[Downloaded free from http://www.ddtjournal.org on Wednesday, November 29, 2017, IP: 106.66.112.

155]

Original Article

Efficacy and Safety of Hepano Tablet in Liver Disorder Patients

with Abnormal Liver Function Test: A Randomized Active
Controlled Prospective Clinical Study
Satyendra Kumar, Arun Gupta, Meenakshi Revadekar1, Sagar More2, Abhay Kulkarni3, Sunil S. Borkar4
Medical Affairs and Clinical Research Division, Dabur Research and Development Centre, Ghaziabad, Uttar Pradesh, 1Department of Kayachikitsa, R. A. Podar Medical
College (Ayu), Mumbai, 2Department of Kayachikitsa, MAM’s Sumatibhai Shah Ayurved Mahavidyalaya and Sane Guruji Aarogya Kendra, Pune, 3Ayurveda Research
Center, Ayurved Seva Sangh, Nashik, 4Department of Kaychikitsa, Shri Gurudeo Ayurved College, Gurukunj Ashram, Amravati, Maharashtra, India

Abstract
Objective: Hepano Tablet is an Ayurvedic herbal formulation studied in pre‑clinical models for safety and hepatoprotective efficacy. The current
study was a randomized, active controlled, multicentre, prospective clinical study that aimed to evaluate hepatoprotective efficacy and safety
of Hepano Tablets. Materials and Methods: Male and female liver diseases patients (18‑65 years) with abnormal liver function tests were
randomized to receive two tablets twice daily orally of either Hepano or a marketed comparator for 8 weeks with follow up at day 7, 14, 28 &
56 during treatment period and thereafter at day 84. Results were assessed from baseline to end of treatment basis changes in liver function tests
and improvement in clinical symptoms of icterus in both the groups. Safety was assessed at all the visits basis changes in laboratory parameters
and adverse event reporting for all cases who took at least one dose of the study drug. Results: Hepano Tablet and marketed comparator showed
significant improvement in Liver functions ‑ Serum Aspartate transaminase (AST), Alanine transaminase (ALT) and Total, Direct and Indirect
Bilirubin Levels and a significant reduction in clinical symptoms of icterus that was comparable at all the visits. Conclusion: Hepano Tablets
can significantly improve Liver Function Tests and clinical symptoms in liver disease patients and could be consumed safely.

Keywords: Ayurveda, hepatoprotective, herbal, liver disorders, liver function test, serum alanine transaminase, serum aspartate
transaminase, total bilirubin

IntroductIon admissions.[5] The liver may also be involved in infections by

hepatotropic viruses like hepatitis A, B, C, and E viruses that
The liver is a vital organ that plays a major role in maintaining
replicate in the liver and for which the liver is the main target.
the various physiological processes in the body including
In addition, the liver may be affected as part of a generalized
metabolism, secretion, storage, and excretion.[1] It is the
host infection with viruses that primarily target other tissues;
site where waste products of metabolism are detoxified
particularly the upper respiratory tract such as herpes viruses,
through processes such as amino acid deamination. The liver
cytomegalovirus, and in severe acute respiratory syndrome
is also responsible for excretion of xenobiotics. [2,3] Liver
associated coronavirus.[6] Acute liver failure is a syndrome
functions may be compromised in many conditions such
characterized by a rapid decline in hepatic synthetic functions
as liver cell injury caused by chemicals such as a certain
and a significant risk of mortality.[7] Liver disease is often
antibiotic, chemotherapeutic agents, and excessive alcohol
consumption.[4] As the primary site of Phase I and II enzyme
Address for correspondence: Mr. Satyendra Kumar,
activities, some drugs can be transformed into hepatotoxic Medical Affairs and Clinical Research Division, Dabur Research and
drug metabolites due to the “first pass effect” through the liver. Development Centre, Dabur India Limited, 22, Site IV, Sahibabad,
Drug-induced hepatotoxicity associated with nonsteroidal Ghaziabad - 201 010, Uttar Pradesh, India.
E-mail: satyendra.kumar@mail.dabur
anti‑inflammatory drugs is one of the main causes of liver
diseases and accounts for increasing number of hospital
This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons
Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0 License, which allows others to remix, tweak,
Access this article online and build upon the work non-commercially, as long as the author is credited and the new
Quick Response Code: creations are licensed under the identical terms.
Website: For reprints contact: reprints@medknow.com
www.ddtjournal.org

How to cite this article: Kumar S, Gupta A, Revadekar M, More S,

DOI: Kulkarni A, Borkar SS. Efficacy and safety of Hepano tablet in liver disorder
10.4103/ddt.DDT_12_16 patients with abnormal liver function test: A randomized active controlled
prospective clinical study. Drug Dev Ther 2017;8:6-12.

