4.4 Article

Biosynthesis of drug metabolites using microbes in hollow fiber cartridge reactors:: Case study of diclofenac metabolism by Actinoplanes species

期刊

DRUG METABOLISM AND DISPOSITION
卷 36, 期 2, 页码 234-240

出版社

AMER SOC PHARMACOLOGY EXPERIMENTAL THERAPEUTICS
DOI: 10.1124/dmd.107.019323

关键词

-

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Fungal and bacterial microbes are known to mimic mammalian cytochrome P450 metabolism. Traditionally, microbial biotransformation screening and small scale-ups (< 1 liter) are performed in shake-flask reactors. An alternative approach is the use of hollow fiber cartridge (HFC) reactors. The performance of HFC reactors is compared with shake-flask reactors using diclofenac as a model substrate. Actinoplanes sp. (American Type Culture Collection 53771) in a shake-flask reactor hydroxylated diclofenac (50 mu M) with 100% turnover in less than 5 h. A scaled-up production resulted in the formation of 4'-hydroxy (169 mg, 54% yield), 5-hydroxy (42 mg, 13% yield), and 4',5-dihydroxy (25 mg, 7.7% yield) metabolites. HFC reactors with Teflon, polysulfone, and cellulose membranes were screened for nonspecific binding of diclofenac. Concentration-time profiles for turnover of 50 to 2000 mu M diclofenac by Actinoplanes sp. were then determined at 22 and 30 degrees C in an HFC reactor. Cellulose-based HFC reactors exhibited the lowest nonspecific binding (87% of 50 mu M diclofenac remaining after 5 h) and offered the best conditions for its biotransformation (100% conversion; < 5 h at 30 degrees C at 50 mu M; 25 h at 500 mu M). The time profile for substrate turnover was equivalent in both a cellulose membrane HFC reactor and shake-flask reactor. Two cellulose membrane HFC reactors were also tested to evaluate the reusability of the cartridges for diclofenac metabolism (50 mu M, 22 degrees C, 15 h; 500 mu M, 30 C, 36 h). Up to seven reaction cycles with intermediate wash cycles were tested. At least 98% conversion was observed in each reaction cycle at both diclofenac concentrations.

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

4.4
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