| Literature DB >> 23351782 |
Dipti B Ruikar1, Sadhana J Rajput.
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE OF THE STUDY: Glimepiride (GLM) was chosen as a model substrate in order to determine the kinetic parameters for in vitro metabolism via human liver micrososmes (HLM). We aimed to optimize the turnover of the substrate by the test system in relation to incubation time and HLM concentration in such a way that it was linearly dependent on time and less than 20% of the substrate was consumed which utilized the lowest amount of the HLM. Further we aimed to report Km and Vmax values for GLM.Entities:
Year: 2012 PMID: 23351782 PMCID: PMC3555947 DOI: 10.1186/2008-2231-20-38
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Daru ISSN: 1560-8115 Impact factor: 3.117
Factors, their levels, and coded values
| | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| Drug concentration (X1) | 10 μmole | 20 μmole | 30 μmole |
| Incubation time (X2) | 10 min | 35 min | 60 min |
| HLM concentration (X3) | 0.25 mg/ml | 0.5 mg/ml | 0.75 mg/ml |
| Coded values | −1 | 0 | +1 |
Different batches with their experimental coded level of variables for full factorial design
| 1 | −1 | −1 | −1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | −1 | 5.01(0.44) |
| 2 | −1 | −1 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 6.5(0.21) |
| 3 | −1 | −1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | −1 | −1 | 1 | 8.9(0.41) |
| 4 | −1 | 0 | −1 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 8.92(0.25) |
| 5 | −1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 19.91(0.69) |
| 6 | −1 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | −1 | 0 | 0 | 18.01(0.48) |
| 7 | −1 | 1 | −1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | −1 | 1 | −1 | 1 | 33.4(0.76) |
| 8 | −1 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0 | −1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 37.69(0.91) |
| 9 | −1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | −1 | −1 | 1 | −1 | 38.81(0.56) |
| 10 | 0 | −1 | −1 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 4.4(0.84) |
| 11 | 0 | −1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 6.1(0.58) |
| 12 | 0 | −1 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | −1 | 0 | 8.45(0.76) |
| 13 | 0 | 0 | −1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 8.05(0.51) |
| 14 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 18.91(0.62) |
| 15 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 15.05(0.65) |
| 16 | 0 | 1 | −1 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | −1 | 0 | 31.75(0.53) |
| 17 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 38.45(1.03) |
| 18 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 38.15(0.89) |
| 19 | 1 | −1 | −1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | −1 | −1 | 1 | 1 | 3.8(0.75) |
| 20 | 1 | −1 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0 | −1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 5.24(0.92) |
| 21 | 1 | −1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | −1 | 1 | −1 | −1 | 7.91(0.72) |
| 22 | 1 | 0 | −1 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 7.56(0.55) |
| 23 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 19.08(0.78) |
| 24 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 14.32(0.43) |
| 25 | 1 | 1 | −1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | −1 | −1 | −1 | 30.56(0.67) |
| 26 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 35.91(0.48) |
| 27 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 36.42(0.34) |
†n = 2.
Response of Full Model and Reduced Model
| X1 | −0.903 | 0.093963003 | - | - |
| X2 | 14.707 | 2.935912E-15† | 14.708 | 1.92E-19 |
| X3 | 2.891 | 3.72138E-05† | 2.921 | 4.63E-06 |
| X12 | −0.042 | 0.962269567 | - | - |
| X22 | 6.541 | 1.39313E-06† | 6.541 | 9.21E-08 |
| X32 | −3.107 | 0.0027451† | −3.107 | 0.001253 |
| X1X2 | −0.288 | 0.648852013 | - | - |
| X1X3 | −0.263 | 0.706627127 | - | - |
| X2X3 | 0.468 | 0.46193583 | - | - |
| X1X2X3 | 0.028 | 0.970329444 | - | - |
| Intercept | 16.522 | 7.07592E-11 | 16.49481481 | 5.84E-15 |
†significant terms at p > 0.05.
Analysis of variance (ANOVA) for full and reduced models of GLM metabolism
| Regression | |||||||
| FM | 10 | 4380.932 | 438.0932 | 94.570 | 0.9916 | 0.9834 | 0.9730 |
| RM | 4 | 4361.916 | 1090.479 | 257.590 | | | |
| Error | |||||||
| FM | 16 | 74.119(E1) | 4.632 | | | | |
| RM | 22 | 93.134(E2) | 4.233 | ||||
†SSE2-SSE1 = 93.134 – 74.119 = 19.015.
No. of the parameters omitted = 6.
MS of error (full model) =4.632.
F calculated = (SSE2 –SSE1/no. of parameters omitted)/MS of error (full model) = (19.015/6)/4.632 = 0.684189.
Tabled F value = 2.74 (α = 0.05, V1 = 6 and V2 = 16).
Where DF indicates degrees of freedom; SS sum of square; MS mean sum of square and F is Fischer’s ratio.
Figure 1Contour plot for GLM oxidative biotransformation showing effect on turnover rate at 0 level of drug concentration (X1).
Figure 2Response surface plot for GLM oxidative biotransformation showing effect on turnover rate at 0 level of X1.
Figure 3Michaelis-Menten plot for GLM oxidative biotransformation in HLM.