Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
| Name | Class |
|---|---|
| University of Florida | OTHER |
| Ohio State University | OTHER |
| Washington University School of Medicine | OTHER |
| University of Colorado, Denver |
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Carbon-12 and carbon-13 are naturally-abundant isotopes in exhaled breath carbon dioxide. The ratio of carbon-13 to carbon-12 in exhaled breath is known as the breath delta value (BDV). This study is seeking to determine if the breath delta value of critically ill adults is an early indicator of the onset of infection that may lead to sepsis.
Sepsis is a major complication for any patient, and its management is an acknowledged challenge for intensivists. Sepsis has unpredictable onset and progression, and is a leading cause of death in ICUs with a mortality rate of 30-50%. Annually in the US, 1.4M cases involve hospitalization, 750,000 cases of severe sepsis or septic shock, and ~260,000 cases of sepsis related death have been reported in recent years. Current experience of UF Health investigators in surgical ICUs is 1 -2 sepsis, severe sepsis, or septic shock patients per day, of which ~10% are trauma patients. Of trauma patients, ~8% develop sepsis during their ICU stay.
Breath delta value is hypothesized to be a biomarker of infection. Breath delta value is not a defined clinical outcome related to human health, because this study is seeking to establish breath delta value as a biomarker of infection. This study is measuring the feasibility of the Isomark Canary™ device. If the Canary does not detect a significant decrease in breath delta value in those subjects who subsequently get an infection, it will not be feasible to use it for this purpose.
Breath delta value will be collected to determine its relationship to infection, no health outcomes are being measured.
This study is designed to determine if the BDV of adult ICU patients is an early indicator of the onset of infection that may lead to sepsis.
The objectives of this study are: (1) to measure variation of BDV with time in adult ICU patients who agree to participate as research subjects; (2) to determine the magnitude of change of BDV in subjects who are subsequently diagnosed with severe infection and sepsis; (3) to define variation of BDV in adult trauma subjects who do not develop severe infection.
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
| Label | Type | Description | Intervention Names |
|---|---|---|---|
| Exhaled Breath | Experimental | Exhaled breath samples will be collected 6 times per day and blood samples will be collected once per day for 7 days. Subjects will be followed for an additional 3 days. We will use the Isomark Canary™ to determine the BDV of breath samples collected during this study. Analysis results of these samples will be combined with data that is abstracted from the subjects' medical records. |
|
| Name | Type | Description | Arm Group Labels | Other Names |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Isomark Canary™ | Device | Isomark, LLC is a Madison, Wisconsin-based company that has developed an investigational device, the Isomark Canary™, that is intended to determine the breath delta value of breath samples collected from critically ill patients. |
| Measure | Description | Time Frame |
|---|---|---|
| Change in Breath Delta Value | The variation in breath delta value was assessed regardless of infection status. Exhaled breath samples were collected from participants upon enrollment and every four hours thereafter until the end of the subject's study duration per protocol. Each subject was used as its own control for the purpose of trend analysis.The first breath sample collected was considered an individual's "baseline" sample. The change in the breath delta value was calculated from this baseline sample. | Baseline to ICU discharge or 7 days, whichever came first |
| Measure | Description | Time Frame |
|---|---|---|
| Number of Participants With an Infection Diagnosis | Daily analysis infection status from blood samples given from each participant. | Days 1 through 7 |
| Measure | Description | Time Frame |
|---|---|---|
| Positive and Negative Predictive Value of BDV for Infection Diagnosis | Based on an ROC analysis the optimal cutoff value for indicating the presence of infection using the BDV is 1.4‰. Based on this cutoff value the sensitivity and specificity were calculated. Sensitivity, or the true positive rate, is the proportion of actual positives that are correctly identified. In this case, the sensitivity is the percentage of people who have an infection and were identified by the Isomark Canary as having an 'infection'. The specificity, or the true negative rate, is the promotion of actual negatives that are correctly identified as negative. In this case, the specificity is the proportion of people without infections that were correctly classified by the Isomark Canary as having 'no infection'. |
Inclusion Criteria:
Exclusion Criteria:
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
| Facility | Status | City | State | ZIP | Country | Contacts |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| University of Florida Health | Gainesville | Florida | 32608 | United States | ||
| University of Florida |
| PubMed Identifier | Type | Citation | Retractions |
|---|---|---|---|
| 30575683 | Derived | O'Rourke AP, Buckman SA, Evans DC, Kerwin AJ, Breunig EA, Butz DE. Changes in exhaled 13CO2/12CO2 breath delta value as an early indicator of infection in intensive care unit patients. J Trauma Acute Care Surg. 2019 Jan;86(1):71-78. doi: 10.1097/TA.0000000000002097. |
