The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Comparison between Cytochrome P450 (CYP) Content and Relative Activity Approaches to Scaling from cDNA-Expressed CYPs to Human Liver Microsomes: Ratios of Accessory Proteins as Sources of Discrepancies between the Approaches
Abstract
Relative activity factors (RAFs) and immunoquantified levels of cytochrome P450 (CYP) isoforms both have been proposed as scaling factors for the prediction of hepatic drug metabolism from studies using cDNA-expressed CYPs. However, a systematic comparison of the two approaches, including possible mechanisms underlying differences, is not available. In this study, RAFs determined for CYPs 1A2, 2B6, 2C19, 2D6, and 3A4 in 12 human livers using lymphoblast-expressed enzymes were compared to immunoquantified protein levels. 2C19, 2D6, and 3A4 RAFs were similar to immunoquantified enzyme levels. In contrast, 1A2 RAFs were 5- to 20-fold higher than CYP1A2 content, and the RAF:content ratio was positively correlated with the molar ratio of NADPH:CYP oxidoreductase (OR) to CYP1A2. The OR:CYP1A2 ratio in lymphoblast microsomes was 92-fold lower than in human liver microsomes. Reconstitution experiments demonstrated a 10- to 20-fold lower activity at OR:CYP1A2 ratios similar to those in lymphoblasts, compared with those in human livers. CYP2B6-containing lymphoblast microsomes had 29- and 13-fold lower OR:CYP and cytochrome b(5):CYP ratios, respectively, than did liver microsomes and yielded RAFs that were 6-fold higher than CYP2B6 content. Use of metabolic rates from cDNA-expressed CYPs containing nonphysiologic concentrations of electron-transfer proteins (relative to human liver microsomes) in conjunction with hepatic CYP contents may lead to incorrect predictions of liver microsomal rates and relative contributions of individual isoforms. Scaling factors used in bridging the gap between expression systems and liver microsomes should not only incorporate relative hepatic abundance of individual CYPs but also account for differences in activity per unit enzyme in the two systems.
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
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.
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
Cites
Shimada, T., Yamazaki, H., Mimura, M., Inui, Y., & Guengerich, F. P. (1994) · The Journal of Pharmacology and Experimental Therapeutics · doi:10.1016/s0022-3565(25)22379-5 · Cited by 2,785
Cited by
THE HUMAN INTESTINAL CYTOCHROME P450 “PIE”
Paine, M. F., Hart, H. L., Ludington, S. S., Haining, R. L., Rettie, A. E., & Zeldin, D. C. (2006) · Drug Metabolism and Disposition · doi:10.1124/dmd.105.008672 · Cited by 870
Li, X.-Q., Björkman, A., Andersson, T. B., Ridderström, M., & Masimirembwa, C. M. (2002) · The Journal of Pharmacology and Experimental Therapeutics · doi:10.1124/jpet.300.2.399 · Cited by 288
Predicting drug clearance from recombinantly expressed CYPs: intersystem extrapolation factors
Proctor, N. J., Tucker, G. T., & Rostami-Hodjegan, A. (2004) · Xenobiotica · doi:10.1080/00498250310001646353 · Cited by 219
Achour, B., Barber, J., & Rostami-Hodjegan, A. (2014) · Drug Metabolism and Disposition · doi:10.1124/dmd.114.058834 · Cited by 212
Olubodun, J. O., Ochs, H. R., Von Moltke, L. L., Roubenoff, R., Hesse, L. M., Harmatz, J. S., Shader, R. I., & Greenblatt, D. J. (2003) · British Journal of Clinical Pharmacology · doi:10.1046/j.0306-5251.2003.01852.x · Cited by 104
Self-citation
Metadata
- Authors
- Venkatakrishnan, K., von Moltke, L. L., Court, M. H., Harmatz, J. S., Crespi, C. L., & Greenblatt, D. J.
- Venue
- Drug Metabolism and Disposition
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2000-12
- Volume
- 28
- Issue
- 12
- Pages
- 1493-1504
- ISSN
- 0090-9556 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2166242161
- Cited by
- 200
- References
- 1
- FWCI
- 9.97
- 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: Comparison between Cytochrome P450 (CYP) Content and Relative Activity Approaches to Scaling from cDNA-Expressed CYPs to Human Liver Microsomes: Ratios of Accessory Proteins as Sources of Discrepancies between the Approaches. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1016/s0090-9556(24)13680-x
- The paper
- Venkatakrishnan, K., von Moltke, L. L., Court, M. H., Harmatz, J. S., Crespi, C. L., & Greenblatt, D. J. (2000). Comparison between Cytochrome P450 (CYP) Content and Relative Activity Approaches to Scaling from cDNA-Expressed CYPs to Human Liver Microsomes: Ratios of Accessory Proteins as Sources of Discrepancies between the Approaches. Drug Metabolism and Disposition. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0090-9556(24)13680-x
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.