Effect of Selepressin vs Placebo on Ventilator- and Vasopressor-Free Days in Patients With Septic Shock: The SEPSIS-ACT Randomized Clinical Trial | Critical Care Medicine | JAMA | JAMA Network
[Skip to Navigation]
Access to paid content on this site is currently suspended due to excessive activity being detected from your IP address Please contact the publisher to request reinstatement.

In a 2019 randomized trial, selepressin--a selective vasopressin V1a receptor agonist hypothesized to mitigate sepsis-induced vasodilatation, vascular leakage, and tissue edema because of its absence of V1b- or V2-mediated effects--did not improve vasopressor- and ventilator-free days at 30 days among patients with septic shock. Pierre-François Laterre, MD, of St. Luc University Hospital, Université Catholique de Louvain in Brussels, Belgium, presents findings from the SEPSIS-ACT trial at the European Society of Intensive Care Medicine (ESICM) 32nd Annual Congress, LIVES 2019, on October 2 in Berlin. Click the related article link for full trial details. Video used with permission.

Angus  DC, van der Poll  T.  Severe sepsis and septic shock.  N Engl J Med. 2013;369(9):840-851. doi:10.1056/NEJMra1208623PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
Singer  M, Deutschman  CS, Seymour  CW,  et al.  The Third International Consensus Definitions for Sepsis and Septic Shock (Sepsis-3).  JAMA. 2016;315(8):801-810. doi:10.1001/jama.2016.0287PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
Rhodes  A, Evans  LE, Alhazzani  W,  et al.  Surviving Sepsis Campaign: international guidelines for management of sepsis and septic shock: 2016.  Intensive Care Med. 2017;43(3):304-377. doi:10.1007/s00134-017-4683-6PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
Hamzaoui  O, Scheeren  TWL, Teboul  JL.  Norepinephrine in septic shock: when and how much?  Curr Opin Crit Care. 2017;23(4):342-347. doi:10.1097/MCC.0000000000000418PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
Kortenoeven  ML, Pedersen  NB, Rosenbaek  LL, Fenton  RA.  Vasopressin regulation of sodium transport in the distal nephron and collecting duct.  Am J Physiol Renal Physiol. 2015;309(4):F280-F299. doi:10.1152/ajprenal.00093.2015PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
Kaufmann  JE, Oksche  A, Wollheim  CB, Günther  G, Rosenthal  W, Vischer  UM.  Vasopressin-induced von Willebrand factor secretion from endothelial cells involves V2 receptors and cAMP.  J Clin Invest. 2000;106(1):107-116. doi:10.1172/JCI9516PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
Laporte  R, Kohan  A, Heitzmann  J,  et al.  Pharmacological characterization of FE 202158, a novel, potent, selective, and short-acting peptidic vasopressin V1a receptor full agonist for the treatment of vasodilatory hypotension.  J Pharmacol Exp Ther. 2011;337(3):786-796. doi:10.1124/jpet.111.178848PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
Maybauer  MO, Maybauer  DM, Enkhbaatar  P,  et al.  The selective vasopressin type 1a receptor agonist selepressin (FE 202158) blocks vascular leak in ovine severe sepsis.  Crit Care Med. 2014;42(7):e525-e533. doi:10.1097/CCM.0000000000000300PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
Rehberg  S, Yamamoto  Y, Sousse  L,  et al.  Selective V(1a) agonism attenuates vascular dysfunction and fluid accumulation in ovine severe sepsis.  Am J Physiol Heart Circ Physiol. 2012;303(10):H1245-H1254. doi:10.1152/ajpheart.00390.2012PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
Rehberg  S, Ertmer  C, Vincent  JL,  et al.  Role of selective V1a receptor agonism in ovine septic shock.  Crit Care Med. 2011;39(1):119-125. doi:10.1097/CCM.0b013e3181fa3898PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
Su  F, He  X, Taccone  FS,  et al.  Abstracts of the 42nd Critical Care Congress: January 19-23, 2013: San Juan, Puerto Rico.  Crit Care Med. 2012;40:1-328.PubMedGoogle Scholar
He  X, Su  F, Taccone  FS,  et al.  A selective V(1A) receptor agonist, selepressin, is superior to arginine vasopressin and to norepinephrine in ovine septic shock.  Crit Care Med. 2016;44(1):23-31. doi:10.1097/CCM.0000000000001380PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
Saad  AF, Maybauer  MO.  The role of vasopressin and the vasopressin type V1a receptor agonist selepressin in septic shock.  J Crit Care. 2017;40:41-45. doi:10.1016/j.jcrc.2017.03.008PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
Russell  JA, Vincent  JL, Kjølbye  AL,  et al.  Selepressin, a novel selective vasopressin V1A agonist, is an effective substitute for norepinephrine in a phase IIa randomized, placebo-controlled trial in septic shock patients.  Crit Care. 2017;21(1):213. doi:10.1186/s13054-017-1798-7PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
Lewis  RJ, Angus  DC, Laterre  PF,  et al; Selepressin Evaluation Programme for Sepsis-induced Shock–Adaptive Clinical Trial.  Rationale and design of an adaptive phase 2b/3 clinical trial of selepressin for adults in septic shock.  Ann Am Thorac Soc. 2018;15(2):250-257. doi:10.1513/AnnalsATS.201708-669SDPubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
Vincent  JL, Moreno  R, Takala  J,  et al; Working Group on Sepsis-Related Problems of the European Society of Intensive Care Medicine.  The SOFA (Sepsis-related Organ Failure Assessment) score to describe organ dysfunction/failure.  Intensive Care Med. 1996;22(7):707-710. doi:10.1007/BF01709751PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
Herdman  M, Gudex  C, Lloyd  A,  et al.  Development and preliminary testing of the new five-level version of EQ-5D (EQ-5D-5L).  Qual Life Res. 2011;20(10):1727-1736. doi:10.1007/s11136-011-9903-xPubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
Yealy  DM, Kellum  JA, Huang  DT,  et al; ProCESS Investigators.  A randomized trial of protocol-based care for early septic shock.  N Engl J Med. 2014;370(18):1683-1693. doi:10.1056/NEJMoa1401602PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
Mouncey  PR, Power  GS, Coats  TJ.  Early, goal-directed resuscitation for septic shock.  N Engl J Med. 2015;373(6):577-578.PubMedGoogle Scholar
Wiedemann  HP, Wheeler  AP, Bernard  GR,  et al; National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome (ARDS) Clinical Trials Network.  Comparison of two fluid-management strategies in acute lung injury.  N Engl J Med. 2006;354(24):2564-2575. doi:10.1056/NEJMoa062200PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
Annane  D, Renault  A, Brun-Buisson  C,  et al; CRICS-TRIGGERSEP Network.  Hydrocortisone plus fludrocortisone for adults with septic shock.  N Engl J Med. 2018;378(9):809-818. doi:10.1056/NEJMoa1705716PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
van Elteren  PH.  On the combination of independent two-sample tests of Wilcoxon.  Bull Int Stat Inst. 1960;37:1-13.Google Scholar
Cao  J, Zhang  S.  Multiple comparison procedures.  JAMA. 2014;312(5):543-544. doi:10.1001/jama.2014.9440PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
Russell  JA, Walley  KR, Singer  J,  et al; VASST Investigators.  Vasopressin versus norepinephrine infusion in patients with septic shock.  N Engl J Med. 2008;358(9):877-887. doi:10.1056/NEJMoa067373PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
Khanna  A, English  SW, Wang  XS,  et al; ATHOS-3 Investigators.  Angiotensin II for the treatment of vasodilatory shock.  N Engl J Med. 2017;377(5):419-430. doi:10.1056/NEJMoa1704154PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
Original Investigation
Caring for the Critically Ill Patient
October 2, 2019