6 © 2017 Drug Development and Therapeutics | Published by Wolters Kluwer - Medknow

[Downloaded free from http://www.ddtjournal.org on Wednesday, November 29, 2017, IP: 106.66.112.155]
Kumar, et al.: Clinical evaluation of Hepano tablets in liver disorders
reflected by biochemical abnormalities of different hepatic
systems or of liver function. Liver function tests (LFTs) reflect
hepatocyte integrity or cholestasis apart from the state of
liver functions. Injury to the liver, whether acute or chronic,
eventually results in an increase in serum concentrations of
aminotransferases aspartate transaminase (AST) and alanine
transaminase (ALT). A change in serum albumin level or
prothrombin time and international normalized ratio (PT/INR)
may be associated with a decrease in liver functioning mass,
although neither is specific for liver disease.[2]
Although there has been remarkable progress in discovering
treatment of chronic liver diseases over the past several
decades, most of the therapies have not yielded satisfactory
outcomes. At times, the available synthetic drugs to treat liver
disorders may cause further damage to the liver. The cost of
conventional drugs, adverse drug reactions, and their inefficacy
has further limited their use. Herbal medicines have been
used for healthcare since long as they are believed to have
lesser or milder adverse effects and recently, an increasing
number of herbal products, including medicinal herbs and
phytochemicals, have been used for treating chronic liver
diseases. Studies have indicated herbs can protect the liver
by several mechanisms such as eliminating viruses, blocking
fibrogenesis, inhibiting oxidative injury, and suppressing
tumorigenesis.[8,9]
Hepano tablet (Mfd: Dabur India Limited) is a proprietary
Ayurvedic herbal formulation that contains the goodness of
herbs like Tinospora cordifolia (Thunb.) (Miers, Azadiracthta
indica A. Juss¸ Andrographis paniculata (Burm. f.) Wall. ex
Nees), Terminalia chebula Retz., Emblica officinalis Gaertn.
and Picrorrhiza kurrooa L. etc., that have traditionally been
used in liver disorders.[10,11] Preclinical studies on Hepano
tablet have demonstrated hepatoprotective activity against
paracetamol and D-galactosamine-induced liver toxicity
through significant (P < 0.001, vs. toxicant) reduction in serum
AST, ALT, and alkaline phosphatase (ALP) and bilirubin
levels; as well as decreased lipid peroxidation. Moreover, there
was a significant elevation (P < 0.001, vs. toxicant) in serum
albumin and glutathione levels compared to toxicant groups.[12]
The rationale behind conducting the current clinical study was
to establish the efficacy and safety of an Ayurvedic herbal
hepatoprotective formulation “Hepano tablets” in patients of
liver disorder with abnormal LFTs. Results were evaluated
in comparison to a marketed herbomineral comparator with
established safety and efficacy.
materIals and methods
Study design
This study was a double‑blind, randomized, active‑controlled,
multicenter, prospective clinical study conducted across four
sites in Maharashtra, India, namely, R. A. Podar Medical
College (Ayurvedic) and M.A. Podar Hospital Worli (site 01);
Sumatibhai Shah Ayurved Hospital, Pune (site 02); Ayurved
Seva Sangh Vibhag, Nashik (site 03); Shri Gurudeo Ayurved
Drug Development and Therapeutics ¦ Volume 8 ¦ Issue 1 ¦ January-June 2017
College and Hospital, Amravati (site 04) in subjects presenting
with liver disorders and having abnormal LFTs. This study was
performed in the period spanning March 2014 to August 2015.
The study was initiated after approval from the Institutional
Ethics Committees of respective sites and all patients gave
written informed consent. The trial was registered with
Clinical Trial Registry of India with No. CTRI/2014/02/0044
on February 17, 2014. The trial protocol can be accessed at:
http://ctri.nic.in/Clinicaltrials/advsearch.php.
Study products and blinding
Hepano tablet batch no.: AP/0008/1012/HPT‑20; mfd: October
2012; expiry: September 2014 was used in the present study.
