==== Front
Eur J Med Res
Eur J Med Res
European Journal of Medical Research
0949-2321
2047-783X
BioMed Central London

1184
10.1186/s40001-023-01184-6
Research
Comparison of the cytokine adsorption ability in continuous renal replacement therapy using polyethyleneimine-coated polyacrylonitrile (AN69ST) or polymethylmethacrylate (PMMA) hemofilters: a pilot single-center open-label randomized control trial
Nakamura Yoshihiko pdmxy827@yahoo.co.jp

1
Hatomoto Hiroki 2
Yamasaki Shintaro 2
Yamauchi Kazuya 2
Kiyomi Fumiaki 3
Hoshino Kota 1
Kawano Yasumasa 1
Nakano Takafumi 4
Hasegawa Takehiro 5
Ishikura Hiroyasu 2
1 grid.411556.2 0000 0004 0594 9821 Department of Emergency and Critical Care Medicine, Fukuoka University Hospital, 7-45-1 Nanakuma, Jonan-ku, Fukuoka, 814-0180 Japan
2 grid.411556.2 0000 0004 0594 9821 Department of Clinical Engineer Center, Fukuoka University Hospital, Fukuoka, Japan
3 Clinical Research Support Center Kyusyu, Fukuoka, Japan
4 grid.411497.e 0000 0001 0672 2176 Department of Pharmacology, Faculty of Pharmaceutical Sciences, Fukuoka University, Fukuoka, Japan
5 Research and Development Division, Sysmex R&D Centre Europe GmbH, Hamburg, Germany
30 6 2023
30 6 2023
2023
28 20815 2 2023
21 6 2023
© The Author(s) 2023
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data.
Background

Sepsis occurs as a result of dysregulated host response to infection. However, cytokine adsorption therapy may restore the balance of proinflammatory and anti-inflammatory mediator responses in patients with sepsis. This study aimed to determine the cytokine adsorption ability of two different types of continuous renal replacement therapy (CRRT) hemofilters for polyethyleneimine-coated polyacrylonitrile (AN69ST) (surface-treated) and polymethylmethacrylate (PMMA) CRRT.

Methods

We performed a randomized controlled trial among sepsis patients undergoing CRRT, who were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive either AN69ST or PMMA-CRRT. The primary outcome was cytokine clearance of hemofilter adsorption (CHA). The secondary endpoints were the intensive care unit (ICU) and 28-day mortalities.

Results

We randomly selected 52 patients. Primary outcome data were available for 26 patients each in the AN69ST-CRRT and PMMA-CRRT arms. The CHA of high-mobility group box 1, tumor necrosis factor, interleukin (IL)-8, monokine induced by interferon-γ, and macrophage inflammatory protein were significantly higher in the AN69ST-CRRT group than in the PMMA-CRRT group (P < 0.001, P < 0.01, P < 0.001, P < 0.001 and P < 0.001, respectively). In contrast, the CHA of IL-6 was significantly higher in the PMMA-CRRT group than in the AN69ST-CRRT group (P < 0.001). In addition, the 28-day mortality was not significantly different between the two groups (50% in AN69ST-CRRT vs. 30.8% in PMMA-CRRT, P = 0.26).

Conclusion

AN69ST and PMMA membranes have different cytokine CHA in patients with sepsis. Therefore, these two hemofilters may have to be used depending on the target cytokine.

Trial registration number: This study was registered in the University Hospital Medical Information Network on November 1, 2017 (Trial No: UMIN000029450, https://center6.umin.ac.jp).

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s40001-023-01184-6.

Keywords

Sepsis
Cytokine adsorption
Continuous renal replacement therapy
Polyethyleneimine-coated
Polymethylmethacrylate
issue-copyright-statement© BioMed Central Ltd., part of Springer Nature 2023
==== Body
pmcBackground

Sepsis, which is a life-threatening organ dysfunction, is caused by the dysregulated host response to infection [1]. High blood levels of proinflammatory and anti-inflammatory cytokines are associated with mortality [2]. This signal activates leukocytes and induces the synthesis of pro- and anti-inflammatory cytokines, including tumor necrosis factor-alpha (TNF-α), interleukin (IL)-1, IL-6, IL-8, and IL-10. In addition, the massive release of cytokines in the blood has been described as a “cytokine storm” and is believed to be responsible for major organ dysfunction [3]. Moreover, cytokine adsorption therapy may restore the balance of proinflammatory and anti-inflammatory mediator responses in patients with sepsis [4]. Thus, cytokine adsorption therapy may reduce the mortality rate; however, this potential has not yet been proven.

Acute kidney injury (AKI) is significantly associated with a high mortality rate in critically ill patients [5]. Continuous renal replacement therapy (CRRT) is widely used in the intensive care unit (ICU) [6]. In addition, cytokine-adsorbing hemofilters, including polyethyleneimine (PEI)-coated polyacrylonitrile (AN69ST) or polymethylmethacrylate (PMMA) [7–9] membranes, are commonly used in Japan for appropriate control of cytokine overproduction in patients with sepsis. In vitro studies have demonstrated that AN69ST membranes have a superior adsorption ability for TNF-α, IL-8 [10], and high-mobility group box 1 (HMGB1) [11], whereas PMMA membranes strongly adsorb IL-6 [10]. A previous observational study showed that the ability of adsorption for chemokines was different between the AN69ST and PMMA membranes [12]. However, clinical evidence comparing cytokine adsorption in these two hemofilters is lacking, and from these aspects, we evaluated the cytokines, including TNF-α, IL-6, IL-8, IL-10, IL-18, monokine induced by interferon-γ (MIG), macrophage inflammatory protein (MIP)-1α, and HMGB1 in the present study. This open-label randomized controlled trial (RCT) aimed to clarify the difference in cytokine adsorption ability between the AN69ST and PMMA hemofilters.

