4.7 Article

Sex-specific extraction of organic anions by the rat liver

期刊

LIFE SCIENCES
卷 82, 期 7-8, 页码 436-443

出版社

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.lfs.2007.12.009

关键词

Oatp; Mrp3; BSP; organic anion transport; bile; sinusoidal; canalicular

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The capacity for hepatic elimination of some compounds is different in males and females and differential expression of a number of sinusoidal and canalicular transporters exists. However, the specific events underlying the functional differences are not understood. To determine how sex influences sinusoidal and canalicular organic anion transport, bile duct-cannulated livers from mature Sprague-Dawley rats of both sexes were single-pass perfused with saline containing the model organic anions bromosulphophthalein (BSP), carboxyfluorescein (CF), carboxyfluorescein diacetate (CFDA) or 4,4'-diisothiocyanatostilbene-2,2'-disulphonic acid (DIDS). Assay of effluent perfusate anion concentration showed that BSP, but not DIDS, extraction was significantly higher in male versus female rats. At 20 min perfusion with 50 mu M BSP the mean effluent concentration was 5.6 and 20.1 mu M in, respectively, male and female rats. HPLC confirmed that the effluent perfusate concentration of BSP was higher in female as compared with male rats and was not contributed to by its glutathione conjugate. With 25 PM DIDS, the effluent concentration reached 7.3 (male) and 8.2 mu M (female), indicating high extraction efficiency. In contrast to BSP and DIDS, CF extraction was very low (< 20%) so that differences between male and females could not be assessed. Biliary BSP and CF excretion were, respectively, 3.5- and 4-fold higher in male rats. Neither sinusoidal efflux nor biliary excretion of CF was sex-dependent with a higher cytoplasmic load of CF (during CFDA perfusion). Our results suggest that differences in sinusoidal uptake are responsible for the sex-specific hepatic excretion of some organic anions. (C) 2007 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

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

4.7
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