Mechanisms underlying differences in systemic exposure of structurally similar active metabolites: Comparison of two preclinical hepatic models

21Citations
Citations of this article
22Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.
Get full text

Abstract

Selection of in vitro models that accurately characterize metabolite systemic and hepatobiliary exposure remains a challenge in drug development. In the present study, mechanisms underlying differences in systemic exposure of two active metabolites, furamidine and 2,5-bis (5-amidino)-2-pyridyl furan (CPD- 0801), were examined using two hepatic models from rats: isolated perfused livers (IPLs) and sandwich-cultured hepatocytes (SCH). Pafuramidine, a prodrug of furamidine, and 2,5-bis[5-(N-methoxyamidino)-2-pyridyl] furan (CPD-0868), a prodrug of CPD-0801, were selected for investigation because CPD- 0801 exhibits greater systemic exposure than furamidine, despite remarkable structural similarity between these two active metabolites. In both IPLs and SCH, the extent of conversion of CPD-0868 to CPD-0801 was consistently higher than that of pafuramidine to furamidine over time (at most 2.5-fold); area under the curve (AUC) of CPD-0801 in IPL perfusate and SCH medium was at least 7-fold higher than that of furamidine. Pharmacokinetic modeling revealed that the rate constant for basolateral (liver to blood) net efflux (k A-net efflux) of total formed CPD-0801 (bound + unbound) was 6-fold higher than that of furamidine. Hepatic accumulation of both active metabolites was extensive (>95% of total formed); the hepatic unbound fraction (fu,L) of CPD-0801 was 5-fold higher than that of furamidine (1.6 versus 0.3%). Incorporation of fu,L into the pharmacokinetic model resulted in comparable k A-net efflux,u between furamidine and CPD-0801. In conclusion, intrahepatic binding markedly influenced the disposition of these active metabolites. A higher fu,L explained, in part, the enhanced perfusate AUC of CPD-0801 compared with furamidine in IPLs. SCH predicted the disposition of prodrug/metabolite in IPLs. Copyright © 2011 by The American Society for Pharmacology and Experimental Therapeutics.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Yan, G. Z., Brouwer, K. L. R., Pollack, G. M., Wang, M. Z., Tidwell, R. R., Hall, J. E., & Paine, M. F. (2011). Mechanisms underlying differences in systemic exposure of structurally similar active metabolites: Comparison of two preclinical hepatic models. Journal of Pharmacology and Experimental Therapeutics, 337(2), 503–512. https://doi.org/10.1124/jpet.110.177220

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free