Centhaquin improves survival in a swine model of hemorrhagic shock

Evolutionary Unmasking Resuscitative Therapeutics Potential of Centhaquin Citrate in Hypovolemic Shock

Hypovolemic shock (HS), a clinical condition of insufficient blood perfusion and oxygenation in body tissues, is associated with immense morbidity and mortality. Treatment approaches include fluid replacement and surgical repair of reversible causes of hemorrhage; however, they cause irreversible blood perfusion loss, systemic inflammation, multiple organ failure, and death. Centhaquin citrate (CC) is an innovative centrally acting cardiovascular active agent that is initially intended as an antihypertensive drug. However, due to its positive ionotropic effect, Centhaquin citrate is being tested clinically as a resuscitative agent for the management of hypovolemic shock It acts at the α2B-adrenergic receptor to produce venous constriction followed by an increase in venous return to the heart. These actions are assumed to be capable of resuscitative activity observed by centhaquin citrate, through an increase in cardiac output and tissue perfusion. Pharmacokinetics investigations in animals and humans have shown that centhaquin citrate is well tolerated and has insignificant side effects. Therefore, centhaquin citrate seems to be a promising entity and gaining the interest of researchers to develop it as a resuscitative agent in HS. The review gives insight into the development of centhaquin citrate as a resuscitative agent and provides insight into the associated mechanism of action and molecular signalling to foster future research on CC for its clinical use in HS.

Role of adrenergic receptors in shock

Shock is a severe, life-threatening medical condition with a high mortality rate worldwide. All four major categories of shock (along with their various subtypes)-hypovolemic, distributive, cardiogenic, and obstructive, involve a dramatic mismatch between oxygen supply and demand, and share standard features of decreased cardiac output, reduced blood pressure, and overall hypoperfusion. Immediate and appropriate intervention is required regardless of shock type, as a delay can result in cellular dysfunction, irreversible multiple organ failure, and death. Studies have shown that dysfunction and downregulation of adrenergic receptors (ARs) are often implicated in these shock conditions; for example, their density is shown to be decreased in hypovolemic and cardiogenic shock, while their reduced signaling in the brain and vasculature decrease blood perfusion and oxygen supply. There are two main categories of ARs, α, and β, each with its subtypes and distributions. Our group has demonstrated that a dose of .02 mg/kg body wt of centhaquine (CQ) specifically activates α2B ARs on venous circulation along with the central α2A ARs after hypovolemic/hemorrhagic shock. Activating these receptors by CQ increases cardiac output (CO) and reduces systemic vascular resistance (SVR), with a net increase in blood pressure and tissue perfusion. The clinical trials of CQ conducted by Pharmazz Inc. in India have demonstrated significantly improved survival in shock patients. CQ improved blood pressure and shock index, indicating better blood circulation, and reduced lactate levels in the blood compared to in-use standard resuscitative agents. After successful clinical trials, CQ is being marketed as a drug (Lyfaquin^®) for hypovolemic/hemorrhagic shock in India, and United States FDA has approved the phase III IND application. It is anticipated that the phase III trial in the United States will begin in 2023. Thus, we have demonstrated that α2 ARs could be suitable targets for treating or managing hypovolemic/hemorrhagic shock. Further understanding of ARs in shock would help find new potential pharmacological targets.

Pathophysiology of Hemorrhage as It Relates to the Warfighter

Saving lives of wounded military Warfighters often depends on the ability to resolve or mitigate the pathophysiology of hemorrhage, specifically diminished oxygen delivery to vital organs that leads to multi-organ failure and death. However, caring for hemorrhaging patients on the battlefield presents unique challenges that extend beyond applying a tourniquet and giving a blood transfusion, especially when battlefield care must be provided for a prolonged period. This review will describe these challenges and potential strategies for treating hemorrhage on the battlefield in a prolonged casualty care situation.