Methods

Trial design and patients

This pilot open-label RCT was conducted at the Tertiary Emergency and Critical Care Center of Fukuoka University Hospital (Fukuoka, Japan) according to the Declaration of Helsinki. Our emergency and closed ICU has 32 beds. The trial was registered at the University Hospital Medical Information Network (UMIN000029450), and its protocol was previously published (https://center6.umin.ac.jp). Eligible patients (at least 18 years of age) included those (1) with sepsis diagnosed using the Sepsis-3 definition [1] on admission; (2) who underwent CRRT therapy; and (3) with AKI diagnosed according to the Kidney Disease: Improving Global Outcome [13] criteria or had undergone prior dialysis for treating end-stage kidney disease (EDKD). Sepsis was defined as cases caused not only by bacterial, but also by viral infection [1]. Therefore, patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) were subjected to the same eligibility criteria, randomization procedure, consent process, and interventions as other patients with sepsis. Patients who had COVID-19 included those with AKI and without AKI, as the Japanese Ministry of Health, Labour, and Welfare recommends considering CRRT for patients with COVID-19 (https://www.mhlw.go.jp/content/000936655.pdf). Regarding the payment for renal replacement therapy (RRT), Japan has adopted a universal health insurance system. Therefore, patients’ financial condition does not influence physicians’ decisions about medical interventions and RRT induction [14]. Furthermore, no evidence regarding the optimal RRT conditions for AKI is firmly established [15]. Therefore, the timing of RRT initiation depends on the attending clinician’s decision.

Interventions and procedures

The PMMA and AN69ST groups were defined based on the PMMA and AN69ST membranes. CRRT was initiated immediately after ICU admission. The patients were randomly assigned (1:1) to the AN69ST or PMMA groups. Random numbers were generated using the Excel random function (Microsoft Japan Co., Ltd., Tokyo, Japan), and patients were then randomly assigned to groups according to the hemofilter used.

All patients were randomized immediately following ICU admission, and CRRT was initiated in the ICU. CRRT was performed using ACH-10® or ACH-Σ® (Asahi Kasei Medical Co., Ltd., Tokyo, Japan). The hemofilters used were an AN69ST (sepXiris150; Baxter Co. Ltd., Tokyo, Japan) or a PMMA membrane (Hemofeel CH1.5N; Toray Medical Co., Ltd., Tokyo, Japan). All CRRT modes were continuous hemodiafiltration. The operating conditions were as follows: quantity of blood flow (QB), 80–100 mL/min; dialysate flow rate, 500 mL/h; and filtration flow rate (QF), 300 mL/h. Sublood-BS (Fuso Pharmaceutical Industries, Osaka, Japan) was used as both the dialysate and replacement fluid. Nafamostat mesylate (NM) (Asahi Kasei Pharma Corp., Tokyo, Japan) was administered as an anticoagulant, and the dose was maintained in the range of 0–30 mg/h. The activated clotting time after hemofiltration was maintained at > 180 s, and it was measured using the Hemochron Response (Heiwa Bussan, Co. Ltd., Tokyo, Japan). NM is a protease inhibitor that strongly inhibits the activity of various coagulation enzymes [16]. Because of its short half-life, NM is regarded as a useful regional anticoagulant during hemodialysis in patients with bleeding tendencies [17]. Accordingly, NM has been in use since 1990 (primarily in Japan) [18] as a regional and widely used as anticoagulant during blood purification in Japanese ICUs [19].

Data and sample collection

The baseline data, including patients’ characteristics such as age, sex, comorbidities, AKI stage on admission, source of infection, and detected microorganism (COVID-19 was diagnosed based on the detection of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 [SARS-CoV-2] on reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction or SARS-CoV-2 antigen from a nasopharyngeal swab sample), diagnosed septic shock [1] on admission; laboratory data, including white blood cell and platelet counts and total bilirubin, creatinine, lactate, C-reactive protein, and procalcitonin levels; whether or not mechanical ventilation was performed; partial pressure of arterial oxygen/fraction of inspired oxygen (PaO2/FIO2) ratio; vasopressor index (VAI) [20]; and Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation II [21] and Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA) [22] scores on admission, hemofilter lifetime, the number of hemofilters used within 24 h after CRRT initiation, and sample collection time after CRRT initiation were also collected.

Blood samples and filtrates were drawn from the extracorporeal circuit at the inlet and outlet of the hemofilter 2–6 and 12–24 h after initiating CRRT (circuit schema is shown in Additional file 1) to evaluate cytokine clearance of hemofilter adsorption (CHA), and blood samples were collected before ICU admission and on days 2–4 and 5–7 after ICU admission from the peripheral arterial catheter. Whole blood was collected with ethylenediaminetetraacetic acid-2 K as an anticoagulant in a conventional blood collection tube NP-EN0557-6 (NIPRO Co., Osaka, Japan). The blood was centrifuged at 1,400 × g for 15 min, and the plasma was stored at -80 °C until measurement.

TNF-α, IL-1β, IL-6, IL-8, IL-10, MIG, and MIP-1α levels were measured using a HISCL-5000 (Sysmex Co., Kobe, Japan) [23] and HMGB1 enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay kit (Shino-Test Corp., Tokyo Japan).

Outcomes

The primary outcome was cytokine CHA. Plasma cytokine clearance was calculated according to the following formula [8, 24]:Plasma clearance;CLs=(CBi-CBo)/CBi×QB-QF+QF,

Transmembrane clearance;FLs=CF/CBi×QF,

Clearance of hemofilter adsorption CHA=CLs-FLs,

where CBi is the blood cytokine level at the filter inlet, CBo represents the blood cytokine level at the filter outlet, QB is the quantity of blood flow (mL/min), QF is the ultrafiltrate flow rate (mL/h), and CF is the cytokine level in the filtrate.

Secondary endpoints included blood cytokine levels upon admission to the ICU and on days 2–4 and 5–7 after ICU admission, ICU mortality, 28-day all-cause mortality, VAI [20], PaO2/FIO2 ratio at 48 h following the CRRT procedure, and ICU-free days (ICUFDs). The VAI was calculated as follows; (dopamine dose × 1) + (dobutamine dose × 1) + adrenaline dose × 100) + (noradrenaline dose × 100), with all doses expressed as μg/kg/min. ICUFDs were calculated as follows: ICUFDs = 0 if the patient died within the first 28 days; ICUFDs = (28-x) if the patient survived for more than 28 days, where x is the number of days spent in the ICU; and ICUFDs = (28-y) if the patient was transferred to another hospital before 28 days had elapsed, where y is the number of days spent in the ICU.

