 18 years and older
- Conditions the study is for
- Sepsis, Septic Shock
- What is being tested?
- Standard diagnostics and Next Generation Sequencing (NGS)
- Could I receive a placebo?
- No, everyone receives an active treatment
- How many people
- 410 participants
- Where
- 22 sitesGermany
- Study dates
- 16 Mar 2022to 23 Apr 2024
- Phase
- Interventional
- Are there results?
- None posted in the registry
Key requirements
Who can take part, as listed by the sponsor. Only the study team can confirm whether you are eligible, so take this list to your doctor.
- Ages 18 years and older
- All sexes
- No healthy volunteers
- Adult, Older adult
Who may be able to join
- All patients who develop sepsis or septic shock within < 24 h in accordance with the new sepsis definition (Sepsis-3) in the above-mentioned participating centers and consent to participation in the study will be included.
- General inclusion criteria:
- Written consent by the study participant or a legally appointed representative
- Age >18 years
- Sepsis:
- Life-threatening organ dysfunction due to a dysregulated immune response on the basis of a suspected or proven infection
Show all 11Show fewer
- Detection of organ dysfunction indicated by SOFA score of ≥ 2 points Alternative:
- Change of the quick (q) SOFA score of 2 points as an indication of a sepsis
- Or septic shock:
- Persistent hypotension despite adequate volume substitution, which necessitates the use of vasopressors, to maintain an arterial medium pressure of > 65 mmHg
- Serum lactate > 2 mmol/l (18 mg/dl)
Who cannot join
- Age < 18 years
- Refusal to participate in the study
- Probable discharge of the patient from the intensive care unit within the first 72 h of initial study inclusion
- Palliative therapy approach
- Death of the patient is already foreseeable or inevitable at trial inclusion
- Patients who have already been included in the study but require re-admission to the intensive care unit cannot be included a second
Trial locations and contacts
22 sites in 1 country.
22 sites in 1 country
Germany22 sites
University Hospital Aachen
Aachen, North Rhine-Westphalia
University Hospital Charité
Berlin, State of Berlin
Klinik Evangelisches Krankenhaus Bethel gGmbH Bielefeld
Bielefeld, North Rhine-Westphalia
University Hospital Bonn
Bonn, North Rhine-Westphalia
University Hospital Köln
Cologne, North Rhine-Westphalia
University Hospital Düsseldorf
Düsseldorf, North Rhine-Westphalia
University Hospital Essen
Essen, North Rhine-Westphalia
University Hospital Frankfurt
Frankfurt am Main, Hesse
University Hospital Göttingen
Göttingen, Lower Saxony
University Hospital Hannover (MHH)
Hanover, Lower Saxony
University Hospital Heidelberg
Heidelberg, Baden-Wurttemberg
Heidenheim Hospital
Heidenheim, Baden-Wurttemberg
Konstanz Hospital
Konstanz, Baden-Wurttemberg
University Hospital Leipzig
Leipzig, Saxony
Klinik Evangelisches Krankenhaus Luckau gGmbH
Luckau, Brandenburg
University Hospital TU München
München, Bavaria
University Hospital Regensburg
Regensburg, Bavaria
University Hospital Rostock
Rostock, Mecklenburg-Vorpommern
University Hospital Tübingen
Tübingen, Baden-Wurttemberg
University Hospital Ulm
Ulm, Baden-Wurttemberg
Helios Dr. Horst Schmidt Hospital
Wiesbaden, Hesse
University Hospital Würzburg
Würzburg, Bavaria
About this study
Sepsis is triggered by an infection and represents one of the greatest challenges of modern intensive care medicine. With regard to a targeted antimicrobial treatment strategy, the earliest possible pathogen detection is of crucial importance. Until now, culture-based detection methods represent the diagnostic gold standard, although they are characterized by numerous limitations. Culture-independent molecular diagnostic procedures may represent a promising alternative. In particular, the concept of plasmatic detection of circulating, free DNA employing next-generation sequencing (NGS) has shown to be suitable for the detection of disease-causing pathogens in patients with bloodstream infections.