Baseline Values and Kinetics of IL-6, Procalcitonin, and TNF-α in Landrace-Large White Swine Anesthetized with Propofol-Based Total Intravenous Anesthesia

The baseline levels of various inflammatory mediators and their changes during anesthesia in swine are not known. The aim of this animal study was to measure the baseline values and kinetics of interleukin-6, procalcitonin, and tumor necrosis factor-alpha in healthy Landrace-Large White swine anesthetized with propofol-based total intravenous anesthesia. We included 8 healthy male pigs with an average weight of 19 ± 2 kg (aged 10-15 weeks) that were subjected to propofol-based total intravenous anesthesia for 8 hours. Complete blood count, serum chemistry, and serum levels of interleukin-6, procalcitonin, and tumor necrosis factor-alpha were analyzed, and serum levels were quantified hourly. Blood was also collected for bacterial culturing. Baseline values of interleukin-6 and procalcitonin were 18 pg/ml and 21 ng/ml, respectively, while tumor necrosis factor-alpha was not detectable during collection of baseline samples. A statistically significant difference was observed in interleukin-6 levels between time points (p < 0.0001). Procalcitonin increased with time, but there were no significant differences between time points (p = 0.152). Tumor necrosis factor-alpha increased until the 3rd hour of propofol-based total intravenous anesthesia, while after the 4th hour, it gradually decreased, reaching its baseline undetectable values by the 7th hour (p < 0.001). Our results can serve as the basis for further translational research.

Resuscitative Effect of Centhaquine (Lyfaquin®) in Hypovolemic Shock Patients: A Randomized, Multicentric, Controlled Trial

INTRODUCTION

Centhaquine (Lyfaquin®) showed significant efficacy as a resuscitative agent in animal models of haemorrhagic shock. Its safety and tolerability were confirmed in healthy human volunteers. In this study, our primary objective was to determine the safety, and the secondary objective was to assess the efficacy of centhaquine in patients with hypovolemic shock.

METHODS

A prospective, multicentre, randomized phase II study was conducted in male and female patients aged 18-70 years with hypovolemic shock having systolic BP ≤ 90 mmHg. Patients were randomized in a 1:1 ratio to either the control or centhaquine group. The control group received 100 ml of normal saline infusion over 1 h, while the centhaquine group received 0.01 mg/kg of centhaquine in 100 ml normal saline infusion over 1 h. Every patient received standard of care (SOC) and was followed for 28 days.

RESULTS

Fifty patients were included, and 45 completed the trial: 22 in the control group and 23 in the centhaquine group. The demographics of patients in both groups were comparable. No adverse event related to centhaquine was recorded in the 28-day observation period. The baseline, Injury Scoring System score, haemoglobin, and haematocrit were similar in both groups. However, 91% of the patients in the centhaquine group needed major surgery, whereas only 68% in the control group (p = 0.0526). Twenty-eight-day all-cause mortality was 0/23 in the centhaquine group and 2/22 in the control group. The percent time in ICU and ventilator support was less in the centhaquine group than in the control group. The total amount of vasopressors needed in the first 48 h of resuscitation was lower in the centhaquine group than in the control group (3.12 ± 2.18 vs. 9.39 ± 4.28 mg). An increase in systolic and diastolic BP from baseline through 48 h was more marked in the centhaquine group than in the control group. Compared with the control group, blood lactate level was lower by 1.75 ± 1.07 mmol/l in the centhaquine group on day 3 of resuscitation. Improvements in base deficit, multiple organ dysfunction syndrome (MODS) score and adult respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) were greater in the centhaquine group than in the control group.

CONCLUSION

When added to SOC, centhaquine is a well-tolerated and effective resuscitative agent. It improves the clinical outcome of patients with hypovolemic shock.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov identifier number: NCT04056065.

A Multicentric, Randomized, Controlled Phase III Study of Centhaquine (Lyfaquin®) as a Resuscitative Agent in Hypovolemic Shock Patients

Introduction

Centhaquine (Lyfaquin^®) showed significant safety and efficacy in preclinical and clinical phase I and II studies.

Methods

A prospective, multicentric, randomized phase III study was conducted in patients with hypovolemic shock, systolic blood pressure (SBP) ≤ 90 mmHg, and blood lactate levels ≥ 2 mmol/L. Patients were randomized in a 2:1 ratio to the centhaquine group (n = 71) or the control (saline) group (n = 34). Every patient received standard of care (SOC) and was followed for 28 days. The study drug (normal saline or centhaquine 0.01 mg/kg) was administered in 100 mL of normal saline infusion over 1 h. The primary objectives were to determine changes (mean through 48 h) in SBP, diastolic blood pressure (DBP), blood lactate levels, and base deficit. The secondary objectives included the amount of fluids, blood products, and vasopressors administered in the first 48 h, duration of hospital stay, time in intensive care units, time on ventilator support, change in acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS), multiple organ dysfunction syndrome (MODS), and the proportion of patients with 28-day all-cause mortality.

