| Literature DB >> 28401920 |
Akiko Ido1, Youhei Hiromori1,2, Liping Meng3, Haruki Usuda1, Hisamitsu Nagase1, Min Yang4, Jianying Hu3, Tsuyoshi Nakanishi1.
Abstract
Fibrates, which are widely used lipidaemic-modulating drugs, are emerging environmental pollutants. However, fibrate concentrations in the environment have not been thoroughly surveyed. Here, we determined concentrations of the most commonly used fibrates and their metabolites in source water and drinking water samples from ten drinking water treatment plants in Shanghai and Zhejiang, China, using solid-phase extraction and liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry. All the target compounds were detected in at least some of the source water samples, at concentrations ranging from 0.04 ng/L (fenofibrate) to 1.53 ng/L (gemfibrozil). All the compounds except fenofibrate were also detected in at least some of the drinking water samples, at recoveries ranging from 35.5% to 91.7%, suggesting that these compounds are poorly removed by typical drinking water treatment processes. In a peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor α agonistic activity assay, the target compounds showed no significant activity at nanogram per litre concentrations; therefore, our results suggest that the fibrate concentrations in drinking water in Shanghai and Zhejiang, China do not significantly affect human health. However, because of the increasing westernization of the Chinese diet, fibrate use may increase, and thus monitoring fibrate concentrations in aquatic environments and drinking water in China will become increasingly important.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2017 PMID: 28401920 PMCID: PMC5388841 DOI: 10.1038/srep45931
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Sci Rep ISSN: 2045-2322 Impact factor: 4.379
Figure 1Ultraperformance LC-MS/MS selected-reaction monitoring chromatograms of the five target compounds in standard solutions and water samples.
The concentrations in the standard solutions were 1.0 μg/L for bezafibrate (BF), gemfibrozil (GF) and clofibric acid (CA) and 0.1 μg/L for fenofibrate (FF) and fenofibric acid (FA).
Concentrations of fibrates and their metabolites in source water and drinking water samples in China.
| DWTPa | Sample typeb | Concentration (ng/L) and Residual ratio (%)c | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| BFe | GFf | FFg | CAh | FAi | ||
| A | SW | ndd | 0.18 | nd | 0.42 | nd |
| DW | nd | 0.08 | nd | 0.35 | nd | |
| B | SW | nd | 0.16 | 0.05 | 0.21 | nd |
| DW | nd | 0.07 | nd | 0.07 | nd | |
| C | SW | 0.61 | 0.13 | 0.06 | 0.47 | nd |
| DW | 0.32 | 0.11 | nd | 0.34 | nd | |
| D | SW | 0.40 | 0.18 | 0.04 | 0.44 | nd |
| DW | 0.37 | 0.08 | nd | 0.34 | nd | |
| E | SW | nd | nd | 0.08 | nd | nd |
| DW | nd | nd | nd | nd | nd | |
| F | SW | 0.86 | 1.53 | 0.05 | 0.90 | 0.32 |
| DW | 0.62 | 0.56 | nd | 0.80 | 0.25 | |
| G | SW | 0.43 | 0.07 | nd | 0.31 | nd |
| DW | 0.30 | 0.06 | nd | 0.24 | nd | |
| H | SW | 0.68 | 0.29 | 0.07 | 0.66 | nd |
| DW | 0.56 | 0.14 | nd | 0.42 | nd | |
| I | SW | 0.58 | 0.49 | nd | 0.49 | nd |
| DW | 0.43 | 0.26 | nd | 0.36 | nd | |
| J | SW | nd | nd | nd | 0.37 | nd |
| DW | nd | nd | nd | 0.21 | nd | |
aDWTP, drinking water treatment plant; bSW, source water; DW, drinking water; cRR, residual ratio in drinking water after water treatment; dnd, not detected (less than the detection limit); eBF, bezafibrate; fGF, gemfibrozil; gFF, fenofibrate; hCA, clofibric acid; iFA, fenofibric acid.
Figure 2PPARα agonistic activities of the target compounds and their metabolites using a PPARα reporter assay.
Hepa 1–6 cells were cotransfected with 20 ng of p4 × UAS-tk-luc and 2 ng of pM-hPPARα full and were then treated with bezafibrate (BF), gemfibrozil (GF), fenofibrate (FF), clofibric acid (CA), or fenofibric acid (FA). pGL-4.74 (0.2 ng) was cotransfected as the internal standard for normalization (see Methods). The results are expressed as average fold activation after normalization to Renilla LUC activity. *P < 0.05 vs DMSO, Tukey honest significant difference test.
Comparison of previously reported fibrate concentrations in drinking (tap) water in Europe and Canada and concentrations for China in the present study.
| Country | Sample type (year) | Fibratea | Concentration (ng/L)b | FF-EQ (ng-FF/L)c | Total FF-EQ (ng/L)d | Reference |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Spain | Tap water (2012) | BF | nd | nc | 3.7 | 13 |
| GF | 2.0 | 0.28 | ||||
| CA | 19 | 3.4 | ||||
| France | Drinking water (2007–2008) | BF | 0.3–2.2 | 0.14–0.99 | 2.7 | 14 |
| FA | 0.2–1.0 | 0.35–1.74 | ||||
| Canada | Drinking water (2003–2004) | CA | 0.9–1.1 | 0.16–0.20 | 0.20 | 10 |
| Tap water (not specified) | GF | 70 | 9.8 | 9.8 | 12 | |
| Germany | Drinking water (1994–2000) | CA | 1–170 | 0.18–31 | 31 | 11 |
| Tap water (not specified) | BF | 27 | 12 | 61 | 12 | |
| CA | 50–270 | 9.0–49 | ||||
| Italy | Tap water(not specified) | BF | nd | nc | 0.95 | 12 |
| CA | 3.2–5.3 | 0.58–0.95 | ||||
aBF, bezafibrate; GF, gemfibrozil; FF, fenofibrate; CA, clofibric acid; FA, fenofibric acid; bnd, not detected; cFF-EQ, fenofibrate- equivalent quantity; nc, not calculated; dsum of maximum FF-EQ of each compound.
Optimized conditions for selected-reaction mode tandem mass spectrometry analysis of fibrates and their metabolites.
| Function (min) | Retention time (min) | Compounda | Dwell time (s) | Precursor ion ( | Product ion ( | Cone voltage (V) | Collision energy (eV) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Negative-ion mode | |||||||
| 3.0–4.0 | 3.51 | CA | 0.05 | 213 | 126.7b | 20 | 14 |
| 84.7 | 16 | ||||||
| 4.5–5.5 | 5.03 | GF | 0.05 | 249 | 120.8b | 20 | 12 |
| 126.8 | 14 | ||||||
| Positive-ion mode | |||||||
| 3.0–4.0 | 3.66 | BF | 0.05 | 362 | 316b | 30 | 15 |
| 276 | 15 | ||||||
| 4.0–4.5 | 4.22 | FA | 0.05 | 319 | 233b | 24 | 18 |
| 139 | 30 | ||||||
| 5.0–5.5 | 5.19 | FF | 0.05 | 361 | 233b | 30 | 16 |
| 139 | 26 | ||||||
aCA, clofibric acid; GF, gemfibrozil; BF, bezafibrate; FA, fenofibric acid; FF, bProduct ion used for quantification.