The DigiSep-Trial is a randomized, controlled, interventional, multicenter trial to characterize the effect of the combination of NGS-based digital precision diagnostics, standard-of-care microbiological analyses and optional expert exchanges compared to solely standard-of-care microbiological analyses in the clinical picture of sepsis / septic shock. The study examines in 410 patients (n = 205 per arm) with sepsis / septic shock whether the so-called DOOR-RADAR (Desirability of Outcome Ranking / Response Adjusted for Duration of Antibiotic Risk) score (representing a combined endpoint including the criteria (1) inpatient admission time, (2) consumption of antibiotics, (3) mortality and (4) acute renal failure (ARF)) can be significantly improved, by application of an additional NGS-based diagnostic concept. We also aim to investigate whether the new diagnostic procedure is cost-effective. It is postulated that the inpatient admission time, mortality rate, incidence of ARF, the duration of antimicrobial therapy as well as the costs of complications and outpatient aftercare can be reduced. Moreover, a significant improvement in the quality of life (QoL) of the affected patients can be expected.
Extensive preparatory work suggests that NGS-based diagnostics have higher specificity and sensitivity compared to standard-of-care microbiological analyses for detecting bloodstream infections. This preliminary work for the DigiSep-Trial with the help of an interventional study design provides the optimal basis to establish this new concept as part of the national standard based on the best possible evidence.
Read the detailed description
Sepsis is a disease which is triggered by an infection and represents one of the greatest challenges of modern intensive care medicine. With regard to targeted anti-microbial therapy, the earliest possible pathogen detection is of crucial importance. Until now, culture-based detection methods represent the gold standard for diagnosis, although numerous limitations characterize these. In this context, culture-independent molecular biological processes are an alternative. In particular, the concept of serum detection of circulating, free DNA employing next-generation sequencing (NGS) seems to represent a promising diagnostic procedure in patients with bloodstream infections. The applicant's extensive preparatory work suggests that NGS-based diagnostics using the SIQ score have higher specificity and sensitivity compared to traditional culture-based methods for detecting bloodstream infections. This preliminary work for the DigiSep trial with the help of interventional study design provides the optimal basis to establish this new concept as part of the national standard based on the best possible evidence. The DigiSep trial is intended to characterize the effect of the combination of digital precision diagnostics, expert exchange and culture-based standard diagnostics compared to a purely culture-based conventional diagnosis in the clinical picture of sepsis / septic shock. The study examines in 410 patients (n = 205 per arm) with sepsis / septic shock whether the so-called DOOR-RADAR score (Desirability of Outcome Ranking / Response Adjusted for Duration of Antibiotic Risk Score) can be significantly improved, by application of the NGS. We also aim to also study whether the new procedure is cost-effective. It is postulated that the inpatient admission time, mortality rate, incidence of acute renal failure (ARF), the duration of anti-microbial therapy as well as the costs of complications and outpatient aftercare can be reduced. Also, a significant improvement in the quality of life of the affected patients can be expected.