Results

The demographics of patients and baseline vitals in both groups were comparable. The cause of hypovolemic shock was trauma in 29.4 and 47.1% of control group and centhaquine group patients, respectively, and gastroenteritis in 44.1 and 29.4%, respectively. Shock index (SI) and quick sequential organ failure assessment at baseline were similar in the two groups. An equal amount of fluids and blood products were administered in both groups during the first 48 h of resuscitation. A lesser amount of vasopressors was needed in the first 48 h of resuscitation in the centhaquine group. An increase in SBP from baseline was consistently higher up to 48 h (12.9% increase in area under the curve from 0 to 48 h [AUC_0–48]) in the centhaquine group than in the control group. A significant increase in pulse pressure (48.1% increase in AUC_0–48) in the centhaquine group compared with the control group suggests improved stroke volume due to centhaquine. The SI was significantly lower in the centhaquine group from 1 h (p = 0.032) to 4 h (p = 0.049) of resuscitation. Resuscitation with centhaquine resulted in a significantly greater number of patients with improved blood lactate (control 46.9%; centhaquine 69.3%; p = 0.03) and the base deficit (control 43.7%; centhaquine 69.8%; p = 0.01) than in the control group. ARDS and MODS improved with centhaquine, and an 8.8% absolute reduction in 28-day all-cause mortality was observed in the centhaquine group.

Conclusion

Centhaquine is an efficacious resuscitative agent for treating hypovolemic shock. The efficacy of centhaquine in distributive shock is being explored.

Trial Registration

Clinical Trials Registry, India; ctri.icmr.org.in, CTRI/2019/01/017196; clinicaltrials.gov, NCT04045327.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s40265-021-01547-5.

A multicentric, randomized, controlled phase III study of centhaquine (Lyfaquin ® ) as a resuscitative agent in hypovolemic shock patients

INTRODUCTION

Centhaquine (Lyfaquin ^® ) showed significant safety and efficacy in preclinical and clinical phase I and II studies.

METHODS

A prospective, multicentric, randomized phase III study was conducted in patients with hypovolemic shock having systolic blood pressure (SBP) of ≤90 mm Hg and blood lactate levels of ≥2 mmol/L. Patients were randomized in a 2:1 ratio, 71 patients to the centhaquine group and 34 patients to the control (saline) group. Every patient received standard of care (SOC) and was followed for 28 days. The study drug (normal saline or centhaquine (0.01 mg/kg)) was administered in 100 mL of normal saline infusion over 1 hour. The primary objectives were to determine changes (mean through 48 hours) in SBP, diastolic blood pressure (DBP), blood lactate levels, and base deficit. The secondary objectives included the amount of fluids, blood products, vasopressors administered in the first 48 hours, duration of hospital stay, time in ICU, time on the ventilator support, change in patient's Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome (ARDS), Multiple Organ Dysfunction Syndrome (MODS) scores, and the proportion of patients with 28-day all-cause mortality.

RESULTS

The demographics of patients and baseline vitals in both groups were comparable. Trauma was the cause of hypovolemic shock in 29.41% of control and 47.06% of centhaquine, gastroenteritis in 44.12% of control, and 29.41% of centhaquine patients. An equal amount of fluids and blood products were administered in both groups during the first 48 hours of resuscitation. A lesser amount of vasopressors was needed in the first 48 hours of resuscitation in the centhaquine group. An increase in SBP from the baseline was consistently higher in the centhaquine group than in the control. A significant increase in pulse pressure in the centhaquine group than the control group suggests improved stroke volume due to centhaquine. The shock index was significantly lower in the centhaquine group than control from 1 hour (p=0.0320) till 4 hours (p=0.0494) of resuscitation. Resuscitation with centhaquine had a significantly greater number of patients with improved blood lactate and the base deficit than the control group. ARDS and MODS improved with centhaquine, and an 8.8% absolute reduction in 28-day all-cause mortality was observed in the centhaquine group.

CONCLUSION

Centhaquine is a highly efficacious resuscitative agent for treating hypovolemic shock. The efficacy of centhaquine in distributive shock due to sepsis and COVID-19 is being explored.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Clinical Trials Registry, India; ctri.icmr.org.in, CTRI/2019/01/017196; clinicaltrials.gov, NCT04045327 .