The composition details of Hepano tablet are given in Table 1.
Marketed Comparator Batch No. 37201823B and 37401221B,
mfd: October 2012 and August 2014 with expiry in September
2015 and July 2017, respectively, were used in the current
study. Each tablet of Marketed Comparator comprised
ingredients such as Capparis spinosa Linn., Cichorium intybus
Linn., Solanum nigrum Linn., Terminalia arjuna (Roxb.)
Bedd., Cassia occidentalis Linn., Achillea millefolium Linn.,
Tamarix gallica Linn., and calcined ferric oxide along with
other herbal ingredients.
Although the double‑blind study design was followed, the
study was not double‑blind in a true sense, because size/shape/
color of tablets in both the group was different. However, the
primary packing of the two study drugs was kept absolutely
similar (PET bottles) to keep both investigators as well as the
subject blind of which drug they received.
Subjects
Patients included were male and female subjects aged between
18 and 65 years of age who were suffering from clinical icterus
as manifested by one or more of the symptoms - dark colored
urine, light‑colored stools, pruritus, pruritic red hives, fatigue,
fever, nausea, vomiting, anorexia, aversion to smoking, right
upper abdominal discomfort, pain or feeling of pressure in
abdomen, and abnormal LFT (serum total bilirubin [TBL]
level ≥2 mg/dl, AST or ALT >2 times ULN of respective
laboratories), subjects who could take oral medications,
were willing to participate in the study and undertake all the
study-related procedures and practice effective contraception
method during the study period.
Table 1: Composition details of Hepano tablet (828 mg
each)
Botanical name Quantity (mg)/tablet
Phyllanthus niruri (Pl.) 286.5
Tinospora cordifolia (St.), Azadirachta indica 286.25 each
(St.Bk.), Andrographis paniculata (Pl.)
Terminalia chebula (P.), Emblica 94.5 each
officinalis (P.), Terminalia belerica (P.)
Picrorhiza kurroa (Rt., Rz.) 71.25
Permitted colors and excipients. P.: Pericarp, Pl.: Plant, St.: Stem,
St.Bk.: Stem bark, Rt.: Root, Rz.: Rhizome
7
[Downloaded free from http://www.ddtjournal.org on Wednesday, November 29, 2017, IP: 106.66.112.155]
Kumar, et al.: Clinical evaluation of Hepano tablets in liver disorders
Subjects having the presence of clinically significant laboratory,
electrocardiogram (ECG) or X‑ray findings during screening,
history of drug addiction, chronic alcoholics, immunologically
compromised subjects, suspected hypersensitivity to contents
of Hepano tablet or contents of Marketed Comparator, known
case of hepatitis‑B or hepatitis‑C, obstructive jaundice
(diagnosed clinically and biochemically), advanced liver
disease (e.g., ascites, bleeding esophageal varices and hepatic
encephalopathy, hepatic cancer), uncontrolled diabetes
mellitus, hypertension, symptomatic congestive heart failure,
unstable angina, history of myocardial infarction, subjects who
had participated in any other clinical trial within 3 months
before recruitment in this study, current or recent (≤2 weeks)
use of herbal hepatoprotective drugs, pregnant or lactating
females, subjects having any other medical condition that in
the investigator’s opinion would preclude patient participation
were excluded.
Methodology
A written informed consent was obtained from subjects
on the screening visit (day‑3), and they were evaluated for
eligibility to participate as per inclusion and exclusion criteria.
Subjects’ demographic details, medical history, physical
examination, vitals (blood pressure, pulse rate, respiratory
rate, temperature), history of prior medication were recorded
and laboratoryinvestigations - complete blood count [CBC]
(red blood cell [RBC], white blood cell [WBC], hemoglobin,
platelets), erythrocyte sedimentation rate (ESR), fasting blood
sugar, LFT, renal function test (RFT) (serum creatinine), lipid
profile (serum total cholesterol and triglycerides), X‑ray chest,
and ECG were done. Females of childbearing age underwent
a urine pregnancy test to rule out pregnancy.
Interventions and dosage
Subjects confirming eligibility criteria were randomized 1:1
