You are seeing this message because your Web browser does not support basic Web standards. Find out more about why this message is appearing and what you can do to make your experience on this site better.


ABOUT JAMA
Advanced Search

Welcome   | My Account | E-mail Alerts | Access Rights | Sign In


  Vol. 269 No. 17, May 5, 1993 TABLE OF CONTENTS
  JAMA
  •  Online Features
  Editorials
 This Article
 •References
 •Full text PDF
 •Send to a friend
 • Save in My Folder
 •Save to citation manager
 •Permissions
 Citing Articles
 •Citation map
 •Citing articles on HighWire
 •Citing articles on Web of Science (11)
 •Contact me when this article is cited
 Related Content
 •Similar articles in JAMA
 Social Bookmarking
  Add to CiteULike Add to Connotea Add to Del.icio.us Add to Digg Add to Reddit Add to Technorati Add to Twitter What's this?

The Search for a Magic Bullet to Fight Sepsis

Roger C. Bone, MD

JAMA. 1993;269(17):2266-2267.

Since this article does not have an abstract, we have provided the first 150 words of the full text PDF and any section headings.

Recently, excitement among the clinical researchers trying to identify additional treatments for sepsis and its associated disorders reached a fever pitch after the publication of two controlled, multicenter clinical trials of monoclonal antibodies against endotoxin. The results of these trials indicated that these antibodies could improve survival in some subgroups of patients suspected of having gram-negative sepsis.1,2

See also p 2221.

These trials followed an earlier study that showed that antisera from volunteers injected with the J5 Escherichia coli mutant could improve survival in patients with gram-negative sepsis.3 Because of these studies, it was widely perceived that Food and Drug Administration approval of one or both of these antibodies would be imminent following publication of the controlled clinical trial results. Clinicians and clinical investigators attempted to develop guidelines for the appropriate use of these therapies—albeit among patients most likely to benefit—so that if approved, they would be used . . . [Full Text PDF of this Article]


Author Affiliations

From the Section of Pulmonary Medicine, Department of Internal Medicine, Rush-Presbyterian-St Luke's Medical Center, and Rush Medical College, Chicago, Ill,


Footnotes

Reprint requests to Department of Internal Medicine, Rush-Presbyterian-St Luke's Medical Center, 1753 W Congress Pkwy, Chicago, IL 60612 (Dr Bone).



Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati   Add to Twitter Twitter     What's this?





HOME | CURRENT ISSUE | PAST ISSUES | TOPIC COLLECTIONS | CME | SUBMIT | SUBSCRIBE | HELP
CONDITIONS OF USE | PRIVACY POLICY | CONTACT US | SITE MAP
 
© 1993 American Medical Association. All Rights Reserved.