Variability in P-Glycoprotein Inhibitory Potency (IC50) Using Various in Vitro Experimental Systems: Implications for Universal Digoxin Drug-Drug Interaction Risk Assessment Decision Criteria

Abstract
A P-glycoprotein (P-gp) IC50 working group was established with 23 participating pharmaceutical and contract research laboratories and one academic institution to assess interlaboratory variability in P-gp IC50 determinations. Each laboratory followed its in-house protocol to determine in vitro IC50 values for 16 inhibitors using four different test systems: human colon adenocarcinoma cells (Caco-2; eleven laboratories), Madin-Darby canine kidney cells transfected with MDR1 cDNA (MDCKII-MDR1; six laboratories), and Lilly Laboratories Cells—Porcine Kidney Nr. 1 cells transfected with MDR1 cDNA (LLC-PK1-MDR1; four laboratories), and membrane vesicles containing human P-glycoprotein (P-gp; five laboratories). For cell models, various equations to calculate remaining transport activity (e.g., efflux ratio, unidirectional flux, net-secretory-flux) were also evaluated. The difference in IC50 values for each of the inhibitors across all test systems and equations ranged from a minimum of 20- and 24-fold between lowest and highest IC50 values for sertraline and isradipine, to a maximum of 407- and 796-fold for telmisartan and verapamil, respectively. For telmisartan and verapamil, variability was greatly influenced by data from one laboratory in each case. Excluding these two data sets brings the range in IC50 values for telmisartan and verapamil down to 69- and 159-fold. The efflux ratio-based equation generally resulted in severalfold lower IC50 values compared with unidirectional or net-secretory-flux equations. Statistical analysis indicated that variability in IC50 values was mainly due to interlaboratory variability, rather than an implicit systematic difference between test systems. Potential reasons for variability are discussed and the simplest, most robust experimental design for P-gp IC50 determination proposed. The impact of these findings on drug-drug interaction risk assessment is discussed in the companion article (Ellens et al., 2013) and recommendations are provided.
Footnotes
- Received December 14, 2012.
- Accepted April 24, 2013.
↵1 Current affiliation: Novartis Institute for BioMedical Research, Cambridge, Massachusetts.
Work at Optivia was supported by Small Business Innovation Research Grants from the National Institutes of Health National Institute of General Medical Sciences [Grants R43GM086970-01, R43RR031474-01].
Disclaimer: The manuscript reflects the views of the authors and should not be construed to represent FDA’s views or policies. Lei Zhang has no conflict of interest to report.
↵
This article has supplemental material available at dmd.aspetjournals.org.
- U.S. Government work not protected by U.S. copyright
DMD articles become freely available 12 months after publication, and remain freely available for 5 years.Non-open access articles that fall outside this five year window are available only to institutional subscribers and current ASPET members, or through the article purchase feature at the bottom of the page.
|