Safety and feasibility outcomes included the number of patients with serious adverse events and reactions in both arms.

Statistical analyses

Data are presented as medians (interquartile ranges) for continuous variables and percentages for categorical variables. We used the Wilcoxon, Steel–Dwass, and Chi-square or Fisher’s exact tests for comparing two groups of continuous variables, multiple comparisons between continuous variables, and comparing categorical variables, respectively. Furthermore, ICU and 28-day mortality rates were analyzed using multivariate logistic regression, and the explanatory variables were age and SOFA score. The data were analyzed using the statistical software JMP12 for Windows (SAS Institute Japan, Tokyo, Japan). Results were considered statistically significant at P-values less than 0.05. Since this was a pilot study, a sample size estimation was not conducted.

Results

Patient baseline characteristics

Overall, 53 patients were enrolled and randomized to either the AN69ST (n = 26) or PMMA (n = 27) group. One patient was excluded because of death before sample collection. Therefore, 26 patients from each group were included in the primary and secondary analyses (Fig. 1). Baseline characteristics including age, sex, comorbidity, AKI severity, source of infection, detected microorganism, laboratory findings, treatment, and cytokine levels (at the inlet of the hemofilter, 2–6 h after initiating CRRT), did not differ between the groups. All non-AKI patients had COVID-19-related sepsis. In contrast, the SOFA score was significantly higher in the AN69ST group than in the PMMA group (P < 0.01) (Table 1).Fig. 1 Flowchart of trial patients. AN69ST polyethyleneimine-coated polyacrylonitrile, PMMA polymethylmethacrylate, CRRT continuous renal replacement therapy

Table 1 Patient characteristics

Variable	AN69ST	PMMA	P valuea	
(n = 26)	(n = 26)	
Age, years	69.5 (63.3–74.0)	71.5 (63.3–77.3)	0.83	
Sex, male	19 (73.0)	19 (73.0)	1.00	
Comorbidity				
 Hypertension	12 (46.2)	13 (50.0)	0.78	
 Diabetes	9 (34.6)	8 (30.8)	0.77	
 Chronic heart failure	2 (7.7)	0 (0.0)	0.24	
 Coronary artery disease	3 (11.5)	1 (3.8)	0.61	
 Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease	1 (3.8)	2 (7.7)	1.00	
 Chronic liver disease	0 (0.0)	0 (0.0)		
KDIGO stage			0.76	
 Non-AKIb	4 (15.4)	3 (11.5)	
 Stage 1	7 (26.9)	8 (30.8)	
 Stage 2	3 (11.5)	3 (11.5)	
 Stage 3	12 (46.2)	12 (46.2)	
 Prior dialysis due to ESKD	6 (23.1)	4 (15.4)	0.50	
Septic shock	6 (23.1)	5 (19.2)	0.74	
Source of infection			0.96	
 Respiratory	13 (50.0)	12 (46.2)	
 Intraabdominal	8 (30.8)	10 (38.5)	
 Skin and soft tissue	3 (11.5)	2 (7.7)	
 Urinary	0 (0)	0 (0.0)	
 Others	2 (7.7)	2 (7.7)	
Microorganisms isolated/or positively identified			
 G( +)	2 (7.7)	5 (19.2)	0.42	
 G(−)	4 (15.4)	4 (15.4)	1.00	
 G( +) and G(−)	8 (30.8)	2 (7.7)	0.08	
 SARS-CoV-2	7 (26.9)	7 (26.9)	1.00	
 Others	5 (19.2)	3 (11.5)	0.70	
 Not detected and unknown	4 (15.4)	6 (23.1)	0.73	
Laboratory test results on admission				
 WBC, × 109 counts/L	9.4 (6.6–14.3)	10.3 (7.6–17.5)	0.39	
 Plt, × 109 counts/L	26.9 (10.2–115.3)	47.4 (15.4–152.5)	0.44	
 T-bil, mg/dL	1.1 (0.6–2.6)	0.8 (0.6–1.3)	0.18	
 Cr, mg/dL	2.1 (1.5–2.9)	2.6 (1.0–5.2)	0.67	
 Lac, mg/dL	26.0 (13.8–61.5)	14.7 (11.2–33.6)	0.09	
 CRP, mg/dL	10.0 (7.2–18.8)	10.8 (4.4–21.2)	0.84	
 PCT, ng/mL	2.7 (1.3–10.9)	7.0 (0.3–45.1)	0.88	
 Mechanical ventilation	22 (84.6)	22 (84.6)	1.00	
 PaO2/FIO2 ratio	134.3 (88.8–315.8)	145.5 (102.2–249.0)	0.73	
 VAI	17.9 (5.5–35.2)	6.1 (0–31.1)	0.07	
 APACHE II score	26.0 (18.3–28.8)	19.5 (18.0–24.8)	0.09	
 SOFA score	12.0 (10.3–15.0)	8.5 (7.0–12.8)	 < 0.01	
Anticoagulant used for CRRT			1.00	
 Heparin	2 (7.7)	1 (3.8)	
 Nafamostat mesylate	24 (92.3)	25 (96.2)	
Baseline cytokine levelsc				
 HMGB1, ng/mL	3.6 (2.0–5.5)	3.1 (1.9–6.6)	0.88	
 TNF-α, pg/mL	2.9 (1.3–6.7)	2.8 (1.3–5.6)	0.79	
 IL-6, pg/mL	1736.2 (584.0–16,407.0)	1369.4 (303.4–3791.8)	0.48	
 IL-8, pg/mL	73.2 (26.8–518.2)	61.4 (34.2–357.1)	0.80	
 IL-10, pg/mL	34.1 (14.0–142.1)	47.1 (25.9–149.9)	0.24	
 IL-18, pg/mL	868.6 (553.1–1286.8)	637.6 (516.5–1390.2)	0.62	
 MIG, pg/mL	76.8 (46.9–238.8)	107.1 (41.7–438.6)	0.52	
 MIP-1α, pg/mL	146.5 (72.2–323.8)	149.6 (65.2–242.3)	0.60	
CRRT prescribed				
 Blood flow rate, mL/min	80 (80–80)	80 (80–80)	0.57	
 Ultrafiltrate flow rate, mL/h	300 (300–318)	300 (300–314)	0.71	
 Dialysate flow rate, mL/h	500 (500–500)	500 (500–500)	0.23	
CRRT filter life time				
 1st filter, h	17.0 (8.7–22.8)	13.3 (4.1–27.7)	0.66	
 2nd filter, h	9.7 (3.2–18.3)	12.6 (3.5–21.3)	0.43	
 Number of filter exchanges within 24 h	1 (0–1.3)	1 (0–1)	0.72	
Time window within which blood samples and filtrates were drawn	
 2–6 h, h	2.2 (2.0–3.0)	2.3 (2.0–3.3)	0.89	
 12–24 h, h	14.8 (13.7–18.4)	14.7 (12.4–19.2)	0.98	
Data are given as medians and interquartile ranges or n (%)

