4.5 Article

Major active components in grapefruit, orange, and apple juices responsible for OATP2B1-mediated drug interactions

期刊

JOURNAL OF PHARMACEUTICAL SCIENCES
卷 102, 期 1, 页码 280-288

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1002/jps.23357

关键词

Organic anion-transporting polypeptide transporters; OATP2B1; grapefruit juice; orange juice; apple juice; flavonoid; interaction; food interactions; intestinal absorption; intestinal secretion; transport

资金

  1. Japan Society for the Promotion of Science (JSPS) [H23-694]
  2. [21790147]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

We aimed to explore the major active components in grapefruit juice (GFJ), orange juice (OJ), and apple juice (AJ) that are responsible for OATP2B1-mediated drug interactions, by means of in vitro studies using Xenopus oocytes expressing OATP2B1 with a typical OATP2B1 substrate, estrone-3-sulfate. All three juices inhibited OATP2B1-mediated estrone-3-sulfate uptake with half-maximum inhibition (IC50) values of 0.222% (GFJ), 0.807% (OJ), and 2.27% (AJ). Eight major flavonoids (naringin, naringenin, hesperidin, hesperetin, phloridzin, phloretin, quercetin, and kaempferol) contained in the juices inhibited OATP2B1-mediated estrone-3-sulfate uptake with IC50 values of 4.63, 49.2, 1.92, 67.6, 23.2, 1.31, 9.47, and 21.3 mu M, respectively. When the concentrationIC50 ratios ([C]/IC50) of these flavonoids in GFJ, OJ, and AJ were calculated, values of [C]/IC50 = 100 were obtained for naringin in GFJ and hesperidin in OJ. No flavonoid in AJ showed a ratio higher than unity. However, significant inhibition of OATP2B1 was observed with a mixture of phloridzin, phloretin, hesperidin, and quercetin at the concentrations present in AJ. In conclusion, our results indicate that naringin and hesperidin are the major OATP2B1 inhibitors in GFJ and OJ, respectively, whereas a combination of multiple components appears to be responsible for OATP2B1 inhibition by AJ. (c) 2012 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. and the American Pharmacists Association J Pharm Sci 102:280288, 2013

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据