As part of the study, the essential data is collected once at the time of sepsis (= onset). The culture-based diagnostics include the guideline-oriented collection of 2 blood culture sets (2 x aerobic / 2 x anaerobic) to the onset and three days later. At the same time, serum samples are obtained for NGS-based pathogen diagnostics. Additional sampling for NGS-based diagnostics can be made up to day 14 after onset or whenever the attending physician establishes a clinical indication for the collection of further blood cultures. The aforementioned cultures vs NGS-based pathogen diagnostics are also accompanied by extended immunological monitoring from blood plasma samples as well as an NGS-based transcriptome analysis. The associated sampling takes place at the time of onset, 3, 7 and 14 days after the beginning of sepsis. Routine microbiological findings from other biological samples (e.g. surgical swabs, drainage secretions, tracheal secretions, tissue samples) are included in the evaluation if these were collected three days before or after the extraction of serum samples for NGS-based diagnostics. The clinical data collection is also carried out at the time of sepsis (= onset), 3, 7 and 14 days later, analogous to the above-mentioned sample collection. The final outcome evaluation takes place 28 days (= 28 d) after the onset of sepsis. The study-related burden on the individual study patient includes a total of 17 ml of whole blood for NGS-based diagnostics, the four samples of 7.5 ml of whole blood for immunological monitoring and the four samples of 2.7 ml of whole blood for transcriptome analysis. The minimum total volume, therefore, amounts to the collection of approximately 75 ml of whole blood within the first 14 days after the onset of sepsis. The sampling takes place with the collection of the blood cultures or within the framework of the daily routine blood samples so that no further venous punctures are required here. Infection parameters such as procalcitonin (PCT) are carried out within the framework of daily regular blood collection and therefore, do not require any additional vascular punctures. The same principle applies to the collection of blood cultures which are routinely obtained as part of standard diagnostics in patients with suspected or proven sepsis. The required blood samples of two 40 ml of whole blood (each two sets of 2 x aerobic / 2 x anaerobic = 4 x 10 ml = 40 ml) therefore do not represent any additional burden due to the study. A further additional burden for the patient concerning invasive procedures or examinations is not expected in the study.
- Conditions
- Sepsis, Septic Shock
- Being tested
- Standard diagnostics, Next Generation Sequencing (NGS)
- Keywords
- Sepsis, Bacteremia, Blood culture, Next generation sequencing, Digital precision diagnostics, Desirability of outcome ranking / response adjusted for duration of antibiotic risk (DOOR/RADAR) score
- Medical subject headings
- Sepsis, Shock, Septic, Bacteremia
What participants receive
What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.
Standard diagnosticsDiagnostic test
Standard diagnostics (Microbial diagnostics by means of standard culture methods + optional consultation of experts in the field of infectious diseases) within the first 72 h after diagnosis of sepsis / septic shock
Next Generation Sequencing (NGS)Diagnostic test
Standard diagnostics + NGS (Microbial diagnostics using standard culture methods + Next Generation Sequencing + optional consultation of experts in the field of infectious diseases) within the first 72 h after diagnosis of sepsis / septic shock
| Study group | Role | What they receive |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | Active comparator | Standard diagnostics Receives: Diagnostic Test: Standard diagnostics |
| 2 | Experimental | Standard diagnostics + NGS Receives: Diagnostic Test: Next Generation Sequencing (NGS) |
What is being measured
The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.
Desirability of Outcome Ranking / Response Adjusted for Duration of Antibiotic Risk-Score
DOOR/RADAR-score [points], (min. 1, max. 5), a lower score indicates a better outcome
Measured: 28 days
Secondary outcomes (12)
Disease severity
Long term mortality [%]
Measured: at 90 and 180 days
Disease severity
Hospital length of stay [days]
Measured: at 28, 90, and 180 days
Degree of organ dysfunction/-failure
Duration of mechanical ventilation [days]
Measured: at 28, 90, and 180 days
Degree of organ dysfunction/-failure
Length of time until shock resolution [hours]
Measured: during 28 days
Degree of organ dysfunction/-failure
Ongoing need for renal replacement therapy [%]
Measured: at 28, 90, and 180 days
Microbiological outcome
Cumulative need for anti-infective drugs [days]
Measured: at 28, 90, and 180 days
Microbiological outcome
Beginning of a targeted anti-infective treatment regimen [days]
Measured: during 28 days
Health economic outcome
Utilization of healthcare ressources (outpatient and inpatient) [Euro]
Measured: at 28, 90, and 180 days
Health economic outcome
Policyholder costs (outpatient and inpatient) [Euro]
Measured: at 28, 90, and 180 days
Economic outcome
Disease-related absence from work [days]
Measured: at 28, 90, and 180 days
Quality-of-life (QoL) based on VR-36 questionnaire
VR-36 questionnaire [points] including 2 summary components, 8 scales, 36 items, a higher score indicates a higher Quality-of-Life (QoL)
Measured: 90 and 180 days
Quality-of-life (QoL) based on EQ-5D-5L questionnaire
EQ-5D-5L questionnaire [points] including 10 items, a higher score indicates a higher Quality-of-Life (QoL)
Measured: at 0, 90 and 180 days
Timeline
From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.