AN69ST polyethyleneimine-coated polyacrylonitrile, PMMA polymethylmethacrylate, IQR interquartile range, KDIGO Kidney Disease: Improving Global Outcomes, ESKD end-stage renal failure, AKI acute kidney injury, G( +) Gram-positive infection, G(−) Gram-negative infection, SARS-CoV-2 severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2, WBC white blood cell, Plt platelet, T-bil total bilirubin, Cr creatinine, Lac serum lactic acid, CRP C-reactive protein, PCT procalcitonin, PaO2/FIO2 partial pressure of arterial oxygen/fraction of inspired oxygen, VAI vasopressor index, APACHE acute physiology and chronic health evaluation, SOFA sequential organ failure assessment, CRRT continuous renal replacement therapy, HMGB1 high-mobility group box 1, TNF tumor necrosis factor, IL interleukin, MIG monokine induced by interferon-γ, MIP-1α macrophage inflammatory protein 1 alpha

aWilcoxon test or χ2 test

bAll non-AKI patients had coronavirus disease 2019-related sepsis

cSamples were at the inlet of the hemofilter 2–6 h after initiating CRRT

Primary outcomes

A comparison of cytokine CHA is presented in Table 2. The ability of CHA of HMGB1, TNF-α, IL-8, MIG, and MIP-1α was significantly higher in the AN69ST group than in the PMMA group. In contrast, PMMA membranes had a significantly higher ability to adsorb IL-6 than AN69ST membranes. Cytokine levels at each sampling point are presented in Additional file 2. Table 2 Primary outcome (cytokine clearance of hemofilter adsorption)

Mediators	Clearance	Sampling time window	AN69ST	PMMA	P valuea	
(n = 26)	(n = 26)	
HMGB1	Plasma clearance (mL/min)	2–6 h	43.6 (30.2–52.8)	5.1 (− 15.5–17.5)	 < 0.001	
12–24 h	20.1 (6.7–45.2)	0.9 (− 20.0–11.1)	 < 0.001	
Transmembrane clearance (mL/min)	2–6 h	0 (0–0)	0 (0–0.34)	0.16	
12–24 h	0 (0–0.35)	0 (0–0.18)	0.47	
Clearance of hemofilter adsorption (mL/min)	2–6 h	43.6 (29.8–52.8)	3.6 (-15.9–17.5)	 < 0.001	
12–24 h	20.1 (6.2–45.2)	− 0.7 (− 20.0–11.1)	 < 0.001	
TNF-α	Plasma clearance (mL/min)	2–6 h	33.5 (28.8–36.3)	26.2 (7.5–30.0)	 < 0.01	
12–24 h	24.7 (18.6–32.3)	13.8 (9.2–24.1)	 < 0.01	
Transmembrane clearance (mL/min)	2–6 h	0.01 (0–0.07)	0 (0–0.06)	0.70	
12–24 h	0.04 (0–0.09)	0 (0–0.02)	 < 0.05	
Clearance of hemofilter adsorption (mL/min)	2–6 h	33.5 (29.4–36.8)	26.4 (6.9–30.2)	 < 0.01	
12–24 h	25.0 (20.4–32.2)	14.0 (9.1–24.9)	 < 0.01	
IL-6	Plasma clearance (mL/min)	2–6 h	9.4 (7.8–12.1)	17.6 (10.7–22.5)	 < 0.001	
12–24 h	9.2 (5.6–12.0)	9.1 (4.0–14.7)	0.82	
Transmembrane clearance (mL/min)	2–6 h	1.8 (1.6–2.2)	0 (0–0.01)	 < 0.001	
12–24 h	1.72 (1.26–2.12)	0.08 (0–0.22)	 < 0.01	
Clearance of hemofilter adsorption (mL/min)	2–6 h	7.6 (4.3–10.6)	17.6 (10.7–22.4)	 < 0.001	
12–24 h	7.4 (3.4–9.8)	9.1 (3.7–14.6)	0.29	
IL-8	Plasma clearance (mL/min)	2–6 h	47.4 (33.0–50.5)	6.2 (− 8.7–12.0)	 < 0.01	
12–24 h	33.9 (14.9–46.4)	3.4 (− 31.0–9.3)	 < 0.01	
Transmembrane clearance (mL/min)	2–6 h	0.15 (0.04–0.87)	1.34 (1.04–4.89)	 < 0.01	
12–24 h	0.4 (0.2–1.2)	3.9 (3.1–11.2)	 < 0.01	
Clearance of hemofilter adsorption (mL/min)	2–6 h	47.0 (31.8–50.7)	4.5 (-11.4–10.6)	 < 0.001	
12–24 h	34.1 (13.6–44.6)	0.7 (− 50.0–5.8)	 < 0.001	
IL-10	Plasma clearance (mL/min)	2–6 h	28.3 (23.1–36.6)	27.2 (16.5–30.3)	0.37	
12–24 h	26.0 (18.1–29.1)	18.8 (12.9–24.8)	0.07	
Transmembrane clearance (mL/min)	2–6 h	0 (0–0.01)	0 (0–0)	0.18	
12–24 h	0.02 (0.01–0.06)	0.01 (0–0.01)	 < 0.01	
Clearance of hemofilter adsorption (mL/min)	2–6 h	28.3 (23.1–35.6)	27.2 (16.5–30.3)	0.36	
12–24 h	26.0 (17.7–29.0)	18.7 (12.9–24.8)	0.07	
IL-18	Plasma clearance (mL/min)	2–6 h	− 0.4 (-3.3–2.3)	− 0.6 (− 3.0–1.5)	0.73	
12–24 h	− 0.2 (-3.1–2.4)	− 2.5 (− 4.7–0.7)	0.17	
Transmembrane clearance (mL/min)	2–6 h	0.01 (0–0.01)	0.10 (0.06–0.13)	 < 0.001	
12–24 h	0.01 (0–0.01)	0.01 (0.04–0.01)	 < 0.001	
Clearance of hemofilter adsorption (mL/min)	2–6 h	− 0.4 (-3.3–2.3)	− 0.7 (− 3.2–1.4)	0.62	
12–24 h	− 0.6 (− 2.4–2.5)	− 2.5 (− 4.7–0.6)	0.09	
MIG	Plasma clearance (mL/min)	2–6 h	64.9 (61.9–66.9)	24.0 (18.8–32.9)	 < 0.001	
12–24 h	59.3 (52.4–61.8)	10.7 (7.4–19.2)	 < 0.001	
Transmembrane clearance (mL/min)	2–6 h	0.13 (0.06–0.20)	0.19 (0.05–0.76)	0.30	
12–24 h	0.48 (0.18–0.86)	2.00 (0.66–2.33)	 < 0.05	
Clearance of hemofilter adsorption (mL/min)	2–6 h	64.6 (61.6–66.7)	24.0 (18.0–32.2)	 < 0.001	
12–24 h	58.6 (49.2–61.2)	8.3 (5.2–17.6)	 < 0.001	
MIP-1α	Plasma clearance (mL/min)	2–6 h	64.3 (60.9–65.9)	38.9 (16.1–45.7)	 < 0.001	
12–24 h	54.9 (48.1–58.9)	20.9 (5.0–31.7)	 < 0.001	
Transmembrane clearance (mL/min)	2–6 h	0.02 (0.01–0.05)	0.01 (0–0.02)	 < 0.05	
12–24 h	0.22 (0.04–0.67)	0.14 (0.01–0.61)	0.36	
Clearance of hemofilter adsorption (mL/min)	2–6 h	64.2 (60.9–65.9)	38.9 (16.0–45.8)	 < 0.001	
12–24 h	54.8 (47.4–58.9)	20.6 (4.3–31.6)	 < 0.001	
Data are given as medians and interquartile ranges

