SepsisNCT05287477
Passive Evaluation in Operational Environment of the AI Clinician Decision Support System for Sepsis Treatment
An observational study of Sepsis, run by Imperial College London at 2 sites in United Kingdom.
Trial summary
Sepsis, or systemic infection, is a common reason for ICU admission and death throughout the world. Despite advances in the way we treat this condition, it remains a significant economic and healthcare burden. A key part of the treatment of sepsis is the administration of IV fluids and blood pressure medication. Read more about this study
- Who is it for?
- Ages 18 years and older
- Conditions the study is for
- Sepsis
- How many people
- 15 participants
- Where
- 2 sitesUnited Kingdom
- Study dates
- 24 Mar 2022to 31 Aug 2024
- Phase
- Observational
- 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
Study population: * Patients: adult septic patients in intensive care. * Human Evaluators: senior registrars, ICU fellows and consultants.
Who may be able to join
- For patients:
- Adult patient > 18 years old
- Admitted to an intensive care unit
- Likely or confirmed diagnosis of sepsis as per sepsis-3 definition (as defined in the glossary)
- ICU length of stay > 24h
- For Evaluators:
- ICU doctors at the senior registrar, ICU fellow or consultant level
Who cannot join
- For patients:
- Not for full active care, e.g. not for vasopressors
- Not expected to survive more than 24h
- Elective surgical admission (these patients are regularly on antibiotics but given as a prophylaxis, with no sepsis)
- Opted-out for use of their data for research (NHS and NHS-X website)
- For both patients and evaluators:
- Declined participation No patient consent is required
Trial locations and contacts
2 sites in 1 country.
United Kingdom2 sites, 2 recruiting
- Not yet recruiting
Univeristy College London Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust
London, NW1 2PG
Novin Fard
David Brealey
- Recruiting
Imperial College Hospitals NHS Trust
London, W2 1BL
Robyn Kullar
Anthony C Gordon, FMedSci
About this study
Sepsis, or systemic infection, is a common reason for ICU admission and death throughout the world. Despite advances in the way we treat this condition, it remains a significant economic and healthcare burden. A key part of the treatment of sepsis is the administration of IV fluids and blood pressure medication. However, there is huge uncertainty around dosing of these drugs in an individual patient. A tool to personalise these medications could improve patient survival. The study team has developed a new method to automatically and continuously review and recommend the correct medication doses to doctors, which was created using artificial intelligence (AI) techniques applied to large medical databases. The researchers' previous work has shown it has the potential to improve patient survival rates. The tool will be capable of processing patient data within the electronic patient record of NHS hospitals in real-time to suggest a course of action. This tool will be evaluated and refined in simulation studies and then be tested in two NHS Trusts in "shadow mode" (results not provided to duty clinicians). This will allow comparison of actual decisions made and recommended decisions from the AI system. The second stage of this clinical evaluation will display the recommendations to clinicians to assess the acceptability of the tool and confirm technical feasibility to inform future clinical trials. The long-term expected benefits of this project are numerous: improved patient survival, reduced use of precious intensive care resources and reduction in healthcare costs.
Read the detailed description
Sepsis is life-threatening organ dysfunction due to severe infection and affects 250,000 patients annually in the UK (pre-COVID-19), of whom 48,000 die. In addition, virtually all COVID-19 intensive care unit (ICU) deaths had sepsis. It is a leading cause of death and the most expensive condition treated in hospitals. It was recognised as a top research priority by the James Lind Alliance, a partnership of patients and clinicians to prioritise the most pressing unanswered questions facing the NHS.
The cornerstone of sepsis resuscitation is the administration of intravenous fluids and/or vasopressors (drugs that squeeze the blood vessels to increase blood pressure) to maintain blood flow to prevent organ failure. However, there is huge uncertainty around the individual dosing of these drugs in an individual patient, partially due to high sepsis heterogeneity. The current guidelines provide recommendations at a population-level but fail to individualise the decisions. Wrong decisions lead to poorer outcomes and increased ICU-resource use. A tool to personalise these medications could improve patient survival.
The study team has developed a new method to automatically and continuously review and recommend the correct dose of these medications to doctors, which was created using artificial intelligence (AI) techniques applied to large medical databases. The method used is called reinforcement learning. In this framework, the study models patients with sepsis in the ICU as belonging to a large number of possible disease states, and analyses what interventions are likely to help them transition to healthier states, and eventually to survival. The researchers demonstrated in their initial publication that the value of the AI selected strategy was on average reliably higher than human clinicians. In a large validation cohort independent from the training data, mortality was lowest in patients where clinicians' actual doses matched the AI decisions: mortality rates rose, in a dose dependent manner, as the clinicians' actual decisions diverged from the AI decisions. The study team has estimated that their AI algorithm could reduce mortality by 10% (in relative terms), which represents over 1,000 lives saved annually in the UK and would scale to hundreds of thousands of lives worldwide. Now, the study team intends to start clinical testing of this AI technology in the UK.