- First posted1 Oct 2020
- Study start16 Mar 2022
- Primary completion28 Mar 2024
- Study completion23 Apr 2024
Resources
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govThe registry entry this page is built from, with its full change history.
- Publications (2)Papers the sponsor has linked to this study.
- Other trials for SepsisStudies of the same condition, open and under way.
- What the trial phases meanHow a treatment moves from first tests in people to approval.
More details
For doctors and researchers: how the study is designed, who runs it, and its registry IDs.
Study design
- Study type
- Interventional
- Phase
- Phase N/A
- Primary purpose
- Diagnosis
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Model description
- Arm 1: Standard diagnostics (Microbial diagnostics by means of standard culture methods + optional consultation of experts in the field of infectious diseases) within the first 72 h after diagnosis Arm 2: Standard diagnostics + NGS (Microbial diagnostics using standard culture methods + Next Generation Sequencing + optional consultation of experts in the field of infectious diseases) within the first 72 h after diagnosis
- Masking
- None (open label)
- Enrolment
- 410 participants (actual)
Sponsor and investigators
- Lead sponsor
- University Hospital, Essen
- Sponsor type
- University, hospital or other
- Collaborators
- Noscendo GmbH, Germany, Health Economics and Health Care Management, Bielefeld University, Heidelberg University, Heinrich-Heine University, Duesseldorf, Jena University Hospital, University Hospital Heidelberg, AOK Rheinland/Hamburg, Barmer Health Insurance, Germany, Techniker Health Insurance, Germany
- Responsible party
- Sponsor
- Investigators
- Thorsten Brenner, MD, Principal investigator, Department of Anesthesiology, University Hospital Essen
IDs, dates and publications
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT04571801
- Sponsor's protocol ID
- DigiSep 01
- Acronym
- DigiSep
- Status last verified
- Aug 2025
- First submitted
- 21 Sep 2020
- Last updated
- 24 Aug 2025
- Results posted
- No
- Data monitoring committee
- Yes
- FDA-regulated drug
- No
- FDA-regulated device
- No
- Individual data sharing
- Yes: Researchers with access to data are limited to the project partners involved. Researchers will receive pseudonymized data sets for data evaluations. A prerequisite for the transfer of the data to the project partners is the written consent of the patients.
Publications
Brenner T, Skarabis A, Schaller SJ, von Groote T, Putensen C, Gunther U, Sauer M, Decker SO, Dusse F, Weiss M, Suchodolski K, Simon TP, Rosenberger P, Moerer O, Unterberg M, Schewe JC, Bracht H, Hutzl S, Feisst M, Marschall U, Brandenburg P, Stevens P, Schmidt J, Pletz MW, Berger MM; German Society of Anaesthesiology and Intensive Care (GSAIC) Trials Group. Effects of a clinical metagenomics intervention on clinical outcomes, healthcare costs, and health-related quality of life in patients with sepsis or septic shock: results of the randomized-controlled DigiSep trial. Intensive Care Med. 2026 Aug;52(8):1635-1649. doi: 10.1007/s00134-026-08521-3. Epub 2026 Jun 30.
PubMed 42377463Brenner T, Skarabis A, Stevens P, Axnick J, Haug P, Grumaz S, Bruckner T, Luntz S, Witzke O, Pletz MW, Ruprecht TM, Marschall U, Altin S, Greiner W, Berger MM; TIFOnet Critical Care Trials Group. Optimization of sepsis therapy based on patient-specific digital precision diagnostics using next generation sequencing (DigiSep-Trial)-study protocol for a randomized, controlled, interventional, open-label, multicenter trial. Trials. 2021 Oct 18;22(1):714. doi: 10.1186/s13063-021-05667-x.
