| Literature DB >> 28074333 |
Maryam Bazargan1,2, David J R Foster3, Andrew K Davey3,4, Beverly S Muhlhausler3,5.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Elimination of rosiglitazone in humans is via hepatic metabolism. The existing studies suggest that CYP2C8 is the major enzyme responsible, with a minor contribution from CYP2C9; however, other studies suggest the involvement of additional cytochrome P450 enzymes and metabolic pathways. Thus a full picture of rosiglitazone metabolism is unclear.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2017 PMID: 28074333 PMCID: PMC5318334 DOI: 10.1007/s40268-016-0166-4
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Drugs R D ISSN: 1174-5886
General information of human liver microsomes
| Sample | Race | Gender | Age |
|---|---|---|---|
| CYB | Caucasian | Female | 30 |
| JOX | Caucasian | Female | 52 |
| PIM | Caucasian | Female | 58 |
| YAC | Caucasian | Male | 75 |
| ZIL | Hispanic | Male | 38 |
Fig. 1Rosiglitazone metabolism velocity profile in human liver microsomes (with no inhibition). The solid line represents the curve of the best fit; the inset is the corresponding Eadie–Hofstee plot. HLM human liver microsomes
Parameters of the best fitted models for enzyme kinetics with no inhibition and in the presence of CYP2C8 or CYP2C9 inhibitors
| HLM | Inhibition | Kinetic model |
|
|
|
|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| CYB | No | MM,IS | 2.18 (0.03–4.32)a | 26.0 (0–58.9) | 20.4 (0–49.2) | – |
| CYP2C8 | MM,IS | 3.91 (0–14.7) | 82.8 (0–337) | 9.06 (0–38.4) | – | |
| CYP2C9 | MM,IS | 1.26 (0–5.13) | 22.2 (0–109) | 14.6 (0–74.7) | – | |
| JOX | No | Allosteric | 0.27 (0.22–0.32) | 912 (0–10294) | – | 5.87 (0–14.1) |
| CYP2C8 | Allosteric | 0.24 (0.14–0.30) | 1664 (0–18309) | – | 4.36 (0–10.3) | |
| CYP2C9 | Allosteric | 0.19 (0.06–0.1) | 205 (0–1742) | – | 4.31 (0–10) | |
| PIM | No | MM,IS | 0.90 (4.34–8.55) | 17.1 (7.21–26.9) | 234 (0–548) | – |
| CYP2C8 | MM,IS | 0.67 (0.32–1.01) | 12.3 (0.4–24) | 859 (0–7903) | – | |
| CYP2C9 | MM,IS | 1.27 (0.4–2.13) | 26.7 (2.28–51.1) | 30.2 (0–63) | – | |
| YAC | No | MM,IS | 0.89 (0.46–1.33) | 29.8 (9.82–49.7) | 54.6 (3.16–106) | – |
| CYP2C8 | MM,IS | 0.76 (0.15–1.38) | 24.5 (0–52.7) | 63.3 (0–170) | – | |
| CYP2C9 | MM,IS | 1.08 (0–2.7) | 38.8 (0–118) | 26.8 (0–83) | – | |
| ZIL | No | MM,IS | 3.12 (1.35–4.89) | 27.6 (5.39–49.8) | 67.3 (0–140) | – |
| CYP2C8 | MM,IS | 1.53 (0.73–2.32) | 13.4 (1.67–25.1) | 313 (0–1174) | – | |
| CYP2C9 | MM,IS | 5.40 (0–15.4) | 55.1 (0–165) | 3.82 (0–11.7) | – |
HLM human liver microsomes, K the constant indicating the degree of substrate inhibition, K the substrate concentration at which the reaction velocity is 50% of V max, K′ (K prime) the substrate concentration at which the reaction velocity equals 50% of V max (equivalent to K m derived by the MM equation), MM,IS Michaelis–Menten with substrate inhibition kinetics, n equivalent to the Hill-coefficient for cooperative substrate binding, V the maximum reaction velocity
aThe 95% confidence interval of the parameter
Fig. 2Rosiglitazone metabolism velocity profile in human liver microsomes with CYP2C8 or CYP2C9 inhibition. The solid line represents the curve of the best fit. HLM human liver microsomes
Fig. 3Inhibition of rosiglitazone metabolism (10 µM) in human liver microsomes in the presence of CYP inhibitors. *Significant difference (P < 0.05) in comparison with control. 13-cis 13-cis retinoic acid (CYP2C8) 142 µM, Die diethyldithiocarbamate (CYP2E1) 40 µM, Fur furafylline (CYP1A2) 10 µM, Ket ketoconazole (CYP3A4) 1 µM, Mon montelukast (CYP2C8) 0.02 µM, Mon + Sul montelukast (CYP2C8) 0.02 µM in combination with sulfaphenazole (CYP2C9) 2.5 µM, Qui quinidine (CYP2D6) 1 µM, Sul sulfaphenazole (CYP2C9) 2.5 µM or 10 µM, Tro troleandomycin (CYP3A4) 40 µM
| In this study, a more comprehensive picture of rosiglitazone metabolism was demonstrated. |
| The work presented here will assist in the better management of rosiglitazone use in regard to polypharmacy and pharmacogenetics. |