The envisioned end-product will be a piece of software that will be accessible by clinicians (ICU doctors initially, then eventually to ICU nurses as well) at the bedside in intensive care. This software will be connected to the electronic patient record, which will be fed to the AI algorithm. In return, the AI will identify where the patient sits in the array of possible disease states, and which actions (a dose of intravenous fluids and vasopressors) are most likely to be beneficial.
First, the study team will develop this software tool, capable of processing patient data within the electronic patient record of NHS hospitals in real-time to suggest a course of action. The study will start by evaluating and refining this tool in simulation studies. The study team will then test the AI tool in two NHS Trusts in a "shadow mode" when the result is not provided to duty clinicians in charge of patient care. This will allow comparison of actual decisions made and recommended decisions from the AI system. In the second stage of the clinical evaluation, the study team will display the recommendations to clinicians to assess the acceptability of the tool to clinicians and also confirm the technical feasibility to inform future large scale clinical trials.
The long-term expected benefits of this project are numerous: improved patient survival, reduced use of precious intensive care resources and reduction in healthcare costs.
- Conditions
- Sepsis
- Keywords
- Artificial Intelligence
- Medical subject headings
- Sepsis
What is being measured
The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.
Data Availability
Data availability: what percentage of essential and optional data fields are available 24/7.
Measured: 18 months
Anonymised patients' data
Patient demographics (age in years, gender, primary diagnosis) Outcomes: organ function (hourly SOFA), ICU and hospital mortality
Measured: 18 months
Rate of intravenous fluids administered to patients
Rate of intravenous fluids (millilitres per hour) and vasopressors (noradrenaline equivalent, in micrograms per kilogram per minute) administered to patients.
Measured: 18 months
Evaluators' data (the doctors assessing the AI in the background)
The evaluator's grade and seniority (i.e.
A custom-made interface linked to a database will capture and record the following:
- What rate of intravenous fluids (millilitres per hour) and vasopressors (noradrenaline equivalent, in micrograms per kilogram per minute) they would recommend, before and after seeing the AI suggested dose.
- Agreement with the AI suggested dose on a Likert scale including the following labels: "the AI suggested dose is:" "certainly too low", "possibly too low","likely appropriate","possibly too high", "certainly too high".
After collecting this data, we will report the median difference (with interquartile range) between the AI suggested doses and the evaluator suggested doses, as well as the proportion of AI decisions in each agreement category ("certainly too low", "possibly too low","likely appropriate","possibly too high", "certainly too high").
Measured: 18 months
System Availability
System availability: delays in generating response 24/7. Number and nature of technical issues (drop-outs, freezes).
Measured: 18 months
Timeline
From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.
- First posted18 Mar 2022
- Study start24 Mar 2022
- Primary completion31 Aug 2024 (estimated)
- Study completion31 Aug 2024 (estimated)
Resources
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govThe registry entry this page is built from, with its full change history.
- Other trials for SepsisStudies of the same condition, open and under way.
- More trials run by Imperial College LondonThe sponsor's other registered studies.
- 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
- Observational
- Observational model
- Other
- Time perspective
- Prospective
- Enrolment
- 15 participants (estimated)
Sponsor and investigators
- Lead sponsor
- Imperial College London
- Sponsor type
- University, hospital or other
- Collaborators
- National Institute for Health Research, United Kingdom
- Responsible party
- Sponsor
IDs, dates and publications
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT05287477
- Sponsor's protocol ID
- 20HH6297
- Status last verified
- Oct 2023
- First submitted
- 1 Mar 2022
- Last updated
- 27 Oct 2023
- Results posted
- No
- Data monitoring committee
- No
- FDA-regulated drug
- No
- FDA-regulated device
- No
- Individual data sharing
- No
Study at a glance
From the registry record, last updated by the sponsor on 27 Oct 2023. Recruitment status is as the sponsor reported it: confirm with the study team.
