Lipid A analogs aimed at preventing the detrimental effects of endotoxin.

Evidence has been presented for two potential methods of administering lipid A derivatives for the reduction of endotoxicity: 1. Use of low doses of agonists to induce early-phase tolerance for a sufficiently long period to protect patients at risk of endotoxin shock. 2. Administration of high doses of antagonists to the LPS-induced release of proinflammatory cytokines. The strengths and weaknesses of both approaches can be summarized as follows: Approach 1 appears promising for patients at risk for septicemias, based on iatrogenic induction of neutropenias or genetically caused neutropenic states, e.g., in cancer patients receiving aggressive chemotherapy or irradiation and in patients receiving immunosuppressive therapy (transplantations, myelodysplastic syndromes, and so forth.) Strengths. A long lasting effect can be expected. Broad protection against many types of infectious organisms. Strong potentiation of antibiotic chemotherapy anticipated irrespective of resistance patterns to antibiotics. Weaknesses. Only prophylactic treatment appears possible. Potential for endotoxic side-effects remains. Approach 2, the administration of LPS antagonists, appears most promising in clinical situations when interference with acute endotoxic shock symptoms subsequent to polytrauma is necessary. Strengths. Immediate onset of activity would be expected. Lower risk of side-effects. Weaknesses. Therapy may already be too late. Activity is restricted to endotoxicity, there being no anti-infectious potential. High drug levels might be required for a prolonged period. Synergism with antibiotics is not yet established. Together, these new lipid A derivatives open up new potential therapeutic avenues for the prophylaxis and therapy of septic shock, septicemias, and infections. Clinical studies will soon show whether the exciting pharmacologic effects observed in animals can be translated into humans.