The effect of antagonism of adenosine A1 receptor against ischemia and reperfusion injury of the liver

Adenosine A1 receptor agonism protection mechanism in intestinal ischemia/reperfusion injury via activation of PI3K/Akt signaling

Intestinal ischemia/reperfusion (I/R) injury is a common clinical problem with a high mortality rate, resulting from loss of blood flow to an intestinal segment. Adenosine serves a protective role in intestinal I/R injury; however, its potential mechanism is not completely understood. The present study aimed to investigate the protective effects of adenosine A₁ receptor (A₁R) agonists CPA and LUF6941 and whether their mechanisms are associated with the PI3K/Akt signaling pathway. To simulate intestinal I/R injury, a cell oxygen-glucose deprivation/reoxygenation (OGD/R) model was established and the human colon cancer cell line (Caco-2) was incubated with A₁R agonists before OGD/R treatment. The viability of Caco-2 cells was detected by PI and Cell Counting Kit-8 assay, apoptosis was detected using flow cytometry and western blotting was used to analyze protein expression levels of PI3K, Akt and p53 in Caco-2 cells. A₁R agonist pretreatment protected Caco-2 cells against OGD/R-induced cell damage and activated PI3K/Akt signaling. Additionally, apoptosis was inhibited by downregulating phosphorylation of p53 protein, as evidenced by increased cell viability. These findings suggested that A₁R agonists decreased OGD/R damage in Caco-2 cells, which may be due to their anti-apoptotic effects and activation of the PI3K/Akt/p53 signal pathway.

Ischemia/Reperfusion Injury of Fatty Liver Is Protected by A2AR and Exacerbated by A1R Stimulation through Opposite Effects on ASK1 Activation

Hepatic ischemia/reperfusion injury (IRI) is aggravated by steatosis and is a main risk factor in fatty liver transplantation. Adenosine receptors (ARs) are emerging as therapeutic targets in liver diseases. By using cellular and in vivo systems of hepatic steatosis and IRI, here we evaluated the effects of pharmacological A2AR and A1R activation. The A2AR agonist CGS21680 protected the primary steatotic murine hepatocyte from IR damage and the activation of ASK1 and JNK. Such an effect was attributed to a phosphatidylinositol-3-kinase (PI3K)/Akt-dependent inhibition of ASK1. By contrast, the A1R agonist CCPA enhanced IR damage, intracellular steatosis and oxidative species (OS) production, thereby further increasing the lipid/OS-dependent ASK1-JNK stimulation. The CGS2680 and CCPA effects were nullified by a genetic ASK1 downregulation in steatotic hepatoma C1C7 cells. In steatotic mice livers, CGS21680 protected against hepatic IRI and ASK1/JNK activation whereas CCPA aggravated hepatic steatosis and IRI, and enhanced ASK1 and JNK stimulation. These results evidence a novel mechanism of CGS21680-mediated hepatoprotection, i.e., the PI3K/AKT-dependent inhibition of ASK1, and they show that CGS21680 and CCPA reduces and enhances the IRI of fatty liver, respectively, by preventing or increasing the activation of the cytotoxic ASK1/JNK axis. They also indicate the selective employment of A2AR agonists as an effective therapeutic strategy to prevent IRI in human fatty liver surgery.

An Evaluation of Ischaemic Preconditioning as a Method of Reducing Ischaemia Reperfusion Injury in Liver Surgery and Transplantation

Liver Ischaemia Reperfusion (IR) injury is a major cause of post-operative liver dysfunction, morbidity and mortality following liver resection surgery and transplantation. There are no proven therapies for IR injury in clinical practice and new approaches are required. Ischaemic Preconditioning (IPC) can be applied in both a direct and remote fashion and has been shown to ameliorate IR injury in small animal models. Its translation into clinical practice has been difficult, primarily by a lack of knowledge regarding the dominant protective mechanisms that it employs. A review of all current studies would suggest that IPC/RIPC relies on creating a small tissue injury resulting in the release of adenosine and l-arginine which act through the Adenosine receptors and the haem-oxygenase and endothelial nitric oxide synthase systems to reduce hepatocyte necrosis and improve the hepatic microcirculation post reperfusion. The next key step is to determine how long the stimulus requires to precondition humans to allow sufficient injury to occur to release the potential mediators. This would open the door to a new therapeutic chapter in this field.