KEY SUMMARY POINTS

A multicentric, randomized, controlled trial was conducted to evaluate the efficacy of centhaquine in hypovolemic shock patients.One hundred and five patients were randomized 2:1 to receive centhaquine or saline. Centhaquine was administered at a dose of 0.01 mg/kg in 100 mL saline and infused over 1 hour. The control group received 100 mL of saline over a 1-hour infusion.Centhaquine improved blood pressure, shock index, reduced blood lactate levels, and improved base deficit. Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome (ARDS) and Multiple Organ Dysfunction Syndrome (MODS) score improved with centhaquine.An 8.8% absolute reduction in 28-day all-cause mortality was observed in the centhaquine group. There were no drug-related adverse events in the study.

Centhaquine Restores Renal Blood Flow and Protects Tissue Damage After Hemorrhagic Shock and Renal Ischemia

Background: Centhaquine (CQ) (Lyfaquin®) is in late stage clinical development as a safe and effective first-in-class resuscitative agent for hemorrhagic shock patients (NCT02408731, NCT04056065, and NCT04045327). Acute kidney injury (AKI) is known to be associated with hemorrhagic shock. Hence, effect of CQ on protection of kidneys from damage due to hemorrhagic shock was investigated. Methods: To assess effect of CQ on AKI in shock, we created a rat model with hemorrhagic shock and AKI. Renal arteries were clamped and de-clamped to induce AKI like ischemia/reperfusion model and hemorrhage was carried out by withdrawing blood for 30 min. Rats were resuscitated with CQ (0.02 mg/kg) for 10 min. MAP, heart rate (HR), and renal blood flow (RBF) were monitored for 120 min. Results: CQ produced a significant improvement in RBF compared to vehicle (p< 0.003) even though MAP and HR was similar in CQ and vehicle groups. Blood lactate level was lower (p = 0.0064) in CQ than vehicle at 120 min post-resuscitation. Histopathological analysis of tissues indicated greater renal damage in vehicle than CQ. Western blots showed higher HIF-1α (p = 0.0152) and lower NGAL (p = 0.01626) levels in CQ vs vehicle. Immunofluorescence in the kidney cortex and medulla showed significantly higher (p< 0.045) expression of HIF-1α and lower expression of Bax (p< 0.044) in CQ. Expression of PHD 3 (p< 0.0001) was higher, while the expression of Cytochrome C (p = 0.01429) was lower in the cortex of CQ than vehicle. Conclusion: Results show CQ (Lyfaquin®) increased renal blood flow, augmented hypoxia response, decreased tissue damage and apoptosis following hemorrhagic shock induced AKI, and may be explored to prevent/treat AKI. Translational Statement: Centhaquine (CQ) is safe for human use and currently in late stage clinical development as a first-in-class resuscitative agent to treat hemorrhagic shock. In the current study, we have explored a novel role of CQ in protection from hemorrhagic shock induced AKI, indicating its potential to treat/prevent AKI.

Measurement of mean systemic filling pressure after severe hemorrhagic shock in swine anesthetized with propofol-based total intravenous anesthesia: implications for vasopressor-free resuscitation

Background

Mean systemic filling pressure (Pmsf) is a quantitative measurement of a patient’s volume status and represents the tone of the venous reservoir. The aim of this study was to estimate Pmsf after severe hemorrhagic shock and cardiac arrest in swine anesthetized with propofol-based total intravenous anesthesia, as well as to evaluate Pmsf’s association with vasopressor-free resuscitation.

Methods

Ten healthy Landrace/Large-White piglets aged 10–12 weeks with average weight 20±1 kg were used in this study. The protocol was divided into four distinct phases: stabilization, hemorrhagic, cardiac arrest, and resuscitation phases. We measured Pmsf at 5–7.5 seconds after the onset of cardiac arrest and then every 10 seconds until 1 minute postcardiac arrest. During resuscitation, lactated Ringers was infused at a rate that aimed for a mean right atrial pressure of ≤4 mm Hg. No vasopressors were used.

Results

The mean volume of blood removed was 860±20 ml (blood loss, ~61%) and the bleeding time was 43.2±2 minutes while all animals developed pulseless electrical activity. Mean Pmsf was 4.09±1.22 mm Hg, and no significant differences in Pmsf were found until 1 minute postcardiac arrest (4.20±0.22 mm Hg at 5–7.5 seconds and 3.72±0.23 mm Hg at 55– 57.5 seconds; P=0.102). All animals achieved return of spontaneous circulation (ROSC), with mean time to ROSC being 6.1±1.7 minutes and mean administered volume being 394±20 ml.