CBi blood cytokine level at the filter inlet, CBo blood cytokine level at the outlet, QB blood flow rate (mL/min), QF flow rate of the ultrafiltrate, CF cytokine level in the filtrate

AN69ST polyethyleneimine-coated polyacrylonitrile, PMMA polymethylmethacrylate, HMGB1 high-mobility group box 1, TNF tumor necrosis factor, IL interleukin, MIG monokine induced by interferon-γ, MIP-1α macrophage inflammatory protein 1 alpha

aWilcoxon test

Plasma clearance=(CBi-CBo)/CBi×QB-QF+QF,

Transmembrane clearance=CF/CBi×QF,

Clearance of hemofilter adsorption=plasma clearance-transmembrane clearance.

Secondary outcomes

The time course of cytokine levels within 7 days of admission is shown in Fig. 2. In the AN69ST group, HMGB1, TNF-α, IL-6, IL-8, IL-10, MIG, and MIP-1α levels were significantly decreased; in the PMMA group, TNF-α, IL-6, IL-8, and IL-10 levels were significantly decreased. No significant difference was observed in all cytokine levels between the AN69ST and PMMA groups at each timepoint.Fig. 2 Time course of cytokine levels. The Kruskal–Wallis test followed by the Steel–Dwass test were used to compare time courses. The Wilcoxon test was used to compare the AN69ST- and PMMA-CRRT groups at each time point. No significant differences between the two groups were found at any time point. a: HMGB1, b: TNF-α, c: IL-6, d: IL-8, e: IL-10, f: IL-18, g: MIG, and h: MIP-1a. AN69ST polyethyleneimine-coated polyacrylonitrile, PMMA polymethylmethacrylate, CRRT continuous renal replacement therapy; HMGB-1 high-mobility group box 1, TNF-α tumor necrosis factor, IL interleukin, MIG monokine induced by interferon-γ, MIP macrophage inflammatory protein

Furthermore, ICU and 28-day all-cause mortalities were not significantly different between the two groups in the unadjusted (odds ratio [OR] 1.89, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.62–5.76 for ICU mortality and OR 2.25, 95% CI 0.72–7.00 for 28-day all-cause mortality) and adjusted analyses (OR 1.65, 95% CI 0.49–5.90 for ICU mortality and OR 2.34, 95% CI 0.67–8.70 for 28-day all-cause mortality) (Table 3).Table 3 Secondary outcomes

Outcome	AN69ST
(n = 26)	PMMA
(n = 26)	AN69ST vs. PMMA	
Unadjusted 95% CI	Adjusted a 95% CI	Unadjusted P value	Adjusted a P value	
ICU mortality, n (%)	13 (50.0)	9 (34.6)	1.89 (0.62–5.76)	1.65 (0.48–5.85)	0.40	0.42	
28-day all-cause mortality, n (%)	13 (50.0)	8 (30.8)	2.00 (0.67–6.23)	2.34 (0.67–8.72)	0.22	0.18	
ICUFDs, median (IQR)	0 (0–18.3)	0 (0–16.0)	0.99 (0.93–1.05)	–	0.65	–	
VAI at 48 h after CRRT initiation, median (IQR)	0 (0–8.4)	0 (0–15.0)	1.01 (0.99–1.05)	–	0.32	–	
P/F ratio at 48 h after CRRT initiation, median (IQR)	220 (61.4–321.0)	227 (91.5–308)	1.00 (0.99–1.00)	–	0.71	–	
AN69ST polyethyleneimine-coated polyacrylonitrile, PMMA polymethylmethacrylate, CI confidence interval, ICU intensive care unit, ICUFDs ICU-free days, IQR interquartile range; CRRT continuous renal replacement therapy, VAI vasopressor index, P/F partial pressure of arterial oxygen/fraction of inspired oxygen

aAnalyzed by multilogistic regression model and explanatory variables such as age and SOFA score

Safety and feasibility outcomes

No serious adverse events were observed in either group (Additional file 3).

