Abstract
Endotoxins are the major components of the outer membrane of most Gram-negative bacteria and are one of the main targets in inflammatory diseases. The presence of endotoxins in blood can provoke septic shock in case of pronounced immune response. Here we show
Introduction
In recent years, endotoxins (LPS) have increasingly become the focus of interest for therapy of diseases that are treated with extracorporeal blood purification. LPS is a major constituent of the outer cell envelope of most Gram-negative bacteria and may strongly trigger inflammatory responses in humans, even at doses as low as 1 ng/kg body mass/h. 1 LPS is released from the cell envelope of growing bacteria, as well as by lysis via antibiotics or complement.2,3 Endotoxins that enter the circulatory system bind to the soluble lipopolysaccharide binding protein (LBP). This complex initiates the inflammatory response by binding to the CD14 membrane protein of monocytes and macrophages, subsequently triggering the production of cytokines via TLR. LPS activation of TLR4 triggers the biosynthesis of diverse mediators of inflammation, such as TNF-α and IL-1β, 4 and activates the production of co-stimulatory molecules required for the adaptive immune response. 5 In mononuclear and endothelial cells, LPS also stimulates tissue factor production, 6 and can therefore trigger the extrinsic coagulation pathway. As long as this process is limited to a local increase of pro- or anti-inflammatory cytokines, this is a normal response of the patient’s immune reaction against pathogens. However, in severe cases, the production of cytokines gets out of control leading to the more severe medical conditions such as systemic inflammatory response syndrome (SIRS) or sepsis. Thus, the effective removal of endotoxins is essential in order to reduce cytokine production in the case of Gram-negative sepsis.
Furthermore, endotoxins play an important role in liver failure. Endotoxins from patients’ intestines can pass the liver owing to reduced endotoxin removal via the reticuloendothelial system, which can lead to endotoxemia and, finally, to the symptoms described above.7,8
Different approaches have been followed to remove or inactivate endotoxins upon inflammation and sepsis. Antimicrobial peptides (AMPs) can block the endotoxin-initiated inflammatory cascade, which leads to a reduction of cytokine production. These AMPs are currently intensively investigated and provide, to some extent, promising results.9–11 While polymyxins are well known to inactivate the biological activity of LPS by shutting down the NF-κB pathway, owing to direct binding of LPS, 12 the mechanisms of action for some other AMPs are not yet fully understood. There is some evidence that they enter another mode of action by inserting into CD14-positive cells and reducing the endotoxin activity by competitive inhibition due to their high affinity to LPS. 13
Polymyxin B (PMB) is an antibiotic preferably applied to treat infections provoked by multidrug resistant Gram-negative bacteria. It is a cyclic, highly cationic decapeptide derived from
Currently, knowledge about pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of polymyxins is very limited as intravenous administration was avoided within the last 50 yrs. Furthermore, nephro- and neurotoxicity restricted clinical application. Because of increasing numbers of multidrug-resistant Gram-negative pathogens and limited development of new antimicrobials, PMB experiences a revival as a therapeutic option for Gram-negative infections. 23 In particular, the use of affinity chromatographic sorbents based on PMB ligands is reported as an appropriate method to remove endotoxins from protein solutions without denaturation and loss of products. 24 Here we show that endotoxin inactivation by PMB or polymyxin E (PME; colistin) in patients with Gram-negative sepsis or endotoxemia could be an additional therapeutic option.
Materials and methods
Materials
PMB and endotoxins (LPS) from
LPS inactivation as a function of PMB concentration
To elucidate the dependency of LPS inactivation on the PMB concentration, fresh human heparinized plasma containing 5 ng/ml or 0.5 ng/ml LPS from either
Influence of PMB–LPS complex on cytokine induction
The PMB-dependent reduction of the LPS activity, as indicated by the LAL test, is not necessarily associated with a reduced inflammatory effect of LPS, namely the induction of the cytokine production. Therefore, further experiments were conducted in order to check if cytokine induction can be modulated by PMB-dependent inactivation of LPS. For these experiments, freshly drawn human heparinized blood was spiked with PMB to yield 0, 250, 500 and 1000 ng/ml PMB. Then, 0.5 ng/ml LPS from
Combined use of PMB and cytokine adsorbent
To verify whether the combination of adsorptive cytokine removal and PMB infusion is more effective than one of these treatments, an experiment as schematically displayed in Figure 1 was conducted. This experiment was carried out with blood from three different volunteers.
