Faryal F Mir1,2,3, Ryan P Tomaszewski1, Dorela D Shuboni-Mulligan1,2, Christiane L Mallett1,2, Jeremy M L Hix1,2, Nicholas D Ether4, Erik M Shapiro1,2. 1. Michigan State University, Department of Radiology, East Lansing, Michigan. 2. Michigan State University Institute of Quantitative Health Science and Engineering, East Lansing, Michigan. 3. Michigan State University College of Osteopathic Medicine, East Lansing, Michigan. 4. Michigan State University, Department of Pharmacology and Toxicology, East Lansing, Michigan.
Abstract
PURPOSE: While rodents are the primary animal models for contrast agent evaluation, rodents can potentially misrepresent human organ clearance of newly developed contrast agents. For example, gadolinium (Gd)-BOPTA has ~50% hepatic clearance in rodents, but ~5% in humans. This study demonstrates the benefit of chimeric mice expressing human hepatic OATPs (organic anion-transporting polypeptides) to improve evaluation of novel contrast agents for clinical use. METHODS: FVB (wild-type) and OATP1B1/1B3 knock-in mice were injected with hepatospecific MRI contrast agents (Gd-EOB-DTPA, Gd-BOPTA) and nonspecific Gd-DTPA. T1 -weighted dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI was performed on mice injected intravenously. Hepatic MRI signal enhancement was calculated per time point. Mass of gadolinium cleared per time point and percentage elimination by means of feces and urine were also measured. RESULTS: Following intravenous injection of Gd-BOPTA in chimeric OATP1B1/1B3 knock-in mice, hepatic MRI signal enhancement and elimination by liver was more reflective of human hepatic clearance than that measured in wild-type mice. Gd-BOPTA hepatic MRI signal enhancement was reduced to 22% relative to wild-type mice. Gd-BOPTA elimination in wild-type mice was 83% fecal compared with 32% fecal in chimeric mice. Hepatic MRI signal enhancement and elimination for Gd-EOB-DTPA and Gd-DTPA were similar between wild-type and chimeric cohorts. CONCLUSION: Hepatic MRI signal enhancement and elimination of Gd-EOB-DTPA, Gd-BOPTA, and Gd-DTPA in chimeric OATP1B1/1B3 knock-in mice closely mimics that seen in humans. This study provides evidence that the chimeric knock-in mouse is a more useful screening tool for novel MRI contrast agents destined for clinical use as compared to the traditionally used wild-type models.
PURPOSE: While rodents are the primary animal models for contrast agent evaluation, rodents can potentially misrepresent human organ clearance of newly developed contrast agents. For example, gadolinium (Gd)-BOPTA has ~50% hepatic clearance in rodents, but ~5% in humans. This study demonstrates the benefit of chimeric mice expressing human hepatic OATPs (organic anion-transporting polypeptides) to improve evaluation of novel contrast agents for clinical use. METHODS: FVB (wild-type) and OATP1B1/1B3 knock-in mice were injected with hepatospecific MRI contrast agents (Gd-EOB-DTPA, Gd-BOPTA) and nonspecific Gd-DTPA. T1 -weighted dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI was performed on mice injected intravenously. Hepatic MRI signal enhancement was calculated per time point. Mass of gadolinium cleared per time point and percentage elimination by means of feces and urine were also measured. RESULTS: Following intravenous injection of Gd-BOPTA in chimeric OATP1B1/1B3 knock-in mice, hepatic MRI signal enhancement and elimination by liver was more reflective of human hepatic clearance than that measured in wild-type mice. Gd-BOPTA hepatic MRI signal enhancement was reduced to 22% relative to wild-type mice. Gd-BOPTA elimination in wild-type mice was 83% fecal compared with 32% fecal in chimeric mice. Hepatic MRI signal enhancement and elimination for Gd-EOB-DTPA and Gd-DTPA were similar between wild-type and chimeric cohorts. CONCLUSION: Hepatic MRI signal enhancement and elimination of Gd-EOB-DTPA, Gd-BOPTA, and Gd-DTPA in chimeric OATP1B1/1B3 knock-in mice closely mimics that seen in humans. This study provides evidence that the chimeric knock-in mouse is a more useful screening tool for novel MRI contrast agents destined for clinical use as compared to the traditionally used wild-type models.
Authors: Laurent Salphati; Xiaoyan Chu; Liangfu Chen; Bhagwat Prasad; Shannon Dallas; Raymond Evers; Donna Mamaril-Fishman; Ethan G Geier; Jonathan Kehler; Jeevan Kunta; Mario Mezler; Loic Laplanche; Jodie Pang; Anja Rode; Matthew G Soars; Jashvant D Unadkat; Robert A B van Waterschoot; Jocelyn Yabut; Alfred H Schinkel; Nico Scheer Journal: Drug Metab Dispos Date: 2014-05-22 Impact factor: 3.922
Authors: M Kim; B Choi; S-Y Joo; H Lee; J-H Lee; K W Lee; S Lee; J B Park; S-K Lee; S J Kim Journal: Transplant Proc Date: 2014-05 Impact factor: 1.066
Authors: Dorela D Shuboni-Mulligan; Maciej Parys; Barbara Blanco-Fernandez; Christiane L Mallett; Regina Schnegelberger; Marilia Takada; Shatadru Chakravarty; Bruno Hagenbuch; Erik M Shapiro Journal: Diabetes Date: 2018-11-28 Impact factor: 9.461
Authors: Maria Karlgren; Anna Vildhede; Ulf Norinder; Jacek R Wisniewski; Emi Kimoto; Yurong Lai; Ulf Haglund; Per Artursson Journal: J Med Chem Date: 2012-05-15 Impact factor: 7.446