Purinergic signalling in the liver in health and disease

Purinergic signalling is involved in both the physiology and pathophysiology of the liver. Hepatocytes, Kupffer cells, vascular endothelial cells and smooth muscle cells, stellate cells and cholangiocytes all express purinoceptor subtypes activated by adenosine, adenosine 5'-triphosphate, adenosine diphosphate, uridine 5'-triphosphate or UDP. Purinoceptors mediate bile secretion, glycogen and lipid metabolism and indirectly release of insulin. Mechanical stress results in release of ATP from hepatocytes and Kupffer cells and ATP is also released as a cotransmitter with noradrenaline from sympathetic nerves supplying the liver. Ecto-nucleotidases play important roles in the signalling process. Changes in purinergic signalling occur in vascular injury, inflammation, insulin resistance, hepatic fibrosis, cirrhosis, diabetes, hepatitis, liver regeneration following injury or transplantation and cancer. Purinergic therapeutic strategies for the treatment of these pathologies are being explored.

Purinergic signaling and blood vessels in health and disease

Purinergic signaling plays important roles in control of vascular tone and remodeling. There is dual control of vascular tone by ATP released as a cotransmitter with noradrenaline from perivascular sympathetic nerves to cause vasoconstriction via P2X1 receptors, whereas ATP released from endothelial cells in response to changes in blood flow (producing shear stress) or hypoxia acts on P2X and P2Y receptors on endothelial cells to produce nitric oxide and endothelium-derived hyperpolarizing factor, which dilates vessels. ATP is also released from sensory-motor nerves during antidromic reflex activity to produce relaxation of some blood vessels. In this review, we stress the differences in neural and endothelial factors in purinergic control of different blood vessels. The long-term (trophic) actions of purine and pyrimidine nucleosides and nucleotides in promoting migration and proliferation of both vascular smooth muscle and endothelial cells via P1 and P2Y receptors during angiogenesis and vessel remodeling during restenosis after angioplasty are described. The pathophysiology of blood vessels and therapeutic potential of purinergic agents in diseases, including hypertension, atherosclerosis, ischemia, thrombosis and stroke, diabetes, and migraine, is discussed.

The role of the A2a receptor agonist, regadenoson, in modulating hepatic artery flow in the porcine small-for-size liver graft

BACKGROUND

Hepatic artery vasoconstriction plays a major role in the pathophysiology of the small-for-size (SFS) liver graft injury and is reversed by adenosine. The A2a adenosine receptor (AR) has been suggested to be one of the key receptors that modulate hepatic hemodynamic changes. The aim of the study is to define the effects of the A2a AR agonist, regadenoson, in modulating hepatic artery flow (HAF) in SFS liver grafts of a porcine model.

METHODS

Seven female recipient pigs (66-70 kg) receiving 20% liver grafts were treated with regadenoson, 0.1 ug/kg/min starting on POD1 (n = 7). Results were compared with those with untreated 20% liver grafts (n= 8). The recipients were observed for 14 d. Hepatic artery flow (HAF) and portal vein flow (PVF) were recorded. Liver biopsies and serum samples were also taken at the designed time points through postoperative day (POD)14.

RESULTS

Dose-response curves of regadenoson established 0.1 ug/kg/min as the most effective dose of regadenoson for maintaining an increase in HAF. No adverse effects were seen with regadenoson infusion. HAF immediately increased by up to 2.2-fold after regadenoson infusion. The levels of daily average of HAF and percentage of HAF in total liver blood flow were 34.5% and 41.8%, respectively, higher in the regadenoson group than in the untreated group. Histologic scores of hepatic artery spasm and bile duct necrosis were significantly lower in the regadenoson group than in the untreated group (P = 0.01 and 0.04, respectively). The complication rates of hepatic artery thrombosis and gastrointestinal bleeding were lower in the regadenoson group than in the untreated group (0/7, 0% versus 2/8, 25% and 0/7, 0% versus 2/8 and 25%, respectively). The 14-d survival rates were 4/7 (57.1 %) in regadenoson group compared with 2/8 (25%) in the untreated group.

CONCLUSION

Adenosine A2a AR agonist, regadenoson, increases HAF in the recipients of SFS grafts with modest improvements in outcome.

Effect of necrosis modulator necrox-7 on hepatic ischemia-reperfusion injury in beagle dogs

OBJECTIVE

The liver is susceptible to ischemia-reperfusion (IR) injury during inflow occlusion for hepatectomy. There is no effective pharmacologic agent available to prevent the release of high-mobility-group box 1 (HMGB1) or to ameliorate IR injury. This pilot study sought to develop a model in beagle dogs for the purpose of testing the efficacy of a necrosis modulator, necrox-7, to prevent hepatic IR injury in beagle dogs.