Scheme of the experiment where three different treatment options: (i) adsorbent combined with PMB; (ii) adsorbent treatment only; (iii) PMB treatment only. The influence on inflammation was tested by determination of the cytokine levels after incubation of differently pre-treated plasma samples with native blood cells.
Binding of PMB to plasma proteins
Depending on the affinity to plasma proteins, which is a specific characteristic of a drug, one part of the drug is transported by plasma proteins and another part is freely distributed throughout the circulation. If protein binding is reversible, an equilibrium will exist between the bound and unbound proportion. To evaluate plasma protein binding, fresh citrate anticoagulated plasma from three donors was spiked with 1 µg/ml PMB. Five hundred µl PMB containing plasma was centrifuged (10,000
Clearance measurement of PMB
Since sepsis patients with acute kidney injury are treated with renal replacement therapy, a dialysis experiment was performed to estimate the clearance of PMB during a treatment. As intensive care treatment sessions usually take several hours, it can be assumed that most of the non-protein-bound fraction of PMB is removed during treatment. In order to avoid that the inflammatory activity of LPS is restored by PMB removal, PMB monitoring would be useful. To check the PMB clearance by a conventional dialysis filter, 1500 ml plasma spiked with 5 µg/ml PMB was circulated through a dialyzer (AV1000S, FMC, Bad Homburg, Germany) using the multiFiltrate device from Fresenius Medical Care (Bad Homburg, Germany). The schematic setup of this experiment is shown in Figure 2. The plasma flow rate (Qb) was 100 ml/min and dialysate (QD) flow rates of 2000 ml/h and 4800 ml/h were chosen. Samples for PMB quantification were collected pre- and postfilter after 5, 10, 15, 20, 25 and 30 min. The experiment was performed three times with different plasma and dialyzers and the PMB clearance was calculated according to the following formula:
Setup for determination of PMB clearance during hemodialysis using the multiFiltrate. The experiment was performed with (A) 1500 ml plasma, (B) a blood pump with (QB) flow rates between 50 and 200 ml and (C) the dialyzer AV1000 S (Fresenius Medical Care). Samples were taken pre- (Cin) and post- (Cout) filter after 5, 10, 15, 20, 25 and 30 min.

PMB quantification
The blood and plasma levels of PMB were determined by use of a competitive enzyme immunoassay kit for analysis of PMB and PME with a detection limit of 1 ng/ml. If necessary, the samples were diluted with dilution reagent provided with the ELISA kit to reach the measuring range between 0 and 100 ng/ml PMB.
Cytokine quantification
The analysis of cytokines was conducted by ELISA with a Bio-Plex cytokine array system (Biorad, Vienna, Austria).
Statistics
Mean and SD were calculated with Excel 2010 (Microsoft, Redmond, WA, USA). The tests for normal distribution and the
Results
LPS inactivation as a function of PMB concentration and ENC50
To estimate the plasma level of PMB required to decrease the LPS activity to a certain level, the LPS inactivation in plasma was measured as a function of PMB concentration. At 0.5 ng/ml LPS, the ENC50 is 84 and 63 ng/ml for LPS from PMB-dependent inactivation of endotoxins from PMB-dependent inactivation of endotoxins from 

Influence of PMB–LPS complex on cytokine induction
Although the LAL test revealed inactivation of LPS by PMB in a concentration-dependent manner, the influence on inflammation was tested by stimulating leukocytes from human blood with increasing amounts of PMB. The results of cytokine release show clearly that the formed LPS–PMB complex exerts a by far lower stimulating effect on blood cells than the native LPS molecule (Table 1; Figure 5). Among all cytokines under investigation, the highest impact was observed on TNF-α release. Only 50 ng PMB per ml blood reduced TNF-α secretion from leukocytes by 87.4 ± 5.9%. Increasing the PMB 2.5-fold to 125 ng/ml decreased the TNF-α level by about 94.8 ± 2.3%. A further increase of PMB caused no considerable decrease of cytokine concentrations (Table 1). The lowest impact of PMB was observed on IL-8 secretion. However, even the negative control without LPS showed high levels of IL-8. In general, the IL-10 level was very low (23 ± 8 pg/ml) because IL-10 is a late-related cytokine and a high level can only be reached if stimulation of the blood cells is prolonged to 12 h. The secretion of IL-1β was reduced by 75.1 ± 10.8% and that of IL-6 by 78.0 ± 12.0% in the presence of 125 ng PMB per ml blood.
