![]() |
|
|
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Department of Experimental and Clinical Pharmacology, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, Minnesota (V.K., T.S.T.); and Global Pharmacokinetics, Dynamics and Metabolism, Pfizer Global Research & Development, St. Louis Laboratories, Pfizer Inc., St. Louis, Missouri (J.L.W., D.A.R., C.J.D., L.A.G.)
Drug-drug interactions may cause serious adverse events in the clinical setting, and the cytochromes P450 are the enzyme system most often implicated in these interactions. Cytochrome P450 2C is the second most abundant subfamily of cytochrome P450 enzymes and is responsible for metabolism of almost 20% of currently marketed drugs. The most abundant isoform of this subfamily is CYP2C9, which is the major clearance pathway for the low therapeutic index drugs warfarin and phenytoin. Considering the importance of CYP2C9 to drug-drug interactions, the in vitro-in vivo extrapolation of drug-drug interactions for CYP2C9 may be confounded by the presence of polymorphic variants and the possibility of multiple binding regions within the CYP2C9 active site, leading to the potential for genotype- and substrate-dependent inhibition. To address the issues of genotype-dependent enzyme inhibition as well as probe substrate correlations, the inhibitory potency (Ki) of 28 effector molecules was assessed with five commonly used probes of CYP2C9 in both the CYP2C9.1 and CYP2C9.3 proteins. The inhibition of CYP2C9.1 and CYP2C9.3 by the battery of inhibitors with five substrate probes demonstrated differential inhibition potency not only between the two genotypes but also across substrate probes. Furthermore, the substrate probes fell into three distinct classes depending on genotype, suggesting that multiple probes may be needed to fully assess inhibition of CYP2C9 in vitro. Thus, both genotype and choice of probe substrate must be considered when attempting to predict potential CYP2C9 drug-drug interactions from in vitro data.
This article has been cited by other articles:
![]() |
A. Nath and W. Atkins Principal Component Analysis of CYP2C9 and CYP3A4 Probe Substrate/Inhibitor Panels Drug Metab. Dispos., November 1, 2008; 36(11): 2151 - 2155. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
V. Kumar, R. C. Brundage, W. S. Oetting, I. E. Leppik, and T. S. Tracy Differential Genotype Dependent Inhibition of CYP2C9 in Humans Drug Metab. Dispos., July 1, 2008; 36(7): 1242 - 1248. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
R. S. Foti and J. L. Wahlstrom CYP2C19 Inhibition: The Impact of Substrate Probe Selection on in Vitro Inhibition Profiles Drug Metab. Dispos., March 1, 2008; 36(3): 523 - 528. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
C. W. Locuson, J. M. Hutzler, and T. S. Tracy Visible Spectra of Type II Cytochrome P450-Drug Complexes: Evidence that "Incomplete" Heme Coordination Is Common Drug Metab. Dispos., April 1, 2007; 35(4): 614 - 622. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||