Effect of Selepressin vs Placebo on Ventilator- and Vasopressor-Free Days in Patients With Septic Shock: The SEPSIS-ACT Randomized Clinical Trial

Author Affiliations
  • 1Department of Critical Care Medicine, St. Luc University Hospital, Université Catholique de Louvain, Brussels, Belgium
  • 2Berry Consultants LLC, Austin, Texas
  • 3Ferring Pharmaceuticals A/S, Copenhagen, Denmark
  • 4StraDevo A/S, Kongens Lyngby, Denmark
  • 5Medical-Surgical Intensive Care Unit, Inserm CIC1435, Dupuytren Teaching Hospital, Limoges, France
  • 6Department of Emergency Medicine, Harbor-UCLA Medical Center, Torrance, California
  • 7Los Angeles Biomedical Research Institute, Torrance, California
  • 8Department of Emergency Medicine, David Geffen School of Medicine at UCLA, Los Angeles, California
  • 9Division of Infectious Diseases, Alpert Medical School of Brown University, Providence, Rhode Island
  • 10Department of Intensive Care, Rigshospitalet, Copenhagen, Denmark
  • 11Department of Intensive Care Medicine, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, the Netherlands
  • 12Center for Heart Lung Innovation and the Division of Critical Care Medicine, St. Paul’s Hospital, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, Canada
  • 13Department of Emergency Medicine, University of Pittsburgh School of Medicine, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania
  • 14Centre Hospitalier Universitaire d’Angers, Angers, France
  • 15Nordsjaellands Hospital in Hilleroed, Copenhagen, Denmark
  • 16Centre Hospitalier Régional, Hopital de La Source, Orléans, France
  • 17Fondation Hôpital Saint Joseph. Paris, France
  • 18Medical Intensive Care Unit, Nantes University Hospital, Nantes, France
  • 19Ghent University Hospital, Ghent, Belgium
  • 20CHU UCL Manur, Mont-Godinne, Yvoir, Belgium
  • 21Clinique Saint-Pierre, Ottignies, Belgium
  • 22Eastern Idaho Regional Medical Center, Idaho Falls
  • 23Centre Hospitalier Universitaire de Nîmes, Nîmes, France
  • 24Lariboisière Hospital, Paris-Diderot University, INSERM UMRS-1144, Paris, France
  • 25Centre Hospitalier Régional et Universitaire de Tours, Tours, France
  • 26Hopital Cochin, Paris, France
  • 27Centre Hospitalier Régional et Universitaire de Dijon, Dijon, France
  • 28Aalborg Universitetshospital, Aalborg, Denmark
  • 29Ziekenhuis Oost-Limburg, Genk, Belgium
  • 30Randers Regions Hospital, Randers, Denmark
  • 31Centre Hospitalier Departemental de Vendee, La Roche sur Yon, France
  • 32Bispebjerg Hospital, Copenhagen, Denmark
  • 33Clinical Research, Investigation, and Systems Modeling of Acute Illness Center, Department of Critical Care, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania
  • 34Associate Editor, JAMA
JAMA. 2019;322(15):1476-1485. doi:10.1001/jama.2019.14607
Visual Abstract. Effect of Selepressin vs Placebo on Ventilator- and Vasopressor-Free Days in Septic Shock
Effect of Selepressin vs Placebo on Ventilator- and Vasopressor-Free Days in Septic Shock
Key Points