METHODS

Six male beagle dogs were randomly assigned to the control group (group A; n = 3) or the treatment group (group B; n = 3). Under general anesthesia, group B received intravenous infusion of necrox-7 (13 mg/kg over 20 minutes) followed by 60 minutes of left hepatic inflow occlusion and 60 minutes of reperfusion. Both groups were tested for serum biochemicals, hematology values, liver biopsies, and plasma HMGB1 levels over a 48-hour period.

RESULTS

The maximum alanine transferase (ALT), aspartate transferase (AST), and lactate dehydrogenase (LDH) levels among group A versus group B were: ALT 868.3 ± 337.4 IU/L vs 274.3 ± 72.6 IU/L (P = .041); AST 1,024.7 ± 246.5 IU/L vs 505.3 ± 66.7 IU/L (P = .024); and LDH 962.7 ± 226.2 IU/L vs 552.7 ± 62.4 IU/L (P = .039). Liver biopsy demonstrated marked necrosis and inflammatory infiltrates in group A, whereas group B showed little evidence of IR injury. The plasma HMGB1 concentration was significantly lower among group B versus A.

CONCLUSION

This pilot study developed a hepatic IR injury model, demonstrating that necrox-7 reduced hepatic necrosis secondary to IR injury in a large animal setting.

Targeting of adenosine receptors in ischemia-reperfusion injury

IMPORTANCE OF THE FIELD

Ischemia-reperfusion (IR) injury is a common problem after transplantation as well as myocardial infarction and stroke. IR initiates an inflammatory response leading to rapid tissue damage. Adenosine, produced in response to IR, is generally considered a protective signaling molecule and elicits its physiological responses through four distinct adenosine receptors. The short half-life, lack of specificity and rapid metabolism limits the use of adenosine as a therapeutic agent. Thus, intense research efforts have focused on the synthesis and implementation of specific adenosine receptor agonists and antagonists as potential therapeutic agents for a variety of inflammatory conditions including IR injury.

AREAS COVERED IN THIS REVIEW

Current knowledge on IR injury with a focus on lung, heart and kidney and studies that have advanced our understanding of the role of adenosine receptors and the therapeutic potential of adenosine receptor agonists and antagonists for the prevention of IR injury.

WHAT THE READER WILL GAIN

Insight into the role of adenosine receptor signaling in IR injury.

TAKE HOME MESSAGE

No therapies are currently available that specifically target IR injury; however, targeting of specific adenosine receptors may offer therapeutic strategies in this regard.

Rolofylline: a selective adenosine 1 receptor antagonist for the treatment of heart failure

BACKGROUND

Co-existent cardiac and renal dysfunction is increasingly recognized as both a predictor and mediator of poor outcomes in patients with advanced heart failure. Novel therapies, including adenosine receptor antagonists, are currently under development for the treatment of 'cardiorenal syndrome'.

OBJECTIVES

To review the pathophysiologic rationale for using rolofylline, a selective adenosine 1 receptor antagonist, in patients with cardiorenal syndrome; and to provide a critical overview of safety and efficacy data from clinical studies.

METHODS

We reviewed published data on the pharmacology of rolofylline, and used this to inform a comprehensive summary of preclinical and clinical trials. Cardiac and renal effects, and safety data with a particular reference to seizures, are highlighted.

RESULTS/CONCLUSION

Rolofylline facilitates diuresis and preserves renal function in patients with acute decompensated heart failure and renal dysfunction. Pilot data also suggest beneficial effects on symptoms and short-term outcomes. The risk of seizures may be minimized by excluding high-risk patients.

Adenosine receptors and inflammation

Extracellular adenosine is produced in a coordinated manner from cells following cellular challenge or tissue injury. Once produced, it serves as an autocrine- and paracrine-signaling molecule through its interactions with seven-membrane-spanning G-protein-coupled adenosine receptors. These signaling pathways have widespread physiological and pathophysiological functions. Immune cells express adenosine receptors and respond to adenosine or adenosine agonists in diverse manners. Extensive in vitro and in vivo studies have identified potent anti-inflammatory functions for all of the adenosine receptors on many different inflammatory cells and in various inflammatory disease processes. In addition, specific proinflammatory functions have also been ascribed to adenosine receptor activation. The potent effects of adenosine signaling on the regulation of inflammation suggest that targeting specific adenosine receptor activation or inactivation using selective agonists and antagonists could have important therapeutic implications in numerous diseases. This review is designed to summarize the current status of adenosine receptor signaling in various inflammatory cells and in models of inflammation, with an emphasis on the advancement of adenosine-based therapeutics to treat inflammatory disorders.

