Clinical subphenotypes of sepsis based on mixed continuous and categorical data and differences in treatment effects: a cluster analysis of multicenter observational studies - Scorecard - MDSpire

Clinical subphenotypes of sepsis based on mixed continuous and categorical data and differences in treatment effects: a cluster analysis of multicenter observational studies

  • By

  • Yuta Yokokawa

  • Rieko Sakurai

  • Daisuke Kudo

  • Gen Tamiya

  • Shigeki Kushimoto

  • January 15, 2026

  • 0 min

Share

Clinical Scorecard: Identification of Clinical Subphenotypes in Sepsis Through Mixed Data Analysis and Treatment Response Variability: A Cluster Analysis from Multicenter Observational Research

At a Glance

CategoryDetail
ConditionSepsis and septic shock
Key MechanismsHeterogeneity in clinical characteristics and treatment responses among sepsis patients; use of mixed data clustering to identify subphenotypes
Target PopulationPatients aged ≥16 years admitted to ICUs with severe sepsis or septic shock
Care SettingIntensive Care Units (ICUs) in multicenter hospital settings

Key Highlights

  • Sepsis is a heterogeneous syndrome with diverse clinical subphenotypes affecting treatment response.
  • Mixed data clustering methods incorporating categorical and continuous variables can classify sepsis subphenotypes.
  • Treatment effectiveness varies among subphenotypes, highlighting the need for precision medicine approaches.

Guideline-Based Recommendations

Diagnosis

  • Use clinical and biomarker data including demographics, vital signs, organ failure indicators, and coagulation markers for subphenotype classification.
  • Apply mixed data clustering methods to incorporate both categorical and continuous clinical variables.

Management

  • Initiate standard sepsis bundle treatments within one hour: fluid resuscitation, early appropriate antimicrobials, and vasopressors for septic shock.
  • Consider adjunctive therapies such as corticosteroids, polymyxin B hemoperfusion, recombinant thrombomodulin, antithrombin III, immunoglobulin G, and vasopressin with clinical judgment due to weak guideline recommendations.

Monitoring & Follow-up

  • Monitor clinical variables at ICU admission including SOFA score components, inflammatory markers, coagulation parameters, and organ function indicators.
  • Assess treatment response variability across identified subphenotypes to guide ongoing management.

Risks

  • Adjunctive therapies lack conclusive evidence and may carry risks; use should be individualized based on subphenotype and clinical judgment.
  • Heterogeneity in sepsis patients may lead to variable outcomes if treatments are not tailored.

Patient & Prescribing Data

ICU patients with severe sepsis or septic shock enrolled in multicenter registries in Japan

Six adjunctive therapies commonly used but weakly recommended show variable effectiveness across subphenotypes; no single therapy conclusively improves outcomes in all patients.

Clinical Best Practices

  • Incorporate mixed data clustering techniques to identify clinically relevant sepsis subphenotypes.
  • Use comprehensive clinical variables at ICU admission for patient stratification.
  • Apply precision medicine principles by tailoring adjunctive therapies to subphenotype-specific treatment responses.
  • Continue standard sepsis bundle interventions promptly while considering adjunctive therapies on a case-by-case basis.
  • Recognize the limitations of current evidence and rely on clinical judgment when using weakly recommended treatments.

References

Original Source(s)

Related Content