- Official title
- Passive Evaluation in Operational Environment of the AI Clinician Decision Support System for Sepsis Treatment
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT05287477
- Acronym / sponsor ID
- 20HH6297
- Conditions
- Sepsis
- Keywords
- Artificial Intelligence
- Study type
- Observational
- Recruitment status
- Unknown status
- Enrolment
- 15 participants (estimated)
- Lead sponsor
- Imperial College LondonUniversity, hospital or other
- Collaborators
- National Institute for Health Research, United Kingdom
- Study start
- 24 Mar 2022 (actual)
- Primary completion
- 31 Aug 2024 (estimated)
- Study completion
- 31 Aug 2024 (estimated)
- First posted
- 18 Mar 2022 (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, or systemic infection, is a common reason for ICU admission and death throughout the world. Despite advances in the way we treat this condition, it remains a significant economic and healthcare burden. A key part of the treatment of sepsis is the administration of IV fluids and blood pressure medication. However, there is huge uncertainty around dosing of these drugs in an individual patient. A tool to personalise these medications could improve patient survival. The study team has developed a new method to automatically and continuously review and recommend the correct medication doses to doctors, which was created using artificial intelligence (AI) techniques applied to large medical databases. The researchers' previous work has shown it has the potential to improve patient survival rates. The tool will be capable of processing patient data within the electronic patient record of NHS hospitals in real-time to suggest a course of action. This tool will be evaluated and refined in simulation studies and then be tested in two NHS Trusts in "shadow mode" (results not provided to duty clinicians). This will allow comparison of actual decisions made and recommended decisions from the AI system. The second stage of this clinical evaluation will display the recommendations to clinicians to assess the acceptability of the tool and confirm technical feasibility to inform future clinical trials. The long-term expected benefits of this project are numerous: improved patient survival, reduced use of precious intensive care resources and reduction in healthcare costs.
Detailed description
Sepsis is life-threatening organ dysfunction due to severe infection and affects 250,000 patients annually in the UK (pre-COVID-19), of whom 48,000 die. In addition, virtually all COVID-19 intensive care unit (ICU) deaths had sepsis. It is a leading cause of death and the most expensive condition treated in hospitals. It was recognised as a top research priority by the James Lind Alliance, a partnership of patients and clinicians to prioritise the most pressing unanswered questions facing the NHS.
The cornerstone of sepsis resuscitation is the administration of intravenous fluids and/or vasopressors (drugs that squeeze the blood vessels to increase blood pressure) to maintain blood flow to prevent organ failure. However, there is huge uncertainty around the individual dosing of these drugs in an individual patient, partially due to high sepsis heterogeneity. The current guidelines provide recommendations at a population-level but fail to individualise the decisions. Wrong decisions lead to poorer outcomes and increased ICU-resource use. A tool to personalise these medications could improve patient survival.
The study team has developed a new method to automatically and continuously review and recommend the correct dose of these medications to doctors, which was created using artificial intelligence (AI) techniques applied to large medical databases. The method used is called reinforcement learning. In this framework, the study models patients with sepsis in the ICU as belonging to a large number of possible disease states, and analyses what interventions are likely to help them transition to healthier states, and eventually to survival. The researchers demonstrated in their initial publication that the value of the AI selected strategy was on average reliably higher than human clinicians. In a large validation cohort independent from the training data, mortality was lowest in patients where clinicians' actual doses matched the AI decisions: mortality rates rose, in a dose dependent manner, as the clinicians' actual decisions diverged from the AI decisions. The study team has estimated that their AI algorithm could reduce mortality by 10% (in relative terms), which represents over 1,000 lives saved annually in the UK and would scale to hundreds of thousands of lives worldwide. Now, the study team intends to start clinical testing of this AI technology in the UK.
The envisioned end-product will be a piece of software that will be accessible by clinicians (ICU doctors initially, then eventually to ICU nurses as well) at the bedside in intensive care. This software will be connected to the electronic patient record, which will be fed to the AI algorithm. In return, the AI will identify where the patient sits in the array of possible disease states, and which actions (a dose of intravenous fluids and vasopressors) are most likely to be beneficial.
First, the study team will develop this software tool, capable of processing patient data within the electronic patient record of NHS hospitals in real-time to suggest a course of action. The study will start by evaluating and refining this tool in simulation studies. The study team will then test the AI tool in two NHS Trusts in a "shadow mode" when the result is not provided to duty clinicians in charge of patient care. This will allow comparison of actual decisions made and recommended decisions from the AI system. In the second stage of the clinical evaluation, the study team will display the recommendations to clinicians to assess the acceptability of the tool to clinicians and also confirm the technical feasibility to inform future large scale clinical trials.