PubMed 34663439
Study at a glance
From the registry record, last updated by the sponsor on 24 Aug 2025. Recruitment status is as the sponsor reported it: confirm with the study team.
- Official title
- Optimization of Sepsis Therapy Based on Patient-specific Digital Precision Diagnostics
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT04571801
- Acronym / sponsor ID
- DigiSep / DigiSep 01
- Conditions
- Sepsis, Septic Shock
- Keywords
- Sepsis, Bacteremia, Blood culture, Next generation sequencing, Digital precision diagnostics, Desirability of outcome ranking / response adjusted for duration of antibiotic risk (DOOR/RADAR) score
- Study type
- Interventional
- Recruitment status
- Completed
- Enrolment
- 410 participants (actual)
- Lead sponsor
- University Hospital, EssenUniversity, hospital or other
- Collaborators
- Noscendo GmbH, Germany, Health Economics and Health Care Management, Bielefeld University, Heidelberg University, Heinrich-Heine University, Duesseldorf, Jena University Hospital, University Hospital Heidelberg, AOK Rheinland/Hamburg, Barmer Health Insurance, Germany, Techniker Health Insurance, Germany
- Study start
- 16 Mar 2022 (actual)
- Primary completion
- 28 Mar 2024 (actual)
- Study completion
- 23 Apr 2024 (actual)
- First posted
- 1 Oct 2020 (actual)
- Results
- Not posted in the source record
Clinical summary
The research question as the sponsor registered it. This describes what the study plans to test, not what it found.
Sepsis is triggered by an infection and represents one of the greatest challenges of modern intensive care medicine. With regard to a targeted antimicrobial treatment strategy, the earliest possible pathogen detection is of crucial importance. Until now, culture-based detection methods represent the diagnostic gold standard, although they are characterized by numerous limitations. Culture-independent molecular diagnostic procedures may represent a promising alternative. In particular, the concept of plasmatic detection of circulating, free DNA employing next-generation sequencing (NGS) has shown to be suitable for the detection of disease-causing pathogens in patients with bloodstream infections.
The DigiSep-Trial is a randomized, controlled, interventional, multicenter trial to characterize the effect of the combination of NGS-based digital precision diagnostics, standard-of-care microbiological analyses and optional expert exchanges compared to solely standard-of-care microbiological analyses in the clinical picture of sepsis / septic shock. The study examines in 410 patients (n = 205 per arm) with sepsis / septic shock whether the so-called DOOR-RADAR (Desirability of Outcome Ranking / Response Adjusted for Duration of Antibiotic Risk) score (representing a combined endpoint including the criteria (1) inpatient admission time, (2) consumption of antibiotics, (3) mortality and (4) acute renal failure (ARF)) can be significantly improved, by application of an additional NGS-based diagnostic concept. We also aim to investigate whether the new diagnostic procedure is cost-effective. It is postulated that the inpatient admission time, mortality rate, incidence of ARF, the duration of antimicrobial therapy as well as the costs of complications and outpatient aftercare can be reduced. Moreover, a significant improvement in the quality of life (QoL) of the affected patients can be expected.
Extensive preparatory work suggests that NGS-based diagnostics have higher specificity and sensitivity compared to standard-of-care microbiological analyses for detecting bloodstream infections. This preliminary work for the DigiSep-Trial with the help of an interventional study design provides the optimal basis to establish this new concept as part of the national standard based on the best possible evidence.