Discussion

To the best of our knowledge, this study is the first RCT to evaluate the difference in cytokine CHA between the AN69ST and PMMA hemofilters in a clinical setting. We found that AN69ST and PMMA membranes had significantly different cytokine CHA in patients with sepsis in different time points at 2–4 h and 12–24 h after CRRT initiation (Table 2).

The AN69 membrane is an electronegative copolymer of acrylonitrile and sodium methanesulfonate. AN69 can undergo adsorption in the membrane bulk through electrostatic interaction. In contrast, AN69ST was achieved by neutralizing the surface in contact with blood by ionic grafting of a polycationic polymer in AN69; however, AN69ST can also be adsorbed in the membrane bulk through electrostatic interaction [25]. The AN69ST group showed significantly superior ability to adsorb HMGB1, MIG, and MIP-1α compared with the PMMA group (Table 2). HMGB1 is well known to be adsorbed by AN69ST membranes in vitro [11, 26] and as a damage-associated molecular pattern. HMGB1 inhibitors have potential therapeutic applications [27, 28]. Moreover, MIG and MIP-1α are known as chemokines, which are drivers of cytokine storms due to infection [29]. AN69ST membranes reportedly have a higher chemokine adsorption ability than PMMA membranes, as evaluated using time-of-flight or mass spectrometry analysis [12].

An in vitro closed-loop circulation system study showed that time-dependent changes of transmembrane pressure (TMP) were not observed but time-dependent superiority for CHA ability was observed in AN69ST membrane in comparison with PMMA for HMGB1 [11], possibly because AN69ST can adsorb mediators not only on the surface, but also in the bulk of the membrane with hydrophobic bonding [11, 12]. In the present study, the ability of CHA was superior not only 2–6 h after CRRT initiation but also 12–24 h after CRRT initiation in AN69ST rather than PMMA, which supports the findings of Yumoto et al. [11] even though in a clinical setting. Because AN69ST is electronegative, positively charged mediators such as TNF-α [10], IL-8 [10], or NM [30] were adsorbed more than other membranes. Moriyama et al. [10] reported that different pH solutions with dissolved TNF-α, IL-6, and IL-8 were closed-loop circuit system in vitro, thus the pH of the test solution shifted from 7.6 to 6.8, the CLs of TNF-α, IL6, and IL-8 increased in the AN69ST hemofilter; whereas, no such trend was observed in the PMMA hemofilter. These results indicated the involvement of ionic interactions in cytokine adsorption by the AN69ST membrane but not the PMMA membrane. The present study also found that the CHA of TNF-α and IL-8 was superior in AN69ST, compared to PMMA. Isoelectric points and molecular weights of cytokine are shown in Additional file 4. IL-10 and MIG are more positively charged than TNF-α; however, IL-18, HMGB1, and MIP-1a are more negatively charged than TNF-α; therefore, further analysis is warranted for CHA mechanism in AN69ST membrane.

In contrast, PMMA membranes have a higher CHA ability for IL-6 than for AN69ST membranes (Table 2). Furthermore, the time course of IL-6 levels was significantly decreased in the PMMA group. IL-6 is a well-known sepsis biomarker, and its levels correlate with the severity of sepsis [31]. Blockade therapy is beneficial for cytokine storms [32]. Based on this study’s findings, we may have to distinguish between AN69ST and PMMA membrane use depending on the target molecules.

Cytokine levels were significantly decreased in both the AN69ST and PMMA groups (Fig. 2). In the AN69ST group, HMGB1, MIG, and MIP-1α levels were significantly decreased after ICU admission, but this was not observed in the PMMA group. However, no significant difference was observed in the cytokine levels between the two groups in terms of baseline characteristics (Table 1). Moreover, the baseline SOFA score was significantly higher in the AN69ST group than in the PMMA group; however, regarding the secondary endpoints, no significant difference was observed in clinical benefit after adjustment for the baseline SOFA score (Table 3). The present study was pilot study; therefore, the sample size was too small, indicating the need for further studies.

Some observational studies [33–35] have shown that AN69ST hemofilters are superior to non-AN69ST hemofilters. Furthermore, AN69ST and PMMA membranes have already been widely used in Japan [33–37], and no serious adverse events were observed in either group. Therefore, future RCTs are warranted to investigate the effect of AN69ST and PMMA hemofilters on clinical outcomes.

Strengths and limitations

The obvious strength of our study is the use of randomization to minimize selection bias. However, this study has some limitations. First, blinding of the interventions was not performed. Second, because this was a pilot, single-center study, generalizability is insufficient. Third, the present study did not have a control group that was not treated with CRRT. Therefore, this study did not provide information about endogenous clearance rates in septic patients, indicating that part of the decreased cytokine levels in blood may not depend on CRRT. Fourth, the sampling time windows (2–6 h and 12–24 h) were relatively wide. However, no significant differences in sampling time windows were observed between the two groups (Table 1), and even after excluding patients with a circuit life span of within 24 h, CHA ability was not different from the CHA ability when including all patients (Additional file 5).

Conclusions

Our first pilot RCT showed that AN69ST and PMMA hemofilters have different cytokine CHA ability in patients with sepsis. However, no significant difference was observed in the present pilot clinical study. Therefore, these two hemofilters may have to be used depending on the target cytokine.

Supplementary Information

Additional file 1. Circuit schema.

Additional file 2. Cytokine levels at each sampling point.

Additional file 3. Number of serious adverse events.

Additional file 4. Molecular weights and isoelectric points of cytokines. The theoretical molecular weights and isoelectric points of each cytokine are indicated in the Table and Figure***. Values were calculated by Expasy (https://web.expasy.org/compute_pi/) based on the amino acid sequence of matured protein. HMGB-1 high-mobility group box 1, TNF-α tumor necrosis factor, IL interleukin, MIG monokine induced by interferon-γ, MIP macrophage inflammatory protein.

