Evidence Hub

Community-acquired pneumonia subgroups and differential response to corticosteroids: a secondary analysis of controlled studies

E. Wittermans, P. A. van der Zee, H. Qi, E. V. D. van de Garde, C. Blum, M. Christ-Crain, D. Gommers, J. Grutters et al.

ERJ Open Research, 2021

727 participants · 9 citations

Abstract

Background Latent class analysis (LCA) has identified subgroups with meaningful treatment implications in acute respiratory distress syndrome. We performed a secondary analysis of three studies to assess whether LCA can identify clinically distinct subgroups in community-acquired pneumonia (CAP) and whether the treatment effect of adjunctive corticosteroids differs between subgroups. Methods LCA was performed on baseline clinical and biomarker data from the Ovidius trial (n=304) and the Steroids in Pneumonia (STEP) trial (n=727), both randomised controlled trials investigating adjunctive corticosteroid treatment in CAP, and the observational TripleP cohort (n=201). Analyses were conducted independently in two cohorts (Ovidius–TripleP combined and the STEP trial). In both cohorts, differences in clinical outcomes and response to adjunctive corticosteroid treatment were examined between subgroups identified through LCA. Results A two-class model fitted both cohorts best. Class 2 patients had more signs of systemic inflammation compared to class 1. In both cohorts, length of stay was longer and in-hospital mortality rate was higher in class 2. In the Ovidius trial, corticosteroids reduced the median length of stay in class 2 (6.5 versus 9.5 days) but not in class 1 (p-value for interaction=0.02). In the STEP trial, there was no significant interaction for length of stay. We found no significant interaction between class assignment and adjunctive corticosteroid treatment for…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a secondary / pooled analysis, done in people. Its evidence level is 3 of 5 (Moderate · trial / cohort / secondary analysis). Trials without a large randomized design, cohorts and secondary analyses give moderate evidence. Reported size: 727 participants or records.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free