at day 0 (baseline) to receive two tablets orally B.D. of either
Hepano tablet or marketed herbomineral comparator for
8 weeks by investigator/CRC.
Response evaluation and follow-up
The total duration of the study after randomization was
12 weeks including a treatment period of 8 weeks and further
subject follow-up after 4 weeks after cessation of medication.
Subjects were followed up during the treatment phase at day
7, 14, 28, 56, and thereafter at day 84. First subject enrollment
at site 01 was on March 4, 2014 and date of last follow‑up at
site 04 was August 17, 2015.
Assessment of efficacy parameters
The efficacy of the study drug was assessed through
improvement in the hepatic condition as measured by the
biochemical and clinical improvement. The biochemical
improvement was assessed through changes in LFT (serum
AST, ALT, and bilirubin levels) at day 0, 7, 14, 28 and 56.
Clinical improvement was assessed though improvement in
signs/symptoms of icterus‑fatigue, loss of appetite, nausea,
vomiting, and itching using a predefined 4‑point scale – the
8 Drug Development and Therapeutics ¦ Volume 8 ¦ Issue 1 ¦ January-June 2017
subjective clinical improvement assessment scale where,
0 represented none/absence of sign/symptom, 1 = mild,
2 = moderate, 3 = severe sign/symptom. The subjects were
monitored for the clinical symptoms of liver dysfunctions
such as chills, headache, malaise, anorexia, nausea, vomiting,
diarrhea, upper abdominal pain, tender liver, enlarged spleen,
dark urine, and yellow tint to the sclera.
Assessment of safety parameters
Safety was assessed using clinical review of all safety
parameters, including laboratory investigations‑hematology,
biochemistry, ECG and urine analysis, adverse event (AE)
reporting as applicable, and monitoring of vitals (pulse rate,
respiratory rate, body temperature, and blood pressure). Safety
assessment was done for all cases who took at least one dose
of the study drug at all the visits.
Statistical analysis
The primary population for this study was per-protocol
population. With almost fifty subjects in each group, the sample
size was sufficient for analysis of change in LFTs. The primary
efficacy endpoint was analyzed using two proportion test. The
95% confidence interval was constructed for the proportion,
all other secondary outcomes were analyzed by applying
appropriate statistical methods like proportion test, t‑test, etc.,
The value of P < 0.05 was considered statistically significant.
Data are expressed as a mean ± standard error.
results
Demographic details
A total of 147 subjects were screened for eligibility. There were
15 screen failures and 132 subjects were enrolled. Enrolled
subjects were randomized equally (66 each) into either of the
study groups. In Hepano tablet group, 50 subjects (43 male and
7 female) completed the total study duration, and 16 patients
dropped out for reasons not related to study or study products.
In Marketed Comparator group, a total 51 subjects (39 male and
12 female) completed the total study duration, and 15 subjects
dropped out for reasons not related to study or study products.
There was no significant difference between the average ages
of subjects in the study groups [Figure 1].
Assessment efficacy
Aspartate aminotransferase
Both Hepano group and Marketed Comparator group showed
a significant reduction in mean AST levels from baseline
at all follow‑up visits. Mean serum AST levels reduced by
44.10, 56.98, 61.25 and 66.76% at day 7, 14, 28, and 56 in
Hepano group when compared to its baseline value, whereas
in the Marketed Comparator group, this reduction was 31.28,
45.29, 46.11, and 53.27%, respectively [Figure 2]. Between
the groups, analysis showed no significant difference at any
follow-up visits after initiation of the treatment.
Alanine transaminase
A significant reduction in ALT levels was observed in both the
groups at all follow-up visits when compared to its baseline value.
[Downloaded free from http://www.ddtjournal.org on Wednesday, November 29, 2017, IP: 106.66.112.155]