The effect of LPS inactivation by PMB on cytokine release in whole blood from three different donors (mean ± SD; The cytokine release in LPS-stimulated ( The results are % SD of the positive control without PMB.
Combined use of PMB and cytokine adsorbent
As pre-existing cytokines cannot be reduced by PMB infusion and the inflammatory acting LPS cannot be removed from blood by adsorption techniques sufficiently, these two types of treatments were simulated in an Comparison of the cytokine release pattern from blood cells after different ways of plasma pre-treatments: adsorbent combined with PMB (Ads/PMB); only adsorbent (Ads); only PMB (PMB); untreated plasma (+ control); native blood (− control). Cytokine release from blood cells after incubation with differently treated inflammatory plasma. The plasma treatments were (i) addition of PMB, (ii) adsorbent to remove cytokines or (iii) the combination of both (see also Figure 1). The results of each donator (A, B and C) are given in % as referred to the positive control without any treatment set at 100%.
Binding of PMB to plasma proteins
Most drugs bind to plasma proteins such as albumin, α1-acid glycoprotein, lipoproteins, α-, β- and γ-globulins, and to erythrocytes. Ultracentrifugation of PMB-spiked plasma through membranes with different MMCOs for separation of protein-bound PMB from free PMB revealed that this drug with a molecular weight of 1.3 kDa is mostly bound to plasma contents. Only the membrane with 100 kDa MMCO was permeable for higher amounts of PMB (25 ± 13%). The PMB-content of filtrates obtained from centrifugation through membranes with smaller pores was <10% compared with a PMB-solution without plasma (Figure 7). Thus, >90% of PMB is bound to plasma proteins and not even one-tenth exists in its free form in circulation.
Binding of PMB to plasma proteins determined by ultrafiltration through membranes with different MMCO. The filtration rate of PMB in plasma was compared with that in 0.9% NaCl solution. The data represent the percentage of PMB in the filtrate as referred to the positive control (mean ± SD; 
Clearance measurement of PMB
The PMB clearance (ClPMB) for the AV1000S filter was determined using the multiFiltrate device (FMC) at a blood flow rate of 100 ml/min. The PMB clearance was 12.9 ± 5.1 ml/min (
Discussion
In sepsis therapy, adsorption-based removal of LPS is still a challenge. The LPS molecule consists of a conserved hydrophobic domain known as lipid A, a non-repeating ‘core’ oligosaccharide and a highly variable distal polysaccharide. Until now, specific adsorption based on immobilized Abs did not offer promising results.27–30 In the case of Abs against the lipid A region, this was attributed to the low affinity of anti-lipid A Abs to lipid A and to cross-reactivity to plasma proteins.31,32 Adsorption based on Abs against the polysaccharide chain (O-antigen) is not feasible as the polysaccharide domain is highly variable. Although anion-exchanger resins efficiently remove endotoxins from aqueous solutions, as well as from protein solutions, they cannot be used in blood purification because of insufficient biocompatibility.
33
Since 1994, a PMB-based extracorporeal hemoperfusion device, called Toraymyxin, has been commercially available and is now approved as a therapeutic device by the health insurance system in Japan.
34
It is recommended for selective blood purification from endotoxins via direct hemoperfusion. Toraymyxin consists of polystyrene-derivative fibres with covalently immobilized PMB at a mass ratio of 0.5%.
35
Direct hemoperfusion using such a PMB-immobilized fiber column (PMX-F) has been used for about 15 yrs for the treatment of septic shock.
36
Direct hemoperfusion with PMX-F can be applied in patients with endotoxemia or suspected Gram-negative infection, who fulfill the conditions of SIRS and suffer from a septic shock requiring administration of vasoactive agents. Several studies claim that endotoxins are efficiently removed by PMX-F,35,37–39 and, concurrently,
Conclusions
As endotoxins induce a strong host immune response, there is an urgent therapeutic need to reduce their activity. As a promising alternative or add-on to endotoxin adsorbents, endotoxin inactivation by low-dose PMB intravenous infusion or infusion into the extracorporeal circuit during blood purification is proposed to reduce considerably endotoxin activity not only in treatment of sepsis, but also in liver failure. However, the findings presented here are based on
Footnotes
Acknowledgements
The excellent technical support of Ute Fichtinger and Claudia Schildböck in the laboratories is gratefully acknowledged.
Declaration of Conflicting Interests
The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.
Funding
The author(s) disclosed receipt of the following financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article: This work was supported by the government of Lower Austria and the European Commission (Project ID: WST3-T-91/036-2014).
