The complexity of minocycline serum protein binding

33Citations
Citations of this article
21Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

This article is free to access.

Abstract

Objectives: Serum protein binding is critical for understanding the pharmacology of antimicrobial agents. Tigecycline and eravacycline were previously reported to have atypical non-linear protein binding; the percentage of free fraction decreased with increasing total concentration. In this study, we extended the investigation to other tetracyclines and examined the factors that might impact protein binding. Methods: Different minocycline concentrations (0.5-50 mg/L) and perfusion media (saline, 0.1 M HEPES buffer and 0.1 and 1 M PBS) were examined by in vitro microdialysis. After equilibration, two dialysate samples were taken from each experiment and the respective antimicrobial agent concentrations were analysed by validated LC-MS/MS methods. For comparison, the serum protein bindings of doxycycline and levofloxacin were also determined. Results: The free fraction of minocycline decreased with increasing total concentration, and the results depended on the perfusion media used. The trends of minocycline protein binding in mouse and human sera were similar. In addition, serum protein binding of doxycycline showed the same concentration-dependent trend as minocycline, while the results of levofloxacin were concentration independent. Conclusions: The serum protein bindings of minocycline and doxycycline are negatively correlated with their total concentrations. It is possible that all tetracyclines share the same pharmacological property. Moreover, the specific perfusion media used could also impact the results of microdialysis. Additional studies are warranted to understand the mechanism(s) and clinical implications of serumprotein binding of tetracyclines.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Zhou, J., Tran, B. T., & Tam, V. H. (2017). The complexity of minocycline serum protein binding. Journal of Antimicrobial Chemotherapy, 72(6), 1632–1634. https://doi.org/10.1093/jac/dkx039

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