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
| ID | Title | Description |
|---|---|---|
| FG000 | Isomark Canary | All subjects were enrolled were at risk for developing infections during the study but did not currently exhibit signs of ongoing infection. The 'at risk' enrolled subjects utilized the Isomark Canary to take exhaled breath samples to assess for infection status. |
| Title | Milestones | Reasons Not Completed | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Overall Study |
|
|
Not provided
Not provided
| ID | Title | Description |
|---|---|---|
| BG000 | Critically Ill Subjects at Risk for Infection | Critically ill adult ICU subjects who are not suspected of having an infection at the time of ICU admission were enrolled as study subjects. |
| Units | Counts |
|---|---|
| Participants |
|
| Title | Description | Population Description | Parameter Type | Dispersion Type | Unit of Measure | Calculate Percentage | Denominator Units Selected | Denominators | Classes |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Age, Categorical | Count of Participants |
| Type | Title | Description | Population Description | Reporting Status | Anticipated Posting Date | Parameter Type | Dispersion Type | Unit of Measure | Calculate Percentage | Time Frame | Units Analyzed | Denominator Units Selected | Arm/Group Information | Denominators | Classes | Analyses | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Primary | Change in Breath Delta Value | The variation in breath delta value was assessed regardless of infection status. Exhaled breath samples were collected from participants upon enrollment and every four hours thereafter until the end of the subject's study duration per protocol. Each subject was used as its own control for the purpose of trend analysis.The first breath sample collected was considered an individual's "baseline" sample. The change in the breath delta value was calculated from this baseline sample. | Posted | Mean | Standard Error | parts per mil (‰) | Baseline to ICU discharge or 7 days, whichever came first |
|
10 days per subject, throughout enrollment period April 2015 to December 2017.
Not provided
Not provided
| ID | Title | Description | Deaths (Affected) | Deaths (At Risk) | Serious Events (Affected) | Serious Events (At Risk) | Other Events (Affected) | Other Events (At Risk) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| EG000 | At Risk for Infection | All subjects were enrolled were at risk for developing infections during the study but did not currently exhibit signs of ongoing infection. |
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
| Title | Organization | Phone | Extension | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Dr. Daniel Butz, Chief Scientific Officer | Isomark, LLC | (608) 561-1895 | daniel.butz@isomark.com |
Not provided
| Type | Includes Protocol | Includes SAP | Includes ICF | Document Label | Document Date | Document Uploaded Date | Document File Name |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Prot | Yes | No | No | Study Protocol | Aug 15, 2016 | Oct 11, 2018 | Prot_000.pdf |
| SAP | No | Yes | No | Statistical Analysis Plan | Oct 15, 2016 | Oct 11, 2018 | SAP_001.pdf |
Not provided
| ID | Term |
|---|---|
| D018805 | Sepsis |
| ID | Term |
|---|---|
| D007239 | Infections |
| D018746 | Systemic Inflammatory Response Syndrome |
| D007249 | Inflammation |
| D010335 | Pathologic Processes |
Not provided
Not provided
| OTHER |
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
| 7 days |
| Jacksonville |
| Florida |
| 32209 |
| United States |
| Washington University School of Medicine | St Louis | Missouri | 63110 | United States |
| The Ohio State University | Columbus | Ohio | 43210 | United States |
| University of Wisconsin - Madison | Madison | Wisconsin | 53706 | United States |
| Isomark, LLC | Madison | Wisconsin | 53711 | United States |
| Incorrectly place ventilator adaptor |
|
| Met exclusion criteria |
|
| Participants |
|
| Sex: Female, Male | Count of Participants | Participants |
|
| Ethnicity (NIH/OMB) | Count of Participants | Participants |
|
| Race (NIH/OMB) | Count of Participants | Participants |
|
| Region of Enrollment | Number | participants |
|
| Units | Counts |
|---|---|
| Participants |
|
|
| Secondary | Number of Participants With an Infection Diagnosis | Daily analysis infection status from blood samples given from each participant. | Posted | Number | Participants | Days 1 through 7 |
|
|
|
| Other Pre-specified | Positive and Negative Predictive Value of BDV for Infection Diagnosis | Based on an ROC analysis the optimal cutoff value for indicating the presence of infection using the BDV is 1.4‰. Based on this cutoff value the sensitivity and specificity were calculated. Sensitivity, or the true positive rate, is the proportion of actual positives that are correctly identified. In this case, the sensitivity is the percentage of people who have an infection and were identified by the Isomark Canary as having an 'infection'. The specificity, or the true negative rate, is the promotion of actual negatives that are correctly identified as negative. In this case, the specificity is the proportion of people without infections that were correctly classified by the Isomark Canary as having 'no infection'. | Posted | Number | percent | 7 days |
|
|
|
| 0 |
| 20 |
| 0 |
| 20 |
| 0 |
| 20 |
Not provided
Not provided
| D013568 |
| Pathological Conditions, Signs and Symptoms |