Question  For adults with septic shock treated with norepinephrine, does use of selepressin, a selective vasopressin V1a receptor agonist, compared with placebo, improve patient outcome, defined as an increase in the number of days alive and free of both ventilation and vasopressor use?

Findings  In this randomized clinical trial that included 828 patients with septic shock requiring norepinephrine, treatment with selepressin compared with placebo resulted in 15.0 vs 14.4 ventilator- and vasopressor-free days within 30 days, a difference that was not statistically significant.

Meaning  Treatment with selepressin was not effective in improving ventilator- and vasopressor-free days.


Importance  Norepinephrine, the first-line vasopressor for septic shock, is not always effective and has important catecholaminergic adverse effects. Selepressin, a selective vasopressin V1a receptor agonist, is a noncatecholaminergic vasopressor that may mitigate sepsis-induced vasodilatation, vascular leakage, and edema, with fewer adverse effects.

Objective  To test whether selepressin improves outcome in septic shock.

Design, Setting, and Participants  An adaptive phase 2b/3 randomized clinical trial comprising 2 parts that included adult patients (n = 868) with septic shock requiring more than 5 μg/min of norepinephrine. Part 1 used a Bayesian algorithm to adjust randomization probabilities to alternative selepressin dosing regimens and to trigger transition to part 2, which would compare the best-performing regimen with placebo. The trial was conducted between July 2015 and August 2017 in 63 hospitals in Belgium, Denmark, France, the Netherlands, and the United States, and follow-up was completed by May 2018.

Interventions  Random assignment to 1 of 3 dosing regimens of selepressin (starting infusion rates of 1.7, 2.5, and 3.5 ng/kg/min; n = 585) or to placebo (n = 283), all administered as continuous infusions titrated according to hemodynamic parameters.

Main Outcomes and Measures  Primary end point was ventilator- and vasopressor-free days within 30 days (deaths assigned zero days) of commencing study drug. Key secondary end points were 90-day mortality, kidney replacement therapy–free days, and ICU-free days.

Results  Among 868 randomized patients, 828 received study drug (mean age, 66.3 years; 341 [41.2%] women) and comprised the primary analysis cohort, of whom 562 received 1 of 3 selepressin regimens, 266 received placebo, and 817 (98.7%) completed the trial. The trial was stopped for futility at the end of part 1. Median study drug duration was 37.8 hours (IQR, 17.8-72.4). There were no significant differences in the primary end point (ventilator- and vasopressor-free days: 15.0 vs 14.5 in the selepressin and placebo groups; difference, 0.6 [95% CI, −1.3 to 2.4]; P = .30) or key secondary end points (90-day mortality, 40.6% vs 39.4%; difference, 1.1% [95% CI, −6.5% to 8.8%]; P = .77; kidney replacement therapy–free days: 18.5 vs 18.2; difference, 0.3 [95% CI, −2.1 to 2.6]; P = .85; ICU-free days: 12.6 vs 12.2; difference, 0.5 [95% CI, −1.2 to 2.2]; P = .41). Adverse event rates included cardiac arrhythmias (27.9% vs 25.2% of patients), cardiac ischemia (6.6% vs 5.6%), mesenteric ischemia (3.2% vs 2.6%), and peripheral ischemia (2.3% vs 2.3%).

Conclusions and Relevance  Among patients with septic shock receiving norepinephrine, administration of selepressin, compared with placebo, did not result in improvement in vasopressor- and ventilator-free days within 30 days. Further research would be needed to evaluate the potential role of selepressin for other patient-centered outcomes in septic shock.

Trial Registration  ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02508649