The long-term expected benefits of this project are numerous: improved patient survival, reduced use of precious intensive care resources and reduction in healthcare costs.
Study design
- Observational model
- Other
- Time perspective
- Prospective
Who may qualify
- Ages
- 18 years and older
- Sex
- All
- Healthy volunteers
- Not accepted
- Age groups
- Adult, Older adult
- Study population
- * Patients: adult septic patients in intensive care. * Human Evaluators: senior registrars, ICU fellows and consultants.
Key inclusion criteria (7 listed)
- Adult patient > 18 years old
- Admitted to an intensive care unit
- Likely or confirmed diagnosis of sepsis as per sepsis-3 definition (as defined in the glossary)
- ICU length of stay > 24h
- ICU doctors at the senior registrar, ICU fellow or consultant level
Key exclusion criteria (7 listed)
- Not for full active care, e.g. not for vasopressors
- Not expected to survive more than 24h
- Elective surgical admission (these patients are regularly on antibiotics but given as a prophylaxis, with no sepsis)
- Opted-out for use of their data for research (NHS and NHS-X website)
- Declined participation No patient consent is required
Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening; this overview does not establish that a patient qualifies. Full inclusion and exclusion criteria.
Primary outcome
Data Availability
Time frame: 18 months
Data availability: what percentage of essential and optional data fields are available 24/7.
Anonymised patients' data
Time frame: 18 months
Patient demographics (age in years, gender, primary diagnosis) Outcomes: organ function (hourly SOFA), ICU and hospital mortality
Rate of intravenous fluids administered to patients
Time frame: 18 months
Rate of intravenous fluids (millilitres per hour) and vasopressors (noradrenaline equivalent, in micrograms per kilogram per minute) administered to patients.
Evaluators' data (the doctors assessing the AI in the background)
Time frame: 18 months
The evaluator's grade and seniority (i.e. A custom-made interface linked to a database will capture and record the following: * What rate of intravenous fluids (millilitres per hour) and vasopressors (noradrenaline equivalent, in micrograms per kilogram per minute) they would recommend, before and after seeing the AI suggested dose. * Agreement with the AI suggested dose on a Likert scale including the following labels: "the AI suggested dose is:" "certainly too low", "possibly too low","likely appropriate","possibly too high", "certainly too high". After collecting this data, we will report the median difference (with interquartile range) between the AI suggested doses and the evaluator suggested doses, as well as the proportion of AI decisions in each agreement category ("certainly too low", "possibly too low","likely appropriate","possibly too high", "certainly too high").
System Availability
Time frame: 18 months
System availability: delays in generating response 24/7. Number and nature of technical issues (drop-outs, freezes).
Results and safety
Results are not available in the source record.
Research links
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govLast updated by the sponsor 27 Oct 2023.
- Individual participant dataSharing planned: No
Related trials for Sepsis
Not yet recruitingPhase 2/3
A Pivotal Safety and Immunogenicity GBS-NN/NN2 Vaccine Maternal Immunisation Trial
Streptococcus Agalactiae Infection, Neonatal Sepsis
Active, not recruiting
CT for Personalized Mechanical Ventilation
Ventilator-Induced Lung Injury, Sepsis Syndrome
RecruitingPhase 4
A Study to Compare the Efficacy and Safety of Extended and Intermittent Infusion of Beta-lactams in Critically Ill Paediatric Patients
Infection, Sepsis
Not yet recruiting
Double Plasma Separation and Adsorption in Acute-on-Chronic Liver Failure (DPMAS-ACLF Trial)
Acute-on-Chronic Liver Failure (ACLF)
Active, not recruitingPhase 4
Thymosin Alpha 1 and IgM Levels in Sepsis
Sepsis, Septic Shock
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.
2 sites in 1 country: see every site and its status.
Questions about this trial
What is this clinical trial studying?
An observational study of Sepsis, run by Imperial College London at 2 sites in United Kingdom.
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 7 inclusion and 7 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: status not confirmed, as of the sponsor's last update on 27 Oct 2023. Status can change between updates, so confirm with the study contact before making plans.
Where is the study taking place?
The record lists 2 sites in United Kingdom. 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?
Results are not available in the source record.
How can a doctor refer a patient or contact the research team?
Contact Anthony C Gordon (02033126328, anthony.gordon@imperial.ac.uk), or a site near the patient. AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals.
What does the primary outcome measure?
Data Availability (time frame: 18 months). The study lists 5 primary outcomes in all. It is what the study was designed to measure, not a finding.
Where can I read the original study information?
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 27 Oct 2023.