| Literature DB >> 30513962 |
Seok-Ho Shin1, Min-Ho Park2, Jin-Ju Byeon3, Byeong Ill Lee4, Yuri Park5, Nahye Kim6, Jangmi Choi7, Young G Shin8.
Abstract
A simple and sensitive liquid chromatography⁻quadrupole-time-of-flight⁻mass spectrometric (LC-QTOF-MS) assay has been developed for the evaluation of drug metabolism and pharmacokinetics (PK) properties of vipadenant in rat, a selective A2a receptor antagonist as one of the novel immune checkpoint inhibitors. A simple protein precipitation method using acetonitrile was used for the sample preparation and the pre-treated samples were separated by a reverse-phase C18 column. The calibration curve was evaluated in the range of 3.02 ~ 2200 ng/mL and the quadratic regression (weighted 1/concentration) was used for the best fit of the curve with a correlation coefficient ≥0.997. The in vivo PK studies in rats showed that vipadenant bioavailability was 30.4 ± 8.9% with a low to moderate drug clearance. In addition, in vitro/in vivo metabolite profiles in rat were also explored. Five different metabolites were observed in our experimental conditions and the major metabolites were different between in vitro and in vivo conditions. As far as we know, there has been no report on the development of quantitative methods for its PK samples nor the identification of its metabolites since vipadenant was developed. Therefore, this paper would be very useful to better understand the pharmacokinetic and drug metabolism properties of vipadenant in rat as well as other species.Entities:
Keywords: A2a receptor antagonist; LC-QTOF-MS; immune checkpoint; metabolite identification; pharmacokinetics; vipadenant
Year: 2018 PMID: 30513962 PMCID: PMC6321172 DOI: 10.3390/pharmaceutics10040260
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Pharmaceutics ISSN: 1999-4923 Impact factor: 6.321
Figure 1Structure of vipadenant.
The mobile phase conditions for LC (Liquid-Chromataography) gradient.
|
| |
|
|
|
| 0 | 10 |
| 0.5 | 10 |
| 0.9 | 95 |
| 1.5 | 95 |
| 1.6 | 10 |
| 3.0 | 10 |
|
| |
|
|
|
| 0 | 5 |
| 1.5 | 5 |
| 18 | 25 |
| 23 | 50 |
| 23.5 | 95 |
| 27 | 95 |
| 27.5 | 5 |
| 32 | 5 |
Figure 2(a) Calibration curve of vipadenant and (b) Lower limit of quantification (LLOQ) in rat plasma.
Quality control results and statistics from the intra/inter-run assays for vipadenant.
|
| |||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Day 1 | 15 | 16.9 | 112.8 | 12.1 | 3 |
| 165 | 175.2 | 106.2 | 7.9 | ||
| 1820 | 1793.4 | 98.5 | 3.2 | ||
| Day 2 | 15 | 17.3 | 114.8 | 9.6 | 3 |
| 165 | 164.2 | 99.2 | 6.3 | ||
| 1820 | 1727.6 | 94.9 | 5.3 | ||
| Day 3 | 15 | 18.5 | 123.3 | 4.9 | 3 |
| 165 | 187.1 | 113.4 | 6.9 | ||
| 1820 | 1923.1 | 105.7 | 5.3 | ||
|
| |||||
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| 15 | 16.2 | 108.1 | 11.3 | 9 | |
| 165 | 178.1 | 107.8 | 7.4 | ||
| 1820 | 1843.7 | 101.3 | 4.6 | ||
Preliminary stability results for vipadenant.
| Freeze-Thaw, Long-Term and Post-Preparative Stability Assessment | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Stability Test | Nominal QC Concentration (ng/mL) | Calculated Concentration (ng/mL) | Mean Accuracy (%) | Precision (% CV) |
| Short term | 15 | 14.7 | 97.8 | 11.6 |
| 165 | 149.4 | 90.5 | 10.9 | |
| 1820 | 1685.6 | 92.6 | 3.9 | |
| Freeze-thaw | 15 | 17.8 | 118.8 | 5.2 |
| 165 | 145.8 | 88.5 | 0.4 | |
| 1820 | 1671.6 | 91.1 | 1.7 | |
| Long-term | 15 | 16.8 | 111.8 | 3.3 |
| 165 | 171.8 | 104.1 | 2.7 | |
| 1820 | 1887.7 | 103.7 | 4.8 | |
| Post-preparative | 15 | 17.3 | 114.8 | 9.6 |
| 165 | 164.2 | 99.2 | 6.3 | |
| 1820 | 1727.6 | 94.9 | 5.3 | |
| Stock storage | 165 | 169.1 | 102.5 | 3.3 |
| 1820 | 1739.2 | 95.6 | 6.1 | |
The Species-dependent matrix effect of vipadenant.