Kumar, et al.: Clinical evaluation of Hepano tablets in liver disorders

Enrollment Assessed for eligibility (n = 147)

Excluded (n = 15)
.
#'
!'"
" (&#"
%'%
(n = 15)
.
 "
'#
$%'$'
(n = 0)
.
'%
%&#"&
(n = 0)

Randomized (n = 132)

Allocation

Allocated to intervention (n = 66)

Allocated to intervention (n = 66) .
)
 #'
"'%)"'#"
(n = 66)
.
)
 #'
"'%)"'#"
(n = 66) .

"#'
%)
 #'
"'%)"'#"
(n = 0)
.

"#'
%)
 #'
"'%)"'#"
(n = 0)
Follow-Up

Lost to follow-up (n = 15)

Lost to follow-up (n = 16) &#"'"(
"'%)"'#"
(n = 0)
&#"'"(
"'%)"'#"
(n = 0)

Analysis

Analysed (n = 51)
Analysed (n = 50) .
+ (
%#!
" ,&&
(n = 0)
.
+ (
%#!
" ,&&
(n = 0)

Figure 1: CONSORT flow diagram

80.00% from day 7 onward till the end of the treatment, i.e., day 56.
70.00% There was, however, no significant difference between the two
60.00% groups at all the follow-up visits [Figures 5 and 6].
50.00%
40.00% Hepano Other liver function tests
30.00% Marketed Product All the other LFTs such as serum ALP, total proteins, albumin,
20.00%
10.00%
AG ratio, and PT/INR were found to be within normal limits
0.00% at the baseline and at all the follow-up visits in both the study
Day 7 Day 14 Day 28 Day 56 groups. There was also no significant difference between the
Figure 2: Percentage change in aspartate transaminase levels (U/I)
two groups at all the follow-up visits.
Symptoms of icterus
There was a reduction of 44.43, 59.81, 64.66, and 72.88% at day A significant reduction in the symptoms of icterus in both
7, 14, 28, and 56 in Hepano group when compared to its baseline the groups was observed day 7 onwards and continued
value, whereas in the Marketed Comparator group this reduction further to day 14, 28, 56, and 84. Almost complete recovery
was 46.21, 55.93, 58.62, and 65.19%, respectively [Figure 3]. in the symptoms of icterus was observed in the Hepano
There was, however, no significant difference between the effects group (97.05%) as compared to Marketed Comparator
of the two groups at any follow-up visits. group (86.40%). However, there was no significant
Total bilirubin difference between the effects of two groups at all the
TBL levels showed a significant reduction in both the groups follow-up visits.
at all the follow-up visits day 7 onward till the end of the Symptoms - fatigue
treatment at day 56. The reduction in Hepano group was found There was a significant reduction in fatigue in both the groups
to be 36.94, 51.27, 59.23 and 67.19% as compared to 29.56, which started from the day 7 onwards at all follow-up visits
44.34, 52.17, and 53.04% at day 7, 14, 28, and 56, respectively. in both the groups. On analyzing between groups, there was
There was, however, no significant difference between the
no significant difference between the two groups at all the
effects of two groups at all the follow-up visits [Figure 4].
follow‑up visits. At the end of the study, there was the almost
Direct and indirect bilirubin levels complete recovery of the symptom (96.22%) in the Hepano
Direct bilirubin and indirect bilirubin showed a significant group as compared to Marketed Comparator group where the
reduction in both the groups on all the follow-up visits starting percentage reduction was 80.73%.

Drug Development and Therapeutics ¦ Volume 8 ¦ Issue 1 ¦ January-June 2017 9

[Downloaded free from http://www.ddtjournal.org on Wednesday, November 29, 2017, IP: 106.66.112.155]

Kumar, et al.: Clinical evaluation of Hepano tablets in liver disorders

80.00% 80.00%
70.00% 70.00%
60.00%
60.00%
50.00%
50.00%
40.00% Hepano
40.00% Hepano
30.00% Marketed Product
30.00% Marketed Product
20.00%
10.00% 20.00%
0.00% 10.00%
Day 7 Day 14 Day 28 Day 56
0.00%
Day 7 Day 14 Day 28 Day 56
Figure 3: Percentage change in alanine transaminase levels (U/I)
Figure 4: Percentage change in total bilirubin levels (U/I)

80.00%
70.00% 70.00%
60.00% 60.00%
50.00% 50.00%
Hepano
40.00% Hepano 40.00%
Marketed Product 30.00% Marketed Product
30.00%
20.00% 20.00%
10.00% 10.00%
0.00%
0.00%
Day 7 Day 14 Day 28 Day56 Day 7 Day 14 Day 28 Day 56

Figure 5: Percentage change in direct bilirubin levels (U/I) Figure 6: Percentage change in indirect bilirubin levels (U/I)

