The authors of the article by Miller and colleagues, published in the October 1, 2018, issue of the Journal, have alerted us to errors in Table 3. Because of a probable flaw in the original R script used to perform the calculations, incorrect values were inadvertently cited in the last row (“Forced”) of Table 3. The correct values for the last three cells in that row are 0.34, 0.84, and 0.53 (instead of 0.65, 0.91, and 0.69). There are additional small corrections (−0.01) to the values of the last three cells in the first row and in the antepenultimate cell in the middle row of the table; these corrections, in the second position to the right of the decimal point, are related to the way in which rounding was handled by the R script used for the original calculations. For the convenience of our readers, the corrected version of the table is included below, with the changes indicated in bold.
Finally, a value from Table 3 is mentioned at the bottom of the middle column on page 908; this should be corrected to read “negative predictive values were 0.84 or greater (Table 3),” not 0.89.
Table 3.
Summary of Results from Binary Analysis of Complete Clinical Dataset
| RPD | Description | Sepsis Prevalence | AUC | Sensitivity | Specificity | NPV | PPV |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unanimous, based on discharge evaluation (n = 290 of 447 [64.9%]) | All three panelists and site PI agree on SIRS (171 of 290 [59.0%]) or sepsis (119 of 290 [41.0%]) | 41.0% | 0.89 | 0.97 | 0.33 | 0.93 | 0.50 |
| Consensus (n = 410 of 447 [91.7%]) | Majority vote leads to exclusion of 37 indeterminates and classification of 230 of 410 (56.1%) as SIRS and 180 of 410 (43.9%) as sepsis | 43.9% | 0.85 | 0.94 | 0.34 | 0.89 | 0.53 |
| Forced (n = 447 of 447 [100.0%]) | All subjects classified as SIRS (245 of 447 [54.8%]) or sepsis (202 of 447 [45.2%]) | 45.2% | 0.82 | 0.92 | 0.34 | 0.84 | 0.53 |
Definition of abbreviations: AUC = area under the curve; NPV = negative predictive value; PI = principal investigator; PPV = positive predictive value; RPD = retrospective physician diagnosis; SIRS = systemic inflammatory response syndrome.
A SeptiCyte LAB cutoff value of 3.1 was used in the analysis. This value had been obtained previously from receiver operating curve analysis of an independent discovery dataset (4).
The authors do not believe that these changes affect the conclusions of the article; they would like to apologize for any confusion.
Reference
- 1.Miller RR, III, Lopansri BK, Burke JP, Levy M, Opal S, Rothman RE, D'Alessio FR, Sidhaye VK, Aggarwal NR, Balk R, Greenberg JA, Yoder M, Patel G, Gilbert E, Afshar M, Parada JP, Martin GS, Esper AM, Kempker JA, Narasimhan M, Tsegaye A, Hahn S, Mayo P, van der Poll T, Schultz MJ, Scicluna BP, Klein Klouwenberg P, Rapisarda A, Seldon TA, McHugh LC, Yager TD, Cermelli S, Sampson D, Rothwell V, Newman R, Bhide S, Fox BA, Kirk JT, Navalkar K, Davis RF, Brandon RA, Brandon RB. Validation of a host response assay, SeptiCyte LAB, for discriminating sepsis from systemic inflammatory response syndrome in the ICU. Am J Respir Crit Care Med. 2018;198:903–913. doi: 10.1164/rccm.201712-2472OC. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]