A1 adenosine receptor antagonists, agonists, and allosteric enhancers

Intense efforts of many pharmaceutical companies and academicians in the A(1) adenosine receptor (AR) field have led to the discovery of clinical candidates that are antagonists, agonists, and allosteric enhancers. The A(1)AR antagonists currently in clinical development are KW3902, BG9928, and SLV320. All three have high affinity for the human (h) A(1)AR subtype (hA(1) K (i) < 10 nM), > 200-fold selectivity over the hA(2A) subtype, and demonstrate renal protective effects in multiple animal models of disease and pharmacologic effects in human subjects. In the A(1)AR agonist area, clinical candidates have been discovered for the following conditions: atrial arrhythmias (tecadenoson, selodenoson and PJ-875); Type II diabetes and insulin sensitizing agents (GR79236, ARA, RPR-749, and CVT-3619); and angina (BAY 68-4986). The challenges associated with the development of any A(1)AR agonist are to obtain tissue-specific effects but avoid off-target tissue side effects and A(1)AR desensitization leading to tachyphylaxis. For the IV antiarrhythmic agents that act as ventricular rate control agents, a selective response can be accomplished by careful IV dosing paradigms. The treatment of type II diabetes using A(1)AR agonists in the clinic has met with limited success due to cardiovascular side effects and a well-defined desensitization of full agonists in human trials (GR79236, ARA, and RPR 749). However, new partial A(1)AR agonists are in development, including CVT-3619 hA(1) AR K(i) = 55nM, hA(2A:hA2B:hA(3))1,000:20, CV Therapeutics), which have the potential to provide enhanced insulin sensitivity without cardiovascular side effects and tachyphylaxis. The nonnucleosidic A(1)AR agonist BAY 68-4986 (capadenoson) represents a novel approach to angina wherein both animal studies and early human studies are promising. T-62 is an A(1)AR allosteric enhancer that is currently being evaluated in clinical trials as a potential treatment for neuropathic pain. The challenges associated with developing A(1)AR antagonists, agonists, or allosteric enhancers for therapeutic intervention are now well defined in humans. Significant progress has been made in identifying A(1)AR antagonists for the treatment of edema associated with congestive heart failure (CHF), A(1)AR agonists for the treatment of atrial arrhythmias, type II diabetes and angina, and A(1)AR allosteric enhancers for the treatment of neuropathic pain.

Endogenous A1 adenosine receptors protect against hepatic ischemia reperfusion injury in mice

Hepatic ischemia reperfusion (IR) injury is a major clinical problem during the perioperative period and occurs frequently after major hepatic resection or liver transplantation. Exogenous and endogenous A(1) adenosine receptor (A(1)AR) activation protects against renal IR injury. In this study, we questioned whether exogenous and endogenous A(1)AR activation protects against hepatic IR injury in vivo. A(1)AR wild-type (WT) or knockout mice were subjected to 60 minutes of partial hepatic IR. Some animals were treated with a selective A(1)AR agonist, 2-chloro-N(6)-cyclopentyladenosine (CCPA; 0.1 mg/kg), or a selective A(1)AR antagonist, 8-cyclopentyl-1,3-dipropylxanthine (DPCPX; 0.4 mg/kg), 15 minutes before hepatic ischemia. Twenty-four hours after hepatic IR, the A(1) knockout mice and DPCPX-treated A(1) wild-type (A(1)WT) mice developed significantly worse liver injury (alanine aminotransferase, liver necrosis, neutrophil infiltration, and apoptosis) compared to A(1)AR WT mice. However, the selective A(1)AR agonist CCPA failed to protect against hepatic IR injury in A(1)WT mice. Our results show that the endogenous A(1)ARs protect against hepatic IR injury in vivo by primarily reducing apoptosis and necrosis with subsequent reductions in proinflammatory neutrophil infiltration. However, in contrast to the kidneys, in which exogenous A(1)AR activation protected against IR injury, exogenous A(1)AR activation failed to protect against liver injury after IR. We conclude that endogenous A(1)AR activation prevents worsened murine liver IR injury primarily by reducing necrotic and apoptotic cell death. Harnessing the mechanisms of cytoprotection with endogenous A(1)AR activation may lead to new therapies for perioperative hepatic IR injury.