| Literature DB >> 30326566 |
Yang Liu1, Li Guo2, Mire Zloh3, Yujuan Zhang4, Jinhu Huang5, Liping Wang6.
Abstract
Florfenicol (FFC) is a valuable synthetic fluorinated derivative of thiamphenicol widely used to treat infectious diseases in food animals. The aims of the study were to investigate whether FFC is a substrate for the breast cancer resistance protein (BCRP) and whether the transporter influences oral availability of FFC. In vitro transport assays using MDCK-chAbcg2 cells were conducted to assess chicken BCRP-mediated transport of FFC, while in vivo pharmacokinetic experiments with single or combined BCRP inhibitor gefitinib were employed to study the role of BCRP in oral FFC disposition. According to U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) criteria, FFC was found to be a potential BCRP substrate due to the net efflux ratio being over 2.0 (2.37) in MDCK cells stably transfected with chicken BCRP and the efflux completely reversed by a BCRP inhibitor (Gefitinib). The molecular docking results indicated that florfenicol can form favorable interactions with the binding pocket of homology modeled chicken BCRP. Pharmacokinetic studies of FFC in different aged broilers with different expression levels of BCRP showed that higher BCRP expression would cause a lower Area Under Curve (AUC) and a higher clearance of FFC. In addition, more extensive absorption of florfenicol after the co-administration with gefitinib (a BCRP inhibitor) was observed. The overall results demonstrated that florfenicol is a substrate of the chicken breast cancer resistant protein which in turn affects its pharmacokinetic behavior.Entities:
Keywords: chicken breast cancer resistant protein; florfenicol; substrate
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2018 PMID: 30326566 PMCID: PMC6214120 DOI: 10.3390/ijms19103165
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Int J Mol Sci ISSN: 1422-0067 Impact factor: 5.923
Permeability, efflux ratio (ER), and net efflux ratio (NER) of florfenicol (FFC) across different cell monolayers.
| Cell Lines | Inhibitor | Efflux Ratio | Net Efflux Ratio (NER) | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| AP→BL | BL→AP | ||||||
| MDCK | − | 0.40 ± 0.04 | 0.40 ± 0.01 | 1.02 ± 0.12 | 0.656 | - | - |
| + | 0.37 ± 0.03 | 0.39 ± 0.01 | 1.06 ± 0.09 | - | |||
| MDCK-chAbcg2 | − | 0.28 ± 0.01 | 0.68 ± 0.04 | 2.40 ± 0.08 | 0.000 | 2.37 ± 0.28 | 0.002 |
| + | 0.37 ± 0.02 | 0.43 ± 0.01 | 1.15 ± 0.02 ** | 1.09 ± 0.09 ** | |||
Mean ± SD, n = 3, ** p < 0.01, compared between gefitinib treatment and non-treatment.
Figure 1The efflux ratio (ER) of florfenicol across different cell monolayers with or without inhibitor. Data are represented as mean ± SD of three independent experiments. ** p < 0.01.
Figure 2Molecular docking of florfenicol into the cBCRP target obtained using AutoDock Vina. (A) Homology model of the BCRP (ribbon representation colored according to secondary structure) and florfenicol (CPK(Corey–Pauling–Koltun) representation). (B) ligand interaction diagram of the florfenicol docking pose (dark green—conventional hydrogen bond; light green—carbon hydrogen bond; dark pink—pi-pi stacked interaction; light pink—pi-alkyl interaction; yellow—pi-sulfur interaction). (C) Florfenicol in the active sites delineated by the hydrophobic surface and surrounding residues which are labelled and represented as thin grey lines(dashed lines represent the same interactions as in B). Hydrogen atoms are not shown for clarity. (D) Florfenicol (thick grey lines) in the ligand binding domain of the cBCRP (ribbon representation: chain A colored in green and B in cyan). (E) Florfenicol (thick yellow lines) overlaid onto gefinitib (thick green lines) in the ligand binding domain of the cBCRP (ribbon representation: chain A colored in green and B in cyan).