Symptom - loss of appetite Symptom - itching

There was a significant decrease in the symptom ‑ loss of
appetite from the baseline visit to the follow-up visits in
both the groups. The reduction started day 7 onward and
continued at all follow‑up visits. There was, however, no
significant difference between the two groups at all the
follow‑up visits. At study completion, there was complete
recovery (100%) of the symptom in the Hepano group and
almost complete recovery in the Marketed Comparator
group (94.31%).
Symptom - nausea
A significant reduction in nausea was observed from the day
7 onward and continued further to day 14, 28, 56, and day
84 in both the groups. Between groups, analyses showed
that there was no significant difference at all the follow‑up
visits. It was observed that at the end of the study there
was no incidence of nausea in the Hepano group from day
56 onward and almost complete recovery in the Marketed
Comparator group as well (91.66% at day 56 and 95% at
day 84).
Symptom - vomiting
There was a significant reduction in vomiting in both the
groups’ day 7 onward and continued at all the follow-up
visits. On analyzing between groups, there was no significant
difference between the effects of the two groups at all the
follow-up visits. It is observed that there was no incidence of
vomiting in Hepano Group from day 56 onward; however, in
Marketed Comparator group, no incidence of vomiting was
seen day 14 onward.
There was a significant reduction in itching in both
the groups from day 7 onward and continued further
throughout the study. On analyzing between groups, there
was no significant difference at all the follow-up visits;
however, there was complete recovery (100%) from the
symptom in Hepano group day 56 onward and almost
complete recovery (95.65%) in the Marketed Comparator
group.
Assessment of safety
Assessment of incidence of adverse events
AEs were reported in 38 subjects. Of these, 20 subjects
were in Hepano Group and 18 in the Marketed Comparator.
A total of 42 AE were recorded in the study, 21 in each
group. The common AE reported were related to the
respiratory and gastrointestinal system such as fever,
cough, and pain in the abdomen, loose motions, etc.,
However, none of the AE was assessed to be related to
the study drugs.
Assessment of laboratory parameters
All the vital parameters were within the normal limits at all the
follow-up visits in both the groups and there was no statistically
significant difference.
All the laboratory parameters such as CBC (RBC, WBC,
hemoglobin, platelets, ESR, fasting blood sugar; LFT, RFT
(serum creatinine), lipid profile (serum total cholesterol and
triglycerides), X‑ray chest and ECG were within normal limits
at both initial and final visits and did not show any significant
difference between the groups.

