Cited by 413Pharmacogenetics and Drug MetabolismDrug Transport and Resistance MechanismsProtein Interaction Studies and Fluorescence Analysis

The Influence of Nonspecific Microsomal Binding on Apparent Intrinsic Clearance, and Its Prediction from Physicochemical Properties

Austin, Rupert P., Barton, Patrick, Cockroft, Scott L., Wenlock, Mark C., Riley, Robert J.·2002·Drug Metabolism and Disposition

Abstract

The apparent intrinsic clearance of 13 drugs has been determined using rat liver microsomes at three different concentrations of microsomal protein. The kinetics was studied using the in vitro half-life method. The nonspecific binding of these drugs to the microsomes was also studied under the same conditions, except for cofactor removal, using equilibrium dialysis. The intrinsic clearances are shown to be dependent on the microsomal concentration, but are approximately constant when corrected for the extent of nonspecific binding to the microsomes. The large difference between observed intrinsic clearance and unbound intrinsic clearance that exists for some compounds, particularly lipophilic bases, is highlighted. A simple model has been developed for understanding the binding of compounds to microsomes and is demonstrated to accurately predict the extent of microsomal binding at one concentration of microsomes from measurement at another. The binding of a further 25 drugs to rat liver microsomes at a microsomal concentration of 1 mg/ml was also studied, along with measurements of lipophilicity using octanol-water partition coefficients. It is shown that the extent of microsomal binding is correlated with lipophilicity, but that basic compounds show a different behavior to acidic and neutral compounds. Microsomal binding is shown to be best predicted using a model where log P is used for basic compounds, and log D(7.4) is used for acidic and neutral compounds. This model has been developed further so that the extent of binding to microsomes of any given concentration can be estimated purely from a knowledge of lipophilicity and ionization.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1124/dmd.30.12.1497

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Austin, R. P., Barton, P., Cockroft, S. L., Wenlock, M. C., & Riley, R. J.
Affiliations
AstraZeneca (United Kingdom) (GB)
Venue
Drug Metabolism and Disposition
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2002-12
Volume
30
Issue
12
Pages
1497-1503
ISSN
0090-9556 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2137442330
Cited by
413
References
0
Citations by year
2026: 20 · 2025: 18 · 2024: 22 · 2023: 13 · 2022: 20 · 2021: 23 · 2020: 18 · 2019: 13 · 2018: 20 · 2017: 12 · 2016: 13 · 2015: 15 · 2014: 10 · 2013: 23 · 2012: 22
FWCI
6.40
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Drug Metabolism and Disposition (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutics › Pharmacology › Pharmacogenetics and Drug Metabolism
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Oncology › Drug Transport and Resistance Mechanisms
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Protein Interaction Studies and Fluorescence Analysis
Keywords
intrinsic clearance, rat liver microsomes, drug binding prediction, lipophilicity, octanol-water partition coefficient, ionization, physicochemical properties, binding model, drug metabolism
MeSH terms
Animals, Chemistry, Physical, Pharmaceutical Preparations, Male, Metabolic Clearance Rate, Microsomes, Liver, Models, Chemical, Predictive Value of Tests, Protein Binding, Rats, Sprague-Dawley, Rats, Chemical Phenomena

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