Efficacy and Safety of Anemoside B4 in Canine Pneumonia Treatment: A Prospective, Randomized Controlled Trial

Jinzhao Ji ^1,2 Xiaoqing Ding ^1,2 Chuanli Liu ^1,2 Lingling Dai ^1,2 Junting Yu ^1,2 Linghao Li ^1,2 Shaobing Wan ^1,2 Yangyang Song ³ Junqing Zhao ³ Zhetong Su ³ Kun Jia ^1,2 Shoujun Li ^1,2*

• ¹ College of Veterinary Medicine, South China Agricultural University, Guangzhou, China
• ² Guangdong Technological Engineering Research Center for Pet, College of Veterinary Medicine, South China Agricultural University, Guangzhou, China
• ³ Guangxi Innovate Pharmaceutical Co., Ltd, Guangxi, China

Background: Canine pneumonia is a serious respiratory disease often associated with Canine Infectious Respiratory Disease (CIRD). Current treatment strategies primarily rely on antibiotics and corticosteroids; however, the emergence of antibiotic resistance and potential side effects from prolonged corticosteroid use limit the effectiveness of these therapies in clinical practice. These challenges highlight the urgent need for alternative treatments. Anemoside B4 (AB4), derived from the traditional Chinese medicine Pulsatilla, has shown promise in preclinical studies for modulating inflammatory responses and improving clinical symptoms of pneumonia. Therefore, AB4 may offer a valuable alternative treatment option for canine pneumonia in veterinary medicine.Methods: A prospective, randomized controlled trial was conducted at the Veterinary Drug Research and Evaluation Center of South China Agricultural University. Seventy-two dogs with mild-tomoderate pneumonia were randomly assigned to one of three groups: AB4, placebo, or Chuanxinlian injection (CXL). The primary outcome was the effect of AB4 on comprehensive clinical scoring of canine pneumonia; secondary outcomes included recovery times for primary symptoms and efficacy assessments. Additionally, AB4's safety in clinical applications was evaluated.The AB4 group demonstrated significantly lower composite clinical scores on Days 7 and 14 compared to the placebo group (p=0.033 and p=0.000, respectively). Significant differences in recovery times for fever and dyspnea were observed between the AB4 and placebo groups (p=0.041 and p=0.024, respectively). Moreover, the cure rate and overall efficacy on Day 14 were significantly higher in the AB4 group than those in the placebo group (p=0.001 and p=0.009, respectively).