Conclusions

For the first time, Pmsf was estimated after severe hemorrhagic shock. In this study, Pmsf remained stable during the first minute post-arrest. All animals achieved ROSC with goal-directed fluid resuscitation and no vasopressors.

Resuscitation with centhaquin and 6% hydroxyethyl starch 130/0.4 improves survival in a swine model of hemorrhagic shock: a randomized experimental study

PURPOSE

To investigate the effects of the combination of centhaquin and 6% hydroxyethyl starch 130/0.4 (HES 130/0.4) in a swine model of hemorrhagic shock.

METHODS

Twenty Landrace-Large White pigs were instrumented and subjected to hemorrhagic shock. The animals were randomly allocated in two experimental groups, the control (group CO, n = 10) and the centhaquin groups (0.015 mg/kg, n = 10, group CH). Acute hemorrhage was induced by stepwise blood withdrawal (18 mL/min) from the internal jugular vein until MAP decreased to 40-45 mmHg, whereas anesthesia remained constant. All animals received HES 130/0.4 solution in the resuscitation phase until their mean arterial pressure (MAP) reached 90% of the baseline. The animals were observed for 60 min, during which no further resuscitation was attempted.

RESULTS

The total amount of blood and the bleeding time did not differ significantly between group CO and group CH (120 ± 13 vs. 120 ± 14 mL, p = 0.6; 20 ± 2 vs. 20 ± 1 min, p = 0.62, respectively). During the hemorrhagic phase, only a difference in heart rate (97.6 ± 4.4 vs. 128.4 ± 3.6 beats/min, p = 0.038) was observed between the two groups. The time required to reach the target MAP was significantly shorter in the centhaquin group compared to controls (13.7 ± 0.4 vs. 19.6 ± 0.84 min, p = 0.012). During the resuscitation phase, a statistical significant difference was observed in MAP (75.2 ± 1.6 vs. 89.8 ± 2.1 mmHg, p = 0.02) between group CO and group CH. During the observation phase, a statistical significant difference was observed in SVR (1109 ± 32.65 vs. 774.6 ± 21.82 dyn s/cm⁵, p = 0.039) and cardiac output (5.82 ± 0.31 vs. 6.9 ± 0.78 L/min, p = 0.027) between the two groups. Two animals of group CO and seven animals of group CH survived for 24 h (p = 0.008). We observed a marked increase in microvascular capillary permeability in group CO compared to group CH, with the wet/dry weight ratio being significantly higher in group CO compared to group CH (4.8 ± 1.6 vs. 3.08 ± 0.6, p < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

The combination of centhaquin 0.015 mg/kg and HES 130/0.4 resulted in shorter time to target MAP, lower wet-to-dry ratio, and better survival rates after resuscitation from hemorrhagic shock.

Alterations in endothelin receptors following hemorrhage and resuscitation by centhaquin

Endothelin-1 (ET-1) acts on ET(A) and ET(B) receptors and has been implicated in hemorrhagic shock (shock). We determined effect of shock and resuscitation by hypertonic saline (saline) or centhaquin on ET(A) and ET(B) receptor expression. Rats were anesthetized, a pressure catheter was placed in the left femoral artery; blood was withdrawn from the right femoral artery to bring mean arterial pressure (MAP) to 35 mm Hg for 30 min, resuscitation was performed and 90 min later sacrificed to collect samples for biochemical estimations. Resuscitation with centhaquin decreased blood lactate and increased MAP. Protein levels of ET(A) or ET(B) receptor were unaltered in the brain, heart, lung and liver following shock or resuscitation. In the abdominal aorta, shock produced an increase (140 %) in ET(A) expression which was attenuated by saline and centhaquin; ET(B) expression was unaltered following shock but was increased (79 %) by centhaquin. In renal medulla, ET(A) expression was unaltered following shock, but was decreased (-61 %) by centhaquin; shock produced a decrease (-34 %) in ET(B) expression which was completely attenuated by centhaquin and not saline. Shock induced changes in ET(A) and ET(B) receptors in the aorta and renal medulla are reversed by centhaquin and may be contributing to its efficacy.