Detailed description
Sepsis is a disease which is triggered by an infection and represents one of the greatest challenges of modern intensive care medicine. With regard to targeted anti-microbial therapy, the earliest possible pathogen detection is of crucial importance. Until now, culture-based detection methods represent the gold standard for diagnosis, although numerous limitations characterize these. In this context, culture-independent molecular biological processes are an alternative. In particular, the concept of serum detection of circulating, free DNA employing next-generation sequencing (NGS) seems to represent a promising diagnostic procedure in patients with bloodstream infections. The applicant's extensive preparatory work suggests that NGS-based diagnostics using the SIQ score have higher specificity and sensitivity compared to traditional culture-based methods for detecting bloodstream infections. This preliminary work for the DigiSep trial with the help of interventional study design provides the optimal basis to establish this new concept as part of the national standard based on the best possible evidence. The DigiSep trial is intended to characterize the effect of the combination of digital precision diagnostics, expert exchange and culture-based standard diagnostics compared to a purely culture-based conventional diagnosis in the clinical picture of sepsis / septic shock. The study examines in 410 patients (n = 205 per arm) with sepsis / septic shock whether the so-called DOOR-RADAR score (Desirability of Outcome Ranking / Response Adjusted for Duration of Antibiotic Risk Score) can be significantly improved, by application of the NGS. We also aim to also study whether the new procedure is cost-effective. It is postulated that the inpatient admission time, mortality rate, incidence of acute renal failure (ARF), the duration of anti-microbial therapy as well as the costs of complications and outpatient aftercare can be reduced. Also, a significant improvement in the quality of life of the affected patients can be expected.
As part of the study, the essential data is collected once at the time of sepsis (= onset). The culture-based diagnostics include the guideline-oriented collection of 2 blood culture sets (2 x aerobic / 2 x anaerobic) to the onset and three days later. At the same time, serum samples are obtained for NGS-based pathogen diagnostics. Additional sampling for NGS-based diagnostics can be made up to day 14 after onset or whenever the attending physician establishes a clinical indication for the collection of further blood cultures. The aforementioned cultures vs NGS-based pathogen diagnostics are also accompanied by extended immunological monitoring from blood plasma samples as well as an NGS-based transcriptome analysis. The associated sampling takes place at the time of onset, 3, 7 and 14 days after the beginning of sepsis. Routine microbiological findings from other biological samples (e.g. surgical swabs, drainage secretions, tracheal secretions, tissue samples) are included in the evaluation if these were collected three days before or after the extraction of serum samples for NGS-based diagnostics. The clinical data collection is also carried out at the time of sepsis (= onset), 3, 7 and 14 days later, analogous to the above-mentioned sample collection. The final outcome evaluation takes place 28 days (= 28 d) after the onset of sepsis. The study-related burden on the individual study patient includes a total of 17 ml of whole blood for NGS-based diagnostics, the four samples of 7.5 ml of whole blood for immunological monitoring and the four samples of 2.7 ml of whole blood for transcriptome analysis. The minimum total volume, therefore, amounts to the collection of approximately 75 ml of whole blood within the first 14 days after the onset of sepsis. The sampling takes place with the collection of the blood cultures or within the framework of the daily routine blood samples so that no further venous punctures are required here. Infection parameters such as procalcitonin (PCT) are carried out within the framework of daily regular blood collection and therefore, do not require any additional vascular punctures. The same principle applies to the collection of blood cultures which are routinely obtained as part of standard diagnostics in patients with suspected or proven sepsis. The required blood samples of two 40 ml of whole blood (each two sets of 2 x aerobic / 2 x anaerobic = 4 x 10 ml = 40 ml) therefore do not represent any additional burden due to the study. A further additional burden for the patient concerning invasive procedures or examinations is not expected in the study.
