Chimeric antigen receptor (CAR)-modified T cells with anti-CD19 specificity are a highly effective novel immune therapy for relapsed/refractory acute lymphoblastic leukemia. Cytokine release syndrome (CRS) is the most significant and life-threatening toxicity. To improve understanding of CRS, we measured cytokines and clinical biomarkers in 51 CTL019-treated patients. Peak levels of 24 cytokines, including IFNγ, IL6, sgp130, and sIL6R, in the first month after infusion were highly associated with severe CRS. Using regression modeling, we could accurately predict which patients would develop severe CRS with a signature composed of three cytokines. Results were validated in an independent cohort. Changes in serum biochemical markers, including C-reactive protein and ferritin, were associated with CRS but failed to predict development of severe CRS. These comprehensive profiling data provide novel insights into CRS biology and, importantly, represent the first data that can accurately predict which patients have a high probability of becoming critically ill. SIGNIFICANCE: CRS is the most common severe toxicity seen after CAR T-cell treatment. We developed models that can accurately predict which patients are likely to develop severe CRS before they become critically ill, which improves understanding of CRS biology and may guide future cytokinedirected therapy. Cancer Discov;6(6);

Rationale: Limited data exist about the international burden of severe sepsis in critically ill children.Objectives: To characterize the global prevalence, therapies, and outcomes of severe sepsis in pediatric intensive care units to better inform interventional trials.Methods: A point prevalence study was conducted on 5 days throughout 2013-2014 at 128 sites in 26 countries. Patients younger than 18 years of age with severe sepsis as defined by consensus criteria were included. Outcomes were severe sepsis point prevalence, therapies used, new or progressive multiorgan dysfunction, ventilator-and vasoactive-free days at Day 28, functional status, and mortality.Measurements and Main Results: Of 6,925 patients screened, 569 had severe sepsis (prevalence, 8.2%; 95% confidence interval, 7.6-8.9%). The patients' median age was 3.0 (interquartile range [IQR], 0.7-11.0) years. The most frequent sites of infection were respiratory (40%) and bloodstream (19%). Common therapies included mechanical ventilation (74% of patients), vasoactive infusions (55%), and corticosteroids (45%). Hospital mortality was 25% and did not differ by age or between developed and resourcelimited countries. Median ventilator-free days were 16 (IQR, 0-25), and vasoactive-free days were 23 (IQR,(12)(13)(14)(15)(16)(17)(18)(19)(20)(21)(22)(23)(24)(25)(26)(27)(28). Sixty-seven percent of patients had multiorgan dysfunction at sepsis recognition, with 30% subsequently developing new or progressive multiorgan dysfunction. Among survivors, 17% developed at least moderate disability. Sample sizes needed to detect a 5-10% absolute risk reduction in outcomes within interventional trials are estimated between 165 and 1,437 patients per group.Conclusions: Pediatric severe sepsis remains a burdensome public health problem, with prevalence, morbidity, and mortality rates similar to those reported in critically ill adult populations. International clinical trials targeting children with severe sepsis are warranted.

Objectives: To develop evidence-based recommendations for clinicians caring for children (including infants, school-aged children, and adolescents) with septic shock and other sepsis-associated organ dysfunction. Design: A panel of 49 international experts, representing 12 international organizations, as well as three methodologists and three public members was convened. Panel members assembled at key international meetings (for those panel members attending the conference), and a stand-alone meeting was held for all panel members in November 2018. A formal conflict-of-interest policy was developed at the onset of the process and enforced throughout. Teleconferences and electronic-based discussion among the chairs, co-chairs, methodologists, and group heads, as well as within subgroups, served as an integral part of the guideline development process. Methods: The panel consisted of six subgroups: recognition and management of infection, hemodynamics and resuscitation, ventilation, endocrine and metabolic therapies, adjunctive therapies, and research priorities. We conducted a systematic review for each Population, Intervention, Control, and Outcomes question to identify the best available evidence, statistically summarized the evidence, and then assessed the quality of evidence using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation approach. We used the evidence-to-decision framework to formulate recommendations as strong or weak, or as a best practice statement. In addition, “in our practice” statements were included when evidence was inconclusive to issue a recommendation, but the panel felt that some guidance based on practice patterns may be appropriate. Results: The panel provided 77 statements on the management and resuscitation of children with septic shock and other sepsis-associated organ dysfunction. Overall, six were strong recommendations, 52 were weak recommendations, and nine were best-practice statements. For 13 questions, no recommendations could be made; but, for 10 of these, “in our practice” statements were provided. In addition, 49 research priorities were identified. Conclusions: A large cohort of international experts was able to achieve consensus regarding many recommendations for the best care of children with sepsis, acknowledging that most aspects of care had relatively low quality of evidence resulting in the frequent issuance of weak recommendations. Despite this challenge, these recommendations regarding the management of children with septic shock and other sepsis-associated organ dysfunction provide a foundation for consistent care to improve outcomes and inform future research.