Trial reportDrugs2021
A Multicentric, Randomized, Controlled Phase III Study of Centhaquine (Lyfaquin
Trial report in Drugs, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to 4 registered trials, which are not on this map. Cited by 12 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
A Prospective, Multi-Centric, Randomized, Double-Blind, Parallel, Phase-III Study to Assess Efficacy of PMZ-2010 as a Resuscitative Agent for Hypovolemic Shock to be Used as an Adjuvant to Standard Shock Treatment
A Multicentric, Randomized, Double-blind, Placebo-controlled Study to Assess the Safety and Efficacy of Centhaquine as an Adjuvant to the Standard of Care in Patients With Moderate to Severe Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome (ARDS)
A Multi-Centric, Randomized, Double-Blind, Placebo-controlled, Phase-III Study to Assess Safety and Efficacy of Centhaquine as a Resuscitative Agent to be Used as an Adjuvant to Standard Treatment of Hypovolemic Shock
A Prospective, Multi-centric, Open-labeled, Phase-IV Study to Assess Safety and Efficacy of LYFAQUIN™ (Centhaquine Citrate) as a Resuscitative Agent for Hypovolemic Shock to be Used as an Adjuvant to Standard Treatment of Shock
Who cites it
12 citing papers in PubMed, 19 citations in OpenAlex.
- Haemodynamic effects of selective venoconstriction with centhaquine in spontaneously breathing patients with mixed hypovolaemic-vasodilatory shock.Experimental physiology · 2026Trial
- Multiple organ dysfunction syndrome: molecular mechanisms and therapeutic strategies.Signal transduction and targeted therapy · 2026Review
- Review
- Centhaquine Increases Stroke Volume and Cardiac Output in Patients with Hypovolemic Shock.Journal of clinical medicine · 2024Article
- Review of COVID-19 Therapeutics by Mechanism: From Discovery to Approval.Journal of Korean medical science · 2024Review
- Effect of Centhaquine on the Coagulation Cascade in Normal State and Uncontrolled Hemorrhage: A Multiphase Study Combining Ex Vivo and In Vivo Experiments in Different Species.International journal of molecular sciences · 2024Article
- Evolutionary Unmasking Resuscitative Therapeutics Potential of Centhaquin Citrate in Hypovolemic Shock.CNS & neurological disorders drug targets · 2024Review
- Controls of Central and Peripheral Blood Pressure and Hemorrhagic/Hypovolemic Shock.Journal of clinical medicine · 2023Review
- Role of adrenergic receptors in shock.Frontiers in physiology · 2023Review
- Pathophysiology of Hemorrhage as It Relates to the Warfighter.Physiology (Bethesda, Md.) · 2022Review
- The Latest in Resuscitation Research: Highlights From the 2020 American Heart Association's Resuscitation Science Symposium.Journal of the American Heart Association · 2021Article
- Centhaquine Restores Renal Blood Flow and Protects Tissue Damage After Hemorrhagic Shock and Renal Ischemia.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
- Update of
Authors and funding
15 authors at 11 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionCenthaquine (Lyfaquin
methodsA 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.
resultsThe 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
conclusionCenthaquine is an efficacious resuscitative agent for treating hypovolemic shock. The efficacy of centhaquine in distributive shock is being explored.
trial registrationClinical Trials Registry, India; ctri.icmr.org.in, CTRI/2019/01/017196; clinicaltrials.gov, NCT04045327.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.