Literature DB >> 7106506

Comparative formation of lithocholic acid from chenodeoxycholic and ursodeoxycholic acids in the colon.

F Bazzoli, H Fromm, R P Sarva, R F Sembrat, S Ceryak.   

Abstract

The comparative rate of formation of lithocholic acid from chenodeoxycholic acid and its 7 beta epimer, ursodeoxycholic acid, was studied in human subjects and in a rhesus monkey. [24-14C]Chenodeoxycholic acid and [24-14C]ursodeoxycholic acid were incubated in vitro, under anaerobic conditions, in fecal samples from 7 control and 7 asymptomatic gallstone subjects. The incubations were carried out for 0, 0.5, 1, 4, and 12 h. In addition, the labeled precursors were instilled into the colon of 4 asymptomatic gallstone patients and a rhesus monkey in which a bile duct fistula had been created. Radioactive metabolites were analyzed by thin-layer chromatography in the in vitro fecal incubates and in the in vivo colonic aspirates, stool, and bile. The biotransformation of the unlabeled material was analyzed by gas-liquid chromatography in the in vitro incubates and in the in vivo fecal samples of the rhesus monkey. There was no statistical difference between chenodeoxycholic and ursodeoxycholic acids in their rate of biotransformation to lithocholic acid, when the total group of 14 subjects was compared. However, among these 14, a subgroup of 4 subjects (2 controls and 2 with gallstones) was identified in whom the rate of degradation to lithocholic acid was significantly faster for chenodeoxycholic than for ursodeoxycholic acid. Increases in the concentrations of the precursors led to a decrease in the rate, but not a change in the comparative pattern of lithocholic acid formation. At the lower concentrations, the conversion of both bile acids to lithocholic acid was almost complete after 12 h. In the in vivo studies, the formation of lithocholic acid from chenodeoxycholic and ursodeoxycholic acids was comparable both in the 4 human subjects and in the rhesus monkey. The results of this study indicate that, in most cases, the risk of liver damage from lithocholic acid formation should be similar for both epimers. However, there appears to be a small population in which this risk could be higher during chenodeoxycholic acid than during ursodeoxycholic acid treatment due to a more rapid formation of lithocholic acid.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  1982        PMID: 7106506

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Gastroenterology        ISSN: 0016-5085            Impact factor:   22.682


  10 in total

Review 1.  [Drug dissolution of gallstones in cholecystolithiasis].

Authors:  W Forth
Journal:  Klin Wochenschr       Date:  1985-11-04

Review 2.  Comparison of Canine and Human Physiological Factors: Understanding Interspecies Differences that Impact Drug Pharmacokinetics.

Authors:  Marilyn N Martinez; Jonathan P Mochel; Sibylle Neuhoff; Devendra Pade
Journal:  AAPS J       Date:  2021-04-27       Impact factor: 4.009

3.  Sulphation of lithocholic acid in the colon-carcinoma cell line CaCo-2.

Authors:  B Halvorsen; B F Kase; K Prydz; S Garagozlian; M S Andresen; S O Kolset
Journal:  Biochem J       Date:  1999-11-01       Impact factor: 3.857

4.  Gallstone dissolution with ursodeoxycholic acid in patients with chronic active hepatitis and two years follow-up. A pilot study.

Authors:  U Leuschner; M Leuschner; J Sieratzki; W Kurtz; K Hübner
Journal:  Dig Dis Sci       Date:  1985-07       Impact factor: 3.199

Review 5.  Ursodeoxycholic acid: a review of its pharmacological properties and therapeutic efficacy.

Authors:  A Ward; R N Brogden; R C Heel; T M Speight; G S Avery
Journal:  Drugs       Date:  1984-02       Impact factor: 9.546

6.  Synthesis and metabolism of sodium 3 alpha,7 alpha-dihydroxy-25,26-bishomo-5 beta-cholane-26-sulfonate in the hamster.

Authors:  T Mikami; E H Mosbach; B I Cohen; N Ayyad; M Yoshii; K Kihira; T Hoshita
Journal:  Lipids       Date:  1995-01       Impact factor: 1.880

7.  Hydrophilic bile acids: prevention and dissolution experiments in two animal models of cholesterol cholelithiasis.

Authors:  B I Cohen; T Mikami; N Ayyad; A Ohshima; R Infante; E H Mosbach
Journal:  Lipids       Date:  1995-09       Impact factor: 1.880

8.  Effect of chenodeoxycholic and ursodeoxycholic acids on isolated adult human hepatocytes.

Authors:  K Miyazaki; F Nakayama; A Koga
Journal:  Dig Dis Sci       Date:  1984-12       Impact factor: 3.199

9.  Inhibitory Effect of Ursodeoxycholic Acid on Clostridium difficile Germination Is Insufficient to Prevent Colitis: A Study in Hamsters and Humans.

Authors:  Lola-Jade Palmieri; Dominique Rainteau; Harry Sokol; Laurent Beaugerie; Marie Dior; Benoit Coffin; Lydie Humbert; Thibaut Eguether; André Bado; Sandra Hoys; Claire Janoir; Henri Duboc
Journal:  Front Microbiol       Date:  2018-11-22       Impact factor: 5.640

Review 10.  Molecular mechanisms of ursodeoxycholic acid toxicity & side effects: ursodeoxycholic acid freezes regeneration & induces hibernation mode.

Authors:  Magd A Kotb
Journal:  Int J Mol Sci       Date:  2012-07-17       Impact factor: 6.208

  10 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.