| Species-Dependent Matrix Effect Assessment (5 Species) | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Species | QC Medium | QC High | ||||
| Mean Concentration (ng/mL) | Mean Accuracy (%) | Precision (% CV) | Mean Concentration (ng/mL) | Mean Accuracy (%) | Precision (% CV) | |
| Control (Rat) | 153.2 | 92.7 | 2.9 | 1788.0 | 98.3 | 5.9 |
| Mouse | 159.7 | 96.6 | 6.1 | 1881.6 | 103.5 | 9.6 |
| Dog | 159.8 | 96.7 | 4.8 | 1879.4 | 103.4 | 7.9 |
| Monkey | 163.7 | 99.1 | 3.3 | 1740.3 | 95.7 | 3.1 |
| Human | 174.0 | 105.3 | 6.6 | 1857.9 | 102.2 | 3.4 |
Figure 3Time-concentration profiles of vipadenant from (a) IV (intravenous) 1, 2 mg/kg study and (b) PO (oral) 2, 5 mg/kg study.
Pharmacokinetic parameters of vipadenant from IV/PO PK study.
| PK Parameters of Vipadenant | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| PK Study | Dose (mg/kg) | AUClast (min ng/mL) | CL (mL/min/kg) | Vss (mL/kg) | BA (%) | |||
| PO | 2 | 65.2 ± 20.2 | 7.5 ± 5.0 | 229.7 ± 88.0 | 16716.4 ± 7245.0 | - | - | 30.4 ± 8.9 |
| 5 | 115.6 ± 59.0 | 30.0 ± 26.0 | 296.0 ± 87.3 | 53196.4 ± 4067.6 | - | - | ||
| IV | 1 | 48.0 ± 5.8 | 2.6 ± 1.3 | 2213.7 ± 1155.3 | 27060.9 ± 5826.5 | 37.8 ± 7.2 | 1082.9 ± 222.5 | |
| 2 | 71.2 ± 8.5 | 2.0 ± 0.0 | 3091.0 ± 221.6 | 90694.2 ± 18814.6 | 22.5 ± 4.3 | 1209.3 ± 174.4 | ||
Figure 4Extracted ion chromatogram of representative MetID samples. (a) in vitro (rat liver microsome) and (b) in vivo MetID (rat pharmacokinetic study) of vipadenant.
Figure 5Identification of in vitro/vivo metabolites based on vipadenant. (a) TOF-MS/MS scan of vipadenant (m/z 322.1); (b) TOF-MS/MS scan of ‘mono-oxidation and mono-glucuronidation’ metabolite (M1: m/z 514.1); (c) TOF-MS/MS scan of the metabolite with a ‘loss of C8H9N’ moiety from vipadenant (M2: m/z 203.1), (d) TOF-MS/MS scan of ‘mono-oxidation’ metabolites (M3, M4, M5, M7: m/z 338.1); (e) TOF-MS/MS scan of metabolites with ‘mono-oxidation followed by reduction’ (M6, M9, M10: m/z 336.1) and (f) TOF-MS/MS scan of ‘acetylated’ metabolites (M8: m/z 364.1).
Figure 6Metabolic pathways of vipadenant in vitro/vivo.
Characteristics of the in vitro/vivo vipadenant MetID results by LC-QTOF-MS/MS assay.
|
| ||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Parent | Vipadenant [M + H]+ | C16H15N7O | 12.3 | 322.1410 | - | −0.2 |
| M1 | Mono-oxidation + mono-glucuronidation [M + H]+ | C22H23N7O8 | 5.1 | 514.1656 | +192 | −4.8 |
| M2 | Loss of C8H9N [M + H]+ | C8H6N6O | 5.8 | 203.0651 | −120 | −0.9 |
| M3 | Mono-oxidation [M + H]+ | C16H15N7O2 | 6.0 | 338.1363 | +16 | 0.9 |
| M4 | Mono-oxidation [M + H]+ | C16H15N7O2 | 6.4 | 338.1338 | +16 | −6.5 |
| M5 | Mono-oxidation [M + H]+ | C16H15N7O2 | 10.6 | 338.1362 | +16 | 0.6 |
| M6 | Mono-oxidation followed by reduction [M + H]+ | C16H13N7O2 | 15.4 | 336.1193 | +14 | −3.1 |
| M7 | Mono-oxidation [M + H]+ | C16H15N7O2 | 15.5 | 338.1338 | +16 | 5.3 |
| M8 | C18H17N7O | 16.0 | 364.1527 | +42 | 2.9 | |
| M9 | Mono-oxidation followed by reduction [M + H]+ | C16H13N7O2 | 17.1 | 336.1192 | +14 | −3.4 |
| M10 | Mono-oxidation followed by reduction [M + H]+ | C16H13N7O2 | 22.5 | 336.1187 | +14 | −4.9 |
|
| ||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Parent | Vipadenant [M + H]+ | C16H15N7O | 12.3 | 322.1417 | - | 1.9 |
| M2 | Loss of C8H9N [M + H]+ | C8H6N6O | 5.8 | 203.0673 | −120 | −1.4 |
| M8 | C18H17N7O | 16.0 | 364.1526 | +42 | 2.6 | |