10 Drug Development and Therapeutics ¦ Volume 8 ¦ Issue 1 ¦ January-June 2017

[Downloaded free from http://www.ddtjournal.org on Wednesday, November 29, 2017, IP: 106.66.112.155]
Kumar, et al.: Clinical evaluation of Hepano tablets in liver disorders
dIscussIon
Approximately 80% of the world’s population has employed
traditional medicine for health care, which is based
predominantly on plant materials[13] and at least one-quarter
of patients with liver disease use botanicals.[14] Although
botanicals have been used successfully for the treatment of
hepatic disorders, the spectrum of current medically utilized
herbal hepatoprotectives remains small, and their effectiveness
has been a matter of continuous discussion.[15] The prevalence
of liver disorders has been increasing steadily, but the treatment
outcomes are still considered poor. Clinical studies conducted
on natural plant products have been promising and may also
suggest herbal medicines becoming a major contributor
to the treatment of liver disorders.[8,16] A handful of herbal
drugs, both single and compound preparations available in
the market have been studied in this context, and the results
have been encouraging. [16,17] However, well‑performed
clinical trials on their therapeutic value in the treatment of
certain liver diseases are rare and remain uncharted.[14] In
line with the same, the current clinical study was attempted
to evaluate the hepatoprotective effects of an herbal
hepatoprotective formulation ‑ Hepano tablet. Preclinical
studies on Hepano tablet have demonstrated hepatoprotective
activity against paracetamol and D-galactosamine-induced
liver toxicity.[12] Safety of Hepano tablet has been established
in animal studies.[17]
Laboratory liver tests are broadly defined as tests useful
in the evaluation and treatment of patients with hepatic
dysfunction.[18] Results of the current study exhibited Hepano
tablet produced significant improvement in both the laboratory
parameters and clinical symptoms of liver diseases from the
7th day of administration and till the end of study period. The
majority of the subjects showed recovery in both symptoms
of icterus as well as laboratory values of LFTs. Moreover,
no relapse in symptoms, as well as change in the laboratory
parameters after another four weeks, follow‑up period after
cessation of the study medication was observed suggesting
potential hepatoprotective effects.
Hepano tablet comprises ingredients such as P. niruri,
T. cordifolia, A. indica¸ A. paniculata, T. chebula, E.
officinalis, and P. kurroa which are traditionally known
for hepatoprotective efficacy as mentioned in classical
texts of Ayurveda as well as modern published literature.
Conventionally, T. cordifolia and A. paniculata are known
to promote digestion and are useful in disorders of liver like
jaundice/hyperbilirubinemia.[19] Ethanolic, aqueous, and PET
extract of all the parts of T. cordifolia have shown the significant
hepatoprotective effect by a reduction in serum ALT, AST, ALP,
and TBL in animal models.[20] Hepatoprotective activity of A.
paniculata against liver toxicants has also been reported.[21,22]
E. officinalis and T. chebula are traditionally known to promote
digestion, are useful in jaundice and possess hepatoprotective
and antioxidant properties.[23,24] Hepatoprotective activity
of Terminalia bellerica and A. indica are also reported.[25,26]
Drug Development and Therapeutics ¦ Volume 8 ¦ Issue 1 ¦ January-June 2017
P. kurroa is traditionally known to be beneficial in liver
disorders. Its efficacy in hepatic disorders is supported by
clinical trials on viral hepatitis and hepatoprotection in animal
models.[27-29] P. niruri also has established hepatoprotective
activity.[30] All these properties of ingredients of Hepano
may have contributed to its hepatoprotective effects in liver
disorders.
conclusIon
Hepano tablet showed significant improvement in laboratory
parameters for abnormal liver functions and symptoms of
liver disease and was found to be safe in the given dosage.
The results were found to be comparable to that of marketed
herbomineral comparator. It is concluded from the present
study that Hepano tablet is the safe and effective product for
liver disorder patients with abnormal LFT.
Financial support and sponsorship
The study samples and financial support for the study were
provided by Dabur India Limited, Sahibabad (Ghaziabad),
Uttar Pradesh, India.
Conflicts of interest
Satyendra Kumar and Arun Gupta are employed with Dabur
India limited that manufactures/markets the study product
Hepano tablets.
references
1. Ilyas U, Katare DP, Aeri V, Naseef PP. A review on hepatoprotective and
immunomodulatory herbal plants. Pharmacogn Rev 2016;10:66‑70.
2. Giannini EG, Testa R, Savarino V. Liver enzyme alteration: A guide for
clinicians. CMAJ 2005;172:367‑79.
3. Yamazaki M, Suzuki H, Sugiyama Y. Recent advances in