Study design
- Primary purpose
- Diagnosis
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Masking
- None (open label)
- Number of arms
- 2
- Model description
- Arm 1: Standard diagnostics (Microbial diagnostics by means of standard culture methods + optional consultation of experts in the field of infectious diseases) within the first 72 h after diagnosis Arm 2: Standard diagnostics + NGS (Microbial diagnostics using standard culture methods + Next Generation Sequencing + optional consultation of experts in the field of infectious diseases) within the first 72 h after diagnosis
| Arm | Type | Receives |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | Active comparator | Diagnostic Test: Standard diagnosticsStandard diagnostics |
| 2 | Experimental | Diagnostic Test: Next Generation Sequencing (NGS)Standard diagnostics + NGS |
Who may qualify
- Ages
- 18 years and older
- Sex
- All
- Healthy volunteers
- Not accepted
- Age groups
- Adult, Older adult
Key inclusion criteria (11 listed)
- All patients who develop sepsis or septic shock within < 24 h in accordance with the new sepsis definition (Sepsis-3) in the above-mentioned participating centers and consent to participation in the study will be included.
- Written consent by the study participant or a legally appointed representative
- Age >18 years
- Life-threatening organ dysfunction due to a dysregulated immune response on the basis of a suspected or proven infection
- Detection of organ dysfunction indicated by SOFA score of ≥ 2 points Alternative:
Key exclusion criteria (6 listed)
- Age < 18 years
- Refusal to participate in the study
- Probable discharge of the patient from the intensive care unit within the first 72 h of initial study inclusion
- Palliative therapy approach
- Death of the patient is already foreseeable or inevitable at trial inclusion
Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening; this overview does not establish that a patient qualifies. Full inclusion and exclusion criteria.
Interventions
| Intervention | Type | Arms |
|---|---|---|
| Standard diagnosticsStandard diagnostics (Microbial diagnostics by means of standard culture methods + optional consultation of experts in the field of infectious diseases) within the first 72 h after diagnosis of sepsis / septic shock | Diagnostic test | 1 |
| Next Generation Sequencing (NGS)Standard diagnostics + NGS (Microbial diagnostics using standard culture methods + Next Generation Sequencing + optional consultation of experts in the field of infectious diseases) within the first 72 h after diagnosis of sepsis / septic shock | Diagnostic test | 2 |
Primary outcome
Desirability of Outcome Ranking / Response Adjusted for Duration of Antibiotic Risk-Score
Time frame: 28 days
DOOR/RADAR-score [points], (min. 1, max. 5), a lower score indicates a better outcome
12 secondary outcomes
Disease severity
Time frame: at 90 and 180 days
Disease severity
Time frame: at 28, 90, and 180 days
Degree of organ dysfunction/-failure
Time frame: at 28, 90, and 180 days
Degree of organ dysfunction/-failure
Time frame: during 28 days
Degree of organ dysfunction/-failure
Time frame: at 28, 90, and 180 days
Microbiological outcome
Time frame: at 28, 90, and 180 days
Microbiological outcome
Time frame: during 28 days
Health economic outcome
Time frame: at 28, 90, and 180 days
Health economic outcome
Time frame: at 28, 90, and 180 days
Economic outcome
Time frame: at 28, 90, and 180 days
Quality-of-life (QoL) based on VR-36 questionnaire
Time frame: 90 and 180 days
Quality-of-life (QoL) based on EQ-5D-5L questionnaire
Time frame: at 0, 90 and 180 days
Results and safety
The study is completed, but results are not available in the source record. That does not mean the treatment did or did not work.
Research links
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govLast updated by the sponsor 24 Aug 2025.
- Derived from this study: PubMed 42377463Brenner T, Skarabis A, Schaller SJ, von Groote T, Putensen C, Gunther U, Sauer M, Decker SO, Dusse F, Weiss M, Suchodolski K, Simon TP, Rosenberger P, Moerer O, Unterberg M, Schewe JC, Bracht H, Hutzl S, Feisst M, Marschall U, Brandenburg P, Stevens P, Schmidt J, Pletz MW, Berger MM; German Society of Anaesthesiology and Intensive Care (GSAIC) Trials Group. Effects of a clinical metagenomics intervention on clinical outcomes, healthcare costs, and health-related quality of life in patients with sepsis or septic shock: results of the randomized-controlled DigiSep trial. Intensive Care Med. 2026 Aug;52(8):1635-1649. doi: 10.1007/s00134-026-08521-3. Epub 2026 Jun 30.