Docking scores of breast cancer resistance protein (BCRP) substrates and inhibitors into the efflux pump site.
| Molecule | Docking Score (kcal/mol) | Molecule | Docking Score (kcal/mol) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Substrates | |||
| florfenicol | −8.3 | ciprofloxacin | −9.9 |
| irinotecan | −12.8 | enrofloxacin | −9.4 |
| topotecan | −11.0 | ampicillin | −8.7 |
| lapatinib | −11.0 | rosuvastatin | −8.6 |
| imatinib | −10.9 | mitoxantrone | −8.3 |
| sulfasalazine | −10.7 | clindamycin | −8.0 |
| methotrexate | −10.1 | ||
| Inhibitors | |||
| eltrombopag | −13.0 | elacridar | −12.2 |
| gefitinib | −9.6 | ||
Docking was carried out using Autodock Vina and VegaZZ as a graphical user interface.
Figure 3Comparison of the BCRP mRNA levels in different ages. Data are represented as mean ± SD (n = 5).
Figure 4Comparison of the BCRP mRNA level in different tissues in broilers at different ages. (A) Comparison of the BCRP mRNA levels in same tissues in broilers at different ages. (B) Comparison of the BCRP mRNA levels in different tissues in 4- and 8-week old broilers. Data are represented as mean ± SD (n = 5). ** p < 0.01.
Figure 5The concentration-time profiles of florfenicol. (A) The plasma concentration-time profiles of orally administered florfenicol (20 mg/kg b.w.) in the 4- and 8-week old broilers. (B) The plasma concentration-time profiles of intravenous administered florfenicol (10 mg/kg b.w.) in the 4- and 8-week old broilers. All data represent mean ± SD (n = 5).
Parameters of florfenicol administrated orally (20 mg/kg) in the 4- and 8-week old broilers (in the presence and absence of gefitinib (100 mg/kg)), respectively.
| Parameters | 4-Week Old Broilers | 8-Week Old Broilers | 8-Week Old Broilers Administered Gefitinib | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 3.87 ± 0.96 | 2.93 ± 1.07 | 0.159 | 1.73 ± 0.48 | 0.079 | |
| 0.63 ± 0.21 | 0.62 ± 0.19 | 0.943 | 2.00 ± 1.41 | 0.064 | |
| 3.27 ± 1.20 | 0.94 ± 0.17 * | 0.012 | 3.50 ± 3.35 | 0.224 | |
| 3.42 ± 1.18 | 5.64 ± 0.60 ** | 0.005 | 7.39 ± 2.98 | 0.327 | |
| 2.43 ± 0.53 | 4.43 ± 1.46 * | 0.034 | 2.57 ± 0.52 # | 0.048 | |
| 8.58 ± 1.88 | 4.91 ± 1.56 ** | 0.007 | 8.01 ± 1.65 # | 0.023 | |
| F (%) | 79.30 | 48.04 | - | 78.38 | - |
Mean ± SD, n = 5, * p < 0.05, ** p < 0.01, compared between 4 and 8-week broilers; # p < 0.05, compared between gefitinib treatment and non-treatment. Cmax: maximal plasma concentration; Tmax: time to obtain Cmax; Vd: apparent distribution volume; Cl: apparent clearance; T: elimination half-life; AUC0~12h: area under the plasma concentration–time curves; F: absolute bioavailability.
Parameters of florfenicol administered intravenously (10 mg/kg) in the 4- and 8-week old broilers.
| Parameters | 4-Week Old Broilers | 8-Week Old Broilers | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1.0 ± 0.85 | 0.79 ± 0.18 | 0.598 | |
| 1.51 ± 0.62 | 1.18 ± 0.29 | 0.310 | |
| 1.65 ± 0.54 | 2.14 ± 0.67 | 0.239 | |
| 5.41 ± 0.31 | 5.11 ± 1.89 | 0.741 |
Figure 6The plasma concentration-time profiles of orally administered florfenicol (20 mg/kg b.w.) in the presence and absence of gefitinib (100 mg/kg). Data represent mean ± SD (n = 5).
Nucleotide sequences of the primers used for real-time quantitative PCR analysis.
| Gene | Forward (5′–3′) | Reverse (5′–3′) | Length/bp | Tm (°C) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| ATGTGGATCAGCA | TTTATGCGCATTT | 300 | 54.1 | |
| Abcg2 | CCTACTTCCTGGCC | TCGGCCTGCTATA | 180 | 56 |