Additional file 5. Results of primary endpoint analysis after excluding patients with circuit life span of within 24 h.

Abbreviations

AKI Acute kidney injury

CHA Clearance of hemofilter adsorption

CI Confidence interval

CRRT Continuous renal replacement therapy

COVID-19 Coronavirus disease 2019

QF Filtration flow rate

HMGB1 High-mobility group box 1

ICUFDs Intensive care unit-free days

ICU Intensive care unit

IL Interleukin

MIP Macrophage inflammatory protein

MIG Monokine induced by interferon-γ

NM Nafamostat mesylate

OR Odds ratio

PaO2/FIO2 Partial pressure of arterial oxygen/fraction of inspired oxygen

AN69ST Polyacrylonitrile

PEI Polyethyleneimine

PMMA Polymethylmethacrylate

QB Quantity of blood flow

RCT Randomized controlled trial

RRT Renal replacement therapy

SOFA Sequential Organ Failure Assessment

SARS-CoV-2 Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2

TMP Transmembrane pressure

TNF-α Tumor necrosis factor-alpha

VAI Vasopressor index

Acknowledgements

We would like to thank Editage (www.editage.com) for English language editing. Part of this study was supported by Sysmex Corp, which played no role in the study and measured cytokine and HMGB1 concentrations. Furthermore, this study was supported by a grant from the Clinical Research Promotion Foundation (2021).

Author contributions

YN, FK, TH, and HI designed the study. HH, SY, KY, KH, and YK performed sample collection and input data. FK advised on statistical findings. YN generated the random allocation sequence; YN, KH, and YK enrolled participants; and HH, SY, and KY assigned participants to interventions. YN, HH, and SY contributed to the statistical analysis. YN, HH, and SY wrote the first draft. All authors critically revised the report, commented on the drafts of the manuscript, and approved the final report.

Funding

Part of this study was supported by Sysmex Corp, which played no role in the study and measured cytokine and HMGB1 concentrations. Furthermore, this study was supported by a grant from the Clinical Research Promotion Foundation (2021).

Availability of data and materials

The data that support the findings of this study are available from authors, but restrictions apply to the availability of these data, which were used under license for the current study, and so are not publicly available. Data are however available from the authors upon reasonable request and with permission of the Medical Ethics Review Board of Fukuoka University.

Declarations

Ethics approval and consent to participate

This study was approved by the Medical Ethics Review Board of Fukuoka University (approval number: 2017M089) and was performed in line with the principles of the Declaration of Helsinki. All patients or legal representatives provided informed consent.

Consent for publication

All patients or legal representatives approved this publication.

