Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 662

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

Rational Use of in Vitro P-glycoprotein Assays in Drug Discovery

Polli, Joseph W., Wring, Stephen A., Humphreys, Joan E., Huang, Liyue, Morgan, Jonathon B., Webster, Lindsey O., Serabjit-Singh, Cosette S.·2001·The Journal of Pharmacology and Experimental Therapeutics

Abstract

P-glycoprotein (Pgp) affects the absorption, distribution, and clearance of a variety of compounds. Thus, identification of compounds that are Pgp substrates can aid drug candidate selection and optimization. Our goal was to evaluate three assays used to determine whether compounds are Pgp substrates. Sixty-six compounds were tested in monolayer efflux, ATPase, and calcein-AM assays. Assay results yielded two categories of compounds. Category I (n = 35) exhibited concordance across the assays. Category II (n = 31) revealed differences among the assays that related to the apparent permeability (P(app)) of the compounds. Within category II, two groups were discerned based on the absence (group IIA, n = 10, nontransported substrates) or presence (group IIB, n = 21, transported substrates) of monolayer efflux. Detection of efflux (group IIB) was associated with compounds having low/moderate P(app) values (mean = 16.6 nm/s), whereas inability to detect efflux (group IIA) was associated with compounds having high P(app) values (mean = 535 nm/s). The calcein-AM and ATPase assays revealed Pgp interactions for highly permeable group IIA compounds but were less responsive than monolayer efflux for low/moderate P(app) compounds of group IIB. All assays detected substrates across a broad range of P(app), but the efflux assay was more prone to fail at high P(app), whereas the calcein-AM and ATPase assays were more prone to fail at low P(app). When P(app) is low, efflux is a greater factor in the disposition of Pgp substrates. The efflux assay is more reliable at low/moderate P(app) and is the method of choice for evaluating drug candidates despite low throughput and reliance on liquid chromatography with tandem mass spectrometry.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/s0022-3565(24)29270-3

Cites

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cited by

See all 662

Metadata

Authors
Polli, J. W., Wring, S. A., Humphreys, J. E., Huang, L., Morgan, J. B., Webster, L. O., & Serabjit-Singh, C. S.
Venue
The Journal of Pharmacology and Experimental Therapeutics
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2001-11
Volume
299
Issue
2
Pages
620-628
ISSN
0022-3565 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2158245905
Cited by
662
References
0
FWCI
9.91
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Rational Use of in Vitro P-glycoprotein Assays in Drug Discovery. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1016/s0022-3565(24)29270-3
The paper
Polli, J. W., Wring, S. A., Humphreys, J. E., Huang, L., Morgan, J. B., Webster, L. O., & Serabjit-Singh, C. S. (2001). Rational Use of in Vitro P-glycoprotein Assays in Drug Discovery. The Journal of Pharmacology and Experimental Therapeutics. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0022-3565(24)29270-3

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.