4.7 Article

Human variability in isoform-specific UDP-glucuronosyltransferases: markers of acute and chronic exposure, polymorphisms and uncertainty factors

期刊

ARCHIVES OF TOXICOLOGY
卷 94, 期 8, 页码 2637-2661

出版社

SPRINGER HEIDELBERG
DOI: 10.1007/s00204-020-02765-8

关键词

Human variability; Pharmacokinetics; Uncertainty factor; UGT; Polymorphism

资金

  1. European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) [GP/EFSA/SCER/2015/01]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

UDP-glucuronosyltransferases (UGTs) are involved in phase II conjugation reactions of xenobiotics and differences in their isoform activities result in interindividual kinetic differences of UGT probe substrates. Here, extensive literature searches were performed to identify probe substrates (14) for various UGT isoforms (UGT1A1, UGT1A3, UGT1A4, UGT1A6, UGT1A9, UGT2B7 and UGT2B15) and frequencies of human polymorphisms. Chemical-specific pharmacokinetic data were collected in a database to quantify interindividual differences in markers of acute (Cmax) and chronic (area under the curve, clearance) exposure. Using this database, UGT-related uncertainty factors were derived and compared to the default factor (i.e. 3.16) allowing for interindividual differences in kinetics. Overall, results show that pharmacokinetic data are predominantly available for Caucasian populations and scarce for other populations of different geographical ancestry. Furthermore, the relationships between UGT polymorphisms and pharmacokinetic parameters are rarely addressed in the included studies. The data show that UGT-related uncertainty factors were mostly below the default toxicokinetic uncertainty factor of 3.16, with the exception of five probe substrates (1-OH-midazolam, ezetimibe, raltegravir, SN38 and trifluoperazine), with three of these substrates being metabolised by the polymorphic isoform 1A1. Data gaps and future work to integrate UGT-related variability distributions with in vitro data to develop quantitative in vitro-in vivo extrapolations in chemical risk assessment are discussed.

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