Competing interests

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
==== Refs
References

1. Singer M Deutschman CS Seymour CW Shankar-Hari M Annane D Bauer M The third international consensus definitions for sepsis and septic shock (Sepsis-3) JAMA 2016 315 801 810 10.1001/jama.2016.0287 26903338
2. Kellum JA Kong L Fink MP Weissfeld LA Yealy DM Pinsky MR Understanding the inflammatory cytokine response in pneumonia and sepsis: results of the Genetic and inflammatory Markers of Sepsis (GenIMS) Study Arch Intern Med 2007 167 1655 1663 10.1001/archinte.167.15.1655 17698689
3. Angus DC van der Poll T Severe sepsis and septic shock N Engl J Med 2013 369 840 851 10.1056/NEJMra1208623 23984731
4. Ankawi G Xie Y Yang B Xie Y Xie P Ronco C What have we learned about the use of Cytosorb adsorption columns? Blood Purif 2019 48 196 202 10.1159/000500013 31039564
5. Chertow GM Burdick E Honour M Bonventre JV Bates DW Acute kidney injury, mortality, length of stay, and costs in hospitalized patients J Am Soc Nephrol 2005 16 3365 3370 10.1681/ASN.2004090740 16177006
6. Uchino S Bellomo R Morimatsu H Morgera S Schetz M Tan I Continuous renal replacement therapy: a worldwide practice survey. The beginning and ending supportive therapy for the kidney (B.E.S.T. kidney) investigators Intensive Care Med 2007 33 1563 1570 10.1007/s00134-007-0754-4 17594074
7. Honore PM Jacobs R Joannes-Boyau O De Regt J De Waele E van Gorp V Newly designed CRRT membranes for sepsis and SIRS–a pragmatic approach for bedside intensivists summarizing the more recent advances: a systematic structured review ASAIO J 2013 59 99 106 10.1097/MAT.0b013e3182816a75 23438770
8. Shiga H Hirasawa H Nishida O Oda S Nakamura M Mashiko K Continuous hemodiafiltration with a cytokine-adsorbing hemofilter in patients with septic shock: a preliminary report Blood Purif 2014 38 211 218 10.1159/000369377 25531978
9. Nakada TA Oda S Matsuda K Sadahiro T Nakamura M Abe R Continuous hemodiafiltration with PMMA hemofilter in the treatment of patients with septic shock Mol Med 2008 14 257 263 10.2119/2007-00108.Nakada 18327291
10. Moriyama K Kato Y Hasegawa D Kurimoto Y Kawaji T Nakamura T Involvement of ionic interactions in cytokine adsorption of polyethyleneimine-coated polyacrylonitrile and polymethyl methacrylate membranes in vitro J Artif Organs 2020 23 240 246 10.1007/s10047-020-01173-0 32394409
11. Yumoto M Nishida O Moriyama K Shimomura Y Nakamura T Kuriyama N In vitro evaluation of high mobility group box 1 protein removal with various membranes for continuous hemofiltration Ther Apher Dial 2011 15 385 393 10.1111/j.1744-9987.2011.00971.x 21884474
12. Michikoshi J Matsumoto S Miyawaki H Morita M Niu H Seo K Evaluation of proteins and cells that adsorb to dialysis membranes used in continuous hemodiafiltration: comparison of AN69ST, polymethylmethacrylate, and polysulfone membranes Blood Purif 2019 48 358 367 10.1159/000501632 31344702
13. International Society of Nephrology 2012 KDIGO clinical practice guideline for acute kidney injury Kidney Int Suppl 2012 2 1 138 10.1038/kisup.2012.1
14. Yamada H Yanagita M Global perspectives in acute kidney injury: Japan Kidney360. 2022 3 1099 1104 10.34067/KID.0007892021 35845320
15. Egi M Ogura H Yatabe T Atagi K Inoue S Iba T The Japanese clinical practice guidelines for management of sepsis and septic shock 2020 (J-SSCG 2020) J Intensive Care 2021 9 53 10.1186/s40560-021-00555-7 34433491
16. Hitomi Y Ikari N Fujii S Inhibitory effect of a new synthetic protease inhibitor (FUT-175) on the coagulation system Haemostasis 1985 15 164 168 10.1159/000215139 3161808
17. Akizawa T Kitaoka T Sato M Koshikawa S Hirasawa Y Kazama M Comparative clinical trial of regional anticoagulation for hemodialysis ASAIO Trans 1988 34 176 178 3058171
18. Lee YK Lee HW Choi KH Kim BS Ability of nafamostat mesilate to prolong filter patency during continuous renal replacement therapy in patients at high risk of bleeding: a randomized controlled study PLoS ONE 2014 9 e108737 10.1371/journal.pone.0108737 25302581
19. Abe M Shiga H Tatsumi H Endo Y Kikuchi Y Suzuki Y Results of the 2018 Japan Society for Blood Purification in Critical Care survey: current status and outcomes Ren Replace Ther 2022 8 58 10.1186/s41100-022-00445-0 36407492
20. Cruz DN Antonelli M Fumagalli R Foltran F Brienza N Donati A Early use of polymyxin B hemoperfusion in abdominal septic shock: the EUPHAS randomized controlled trial JAMA 2009 301 2445 2452 10.1001/jama.2009.856 19531784
21. Knaus WA Draper EA Wagner DP Zimmerman JE Apache II: a severity of disease classification system Crit Care Med 1985 13 818 829 10.1097/00003246-198510000-00009 3928249
22. Vincent JL Moreno R Takala J Willatts S De Mendonça A Bruining H The SOFA (Sepsis-related Organ Failure Assessment) score to describe organ dysfunction/failure. On behalf of the Working Group on Sepsis-Related Problems of the European Society of Intensive Care Medicine Intensive Care Med 1996 22 707 710 10.1007/BF01709751 8844239
23. Hasegawa T Nakagawa A Suzuki K Yamashita K Yamashita S Iwanaga N Type 1 inflammatory endotype relates to low compliance, lung fibrosis, and severe complications in COVID-19 Cytokine 2021 148 155618 10.1016/j.cyto.2021.155618 34127355
24. Hirayama T Nosaka N Okawa Y Ushio S Kitamura Y Sendo T AN69ST membranes adsorb nafamostat mesylate and affect the management of anticoagulant therapy: a retrospective study J Intensive Care 2017 5 46 10.1186/s40560-017-0244-x 28729905
25. Thomas M Moriyama K Ledebo I AN69: evolution of the world’s first high permeability membrane Contrib Nephrol 2011 173 119 129 10.1159/000328961 21865784
26. Nakamura T Moriyama K Shimomura Y Kato Y Kuriyama N Hara Y Adsorption kinetics of high mobility group box 1 protein in a polyacrylonitrile hemofiltration membrane Ther Apher Dial 2021 25 66 72 10.1111/1744-9987.13489 32216030
27. Denning NL Aziz M Gurien SD Wang P DAMPs and NETs in sepsis Front Immunol 2019 10 2536 10.3389/fimmu.2019.02536 31736963
28. Wang H Ward MF Sama AE Targeting HMGB1 in the treatment of sepsis Expert Opin Ther Targets 2014 18 257 268 10.1517/14728222.2014.863876 24392842
29. Fajgenbaum DC June CH Cytokine storm N Engl J Med 2020 383 2255 2273 10.1056/NEJMra2026131 33264547
30. Nakamura Y Hara S Hatomoto H Yamasaki S Nakano T Miyazaki M Adsorption of nafamostat mesilate on AN69ST membranes: a single-center retrospective and in vitro study Ther Apher Dial 2017 21 620 627 10.1111/1744-9987.12587 28960755
31. Hotchkiss RS Moldawer LL Opal SM Reinhart K Turnbull IR Vincent JL Sepsis and septic shock Nat Rev Dis Primers 2016 2 16045 10.1038/nrdp.2016.45 28117397
32. Tanaka T Narazaki M Kishimoto T Immunotherapeutic implications of IL-6 blockade for cytokine storm Immunotherapy 2016 8 959 970 10.2217/imt-2016-0020 27381687
33. Hayashi K Sasabuchi Y Matsui H Nakajima M Ohbe H Ono K Clinical effect of the acrylonitrile-Co-methallyl sulfonate surface-treated membrane as a cytokine adsorption therapy for sepsis due to acute panperitonitis: a retrospective cohort study Blood Purif 2020 49 364 371 10.1159/000504560 31940608
34. Kobashi S Maruhashi T Nakamura T Hatabayashi E Kon A The 28-day survival rates of two cytokine-adsorbing hemofilters for continuous renal replacement therapy: a single-center retrospective comparative study Acute Med Surg 2019 6 60 67 10.1002/ams2.382 30651999
35. Doi K Iwagami M Yoshida E Marshall MR Associations of polyethylenimine-coated AN69ST membrane in continuous renal replacement therapy with the intensive care outcomes: observations from a claims database from Japan Blood Purif 2017 44 184 192 10.1159/000476052 28609776
36. Tanaka A Inaguma D Nakamura T Watanabe Y Ito E Kamegai N Effect of continuous hemodiafiltration using an AN69ST membrane in patients with sepsis Ren Replace Ther 2017 3 1 6 10.1186/s41100-017-0093-z
37. Shibata M Miyamoto K Kato S Comparison of the circulatory effects of continuous renal replacement therapy using AN69ST and polysulfone membranes in septic shock patients: A retrospective observational study Ther Apher Dial 2020 24 561 567 10.1111/1744-9987.13462 31837077