- Derived from this study: PubMed 34663439Brenner T, Skarabis A, Stevens P, Axnick J, Haug P, Grumaz S, Bruckner T, Luntz S, Witzke O, Pletz MW, Ruprecht TM, Marschall U, Altin S, Greiner W, Berger MM; TIFOnet Critical Care Trials Group. Optimization of sepsis therapy based on patient-specific digital precision diagnostics using next generation sequencing (DigiSep-Trial)-study protocol for a randomized, controlled, interventional, open-label, multicenter trial. Trials. 2021 Oct 18;22(1):714. doi: 10.1186/s13063-021-05667-x.
- Individual participant dataSharing planned: Yes. Researchers with access to data are limited to the project partners involved. Researchers will receive pseudonymized data sets for data evaluations. A prerequisite for the transfer of the data to the project partners is the written consent of the patients.
Related trials for Sepsis
Not yet recruitingObservational study
Serum GDF-15 and LGALS3BP as Prognostic Biomarkers in Sepsis
Sepsis, Septic Shock
RecruitingPhase 3
A Trial of Adjunctive Fludrocortisone (50mcg, 100mcg or Placebo) in Critically Ill Patients With Septic Shock Receiving Hydrocortisone, Evaluating Survival and Functional Recovery and the Influence of Transcriptomic Response
Septic Shock
RecruitingObservational study
Middle East Study of Infections in Patients With Hematological Malignancies
Hematological Malignancy, Hematopoetic Stem Cell Transplantation
RecruitingObservational study
Early Detection and Kinetics of Sepsis-Induced Coagulopathy in Severe Burn Patients
Peer Bullying Intervention, Vodcast
Not yet recruitingObservational study
Comparative Study of the Genomic Characteristics of Uropathogenic Escherichia Coli According to the Severity of Community-Acquired Urinary Tract Infections in Guadeloupe (COLIGENURI)
Urinary Tract Infections
Referral and contact
AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals. Contact the study team or a site listed below; they decide who can take part. This study is not recruiting at the moment.
Thorsten Brenner, MD principal investigator
Department of Anesthesiology, University Hospital Essen
22 sites in 1 country: see every site and its status.
Questions about this trial
What is this clinical trial studying?
A study testing Standard diagnostics and Next Generation Sequencing (NGS) in people with Sepsis and Septic Shock, run by University Hospital, Essen at 22 sites in Germany.
The full registered description is in the About this study section and the official record.
Who may be eligible to take part?
The sponsor lists 11 inclusion and 6 exclusion criteria. Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening, so read the full criteria and contact a listed site.
Is this clinical trial currently recruiting?
The record says: finished, as of the sponsor's last update on 24 Aug 2025. Status can change between updates, so confirm with the study contact before making plans.
Where is the study taking place?
The record lists 22 sites in Germany. Whether a site is taking part right now should be confirmed with that site. See every site.
What are the possible benefits and risks?
They depend on the study and the treatment, and no study can promise a benefit. The study team explains the known risks during informed consent, before anyone joins; the record itself does not list them.
Are results available for this study?
The study is completed, but results are not available in the source record. That does not mean the treatment did or did not work.
How can a doctor refer a patient or contact the research team?
The record lists no contact. The official record names the sponsor, who can be asked directly. AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals.
What does the primary outcome measure?
Desirability of Outcome Ranking / Response Adjusted for Duration of Antibiotic Risk-Score (time frame: 28 days). It is what the study was designed to measure, not a finding.
Where can I read the original study information?
On the ClinicalTrials.gov record for NCT04571801, which also lists 2 linked publications.
Does a listing mean the treatment is approved or proven to work?
No. A listing means the study is registered. It does not show that the treatment is safe, works, or is approved by a regulator.
How often is this information updated?
AzTrials copies changed records from ClinicalTrials.gov every night and reloads the whole registry every week. The sponsor last updated this record on 24 Aug 2025.