carrier-mediated hepatic uptake and biliary excretion of xenobiotics.
Pharm Res 1996;13:497‑513.
4. Guicciardi ME, Gores GJ. Apoptosis: A mechanism of acute and chronic
liver injury. Gut 2005;54:1024‑33.
5. Tan CY, Saw TY, Fong CW, Ho HK. Comparative hepatoprotective
effects of tocotrienol analogs against drug‑induced liver injury. Redox
Biol 2015;4:308-20.
6. Adams DH, Hubscher SG. Systemic viral infections and collateral
damage in the liver. Am J Pathol 2006;168:1057‑9.
7. Lee WM. Recent developments in acute liver failure. Best Pract Res
Clin Gastroenterol 2012;26:3‑16.
8. Hong M, Li S, Tan HY, Wang N, Tsao SW, Feng Y. Current status of
herbal medicines in chronic liver disease therapy: The biological effects,
molecular targets and future prospects. Int J Mol Sci 2015 2;16:28705‑45.
9. Shamsi‑Baghbanan H, Sharifian A, Esmaeili S, Minaei B.
Hepatoprotective herbs, avicenna viewpoint. Iran Red Crescent Med J
2014;16:e12313.
10. Dhiman RK, Chawla YK. Herbal medicines for liver diseases. Dig Dis
Sci 2005;50:1807‑12.
11. Handa SS, Gupta AK, Tandon N, Sharma M. Perspectives of Indian
Medicinal Plants in the Management of Liver Disorders. New Delhi:
Medicinal Plants Unit, Indian Council of Medical Research; 2008.
12. Khan MA, Gupta A, Kumar S, Ahmad S, Sastry JL. Hepatoprotective
activity of a new polyherbal formulation against paracetamol and
D‑galactosamine induced hepatic toxicity. J Pharm Bioallied Sci
2015;7:246-9.
13. Madrigal‑Santillán E, Madrigal‑Bujaidar E, Álvarez‑González I,
Sumaya‑Martínez MT, Gutiérrez‑Salinas J, Bautista M, et al. Review
of natural products with hepatoprotective effects. World J Gastroenterol
11
[Downloaded free from http://www.ddtjournal.org on Wednesday, November 29, 2017, IP: 106.66.112.155]
Kumar, et al.: Clinical evaluation of Hepano tablets in liver disorders
2014;20:14787-804.
14. Stickel F, Schuppan D. Herbal medicine in the treatment of liver
diseases. Dig Liver Dis 2007;39:293-304.
15. Muriel P, Rivera‑Espinoza Y. Beneficial drugs for liver diseases. J Appl
Toxicol 2008;28:93-103.
16. Handa SS, Chakraborty KK, Sharma A. Antihepatotoxic activity of
some Indian herbal formulations as compared to silymarin. Fitoterapia
1986;57:307.
17. Adhikari KS, Singh P, Wahid S, Sokhal B, Kaushik R,
Shishodia G. 28‑Days Repeated Dose Oral Toxicity Study with
DRDC/AY/8060 (Hepano) in Wistar Rats: Data on Files. New Delhi,
India: Althea Life Sciences Limited; 2012. p. 1-23.
18. Gowda S, Desai PB, Hull VV, Math AA, Vernekar SN, Kulkarni SS.
A review on laboratory liver function tests. Pan Afr Med J 2009;3:17.
19. Bhavprakash Nighantu, Haritakyadi Varga. Commentary by Chunekar
KC, Pandey GS. Revised Edition. Varanasi, India: Chaukhambha
Bharati Academy; 2010. p. 8‑10.
20. Kavitha BT, Shruthi SD, Rai SP, Ramachandra YL. Phytochemical
analysis and hepatoprotective properties of Tinospora cordifolia against
carbon tetrachloride‑induced hepatic damage in rats. J Basic Clin Pharm
2011;2:139-42.
21. Rana AC, Avadhoot Y. Hepatoprotective effects of Andrographis
paniculata against carbon tetrachloride‑induced liver damage. Arch
Pharm Res 1991;14:93‑5.
22. Handa SS, Sharma A. Hepatoprotective activity of andrographolide
against galactosamine & paracetamol intoxication in rats. Indian J Med
Res 1990;92:284‑92.
12 Drug Development and Therapeutics ¦ Volume 8 ¦ Issue 1 ¦ January-June 2017
23. Thilakchand KR, Mathai RT, Simon P, Ravi RT, Baliga‑Rao MP,
Baliga MS. Hepatoprotective properties of the Indian gooseberry
(Emblica officinalis Gaertn): A review. Food Funct 2013;4:1431‑41.
24. Krishnaveni M, Mirunalini S. Therapeutic potential of Phyllanthus
emblica (amla): The ayurvedic wonder. J Basic Clin Physiol Pharmacol
2010;21:93-105.
25. Bag A, Bhattacharyya SK, Chattopadhyay RR. The development of
Terminalia chebula Retz. (Combretaceae) in clinical research. Asian
Pac J Trop Biomed 2013;3:244‑52.
26. Anand KK, Singh B, Saxena AK, Chandan AK, Gupta VN.
Hepatoprotective studies of a fraction from the fruits of Terminalia
belerica Roxb. on experimental liver injury in rodents. Phytother Res
1994;8:287-92.
27. Chattopadhyay RR, Sarkar SK, Ganguly S, Banerjee RN, Basu TK,
Mukherjee A. Hepatoprotective activity of Azadirachta indica leaves
on paracetamol induced hepatic damage in rats. Indian J Exp Biol
1992;30:738-40.
28. Lee HS, Keum KY, Ku SK. Effects of Picrorrhiza rhizoma water
extracts on the subacute liver damages induced by carbon tetrachloride.
J Med Food 2007;10:110‑7.
29. Lee HS, Keum KY, Ku SK. Hypolipemic effect of water extracts of
Picrorrhiza rhizoma in PX‑407 induced hyperlipemic ICR mouse model
with hepatoprotective effects: A prevention study. J Ethnopharmacol
2006;105:380-6.
30. Naaz F, Javed S, Abdin MZ. Hepatoprotective effect of ethanolic extract
of Phyllanthus amarus Schum. et Thonn. on aflatoxin B1‑induced liver
damage in mice. J Ethnopharmacol 2007;113:503‑9.