4.6 Article Proceedings Paper

Sequential injection affinity chromatography utilizing an albumin immobilized monolithic column to study drug-protein interactions

期刊

JOURNAL OF CHROMATOGRAPHY A
卷 1144, 期 1, 页码 126-134

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE BV
DOI: 10.1016/j.chroma.2006.12.081

关键词

frontal analysis; sequential injection analysis; monolithic column; protein binding; naproxen

向作者/读者索取更多资源

In this study, sequential injection affinity chromatography was used for drug-protein interactions studies. The analytical system used consisted of a sequential injection analysis (SIA) manifold directly connected with convective interaction media (CIM) monolithic epoxy disks modified by ligand-immobilization of protein. A non-steroidal, anti-inflammatory drug, naproxen (NAP) and bovine serum albumin (BSA) were selected as model drug and protein, respectively. The SIA system was used for sampling, introduction and propulsion of drug towards to the monolithic column. Association equilibrium constants, binding capacity at various temperatures and thermodynamic parameters (free energy G, enthalpy AH) of the binding reaction of naproxen are calculated by using frontal analysis mathematics. The variation of incubation time and its effect in on-line binding mode was also studied. The results indicated that naproxen had an association equilibrium constant of 2.90 x 10(6) M-1 at pH 7.4 and 39 degrees C for a single binding site. The associated change in enthalpy (Delta H) was -27.36 kcal mol(-1) and the change in entropy (Delta S) was -73 cal mol(-1) K-1 for a single type of binding sites. The location of the binding region was examined by competitive binding experiments using a biphosphonate drug, alendronate (ALD), as a competitor agent. It was found that the two drugs occupy the same class of binding sites on BSA. All measurements were performed with fluorescence (lambda(est)= 230 nm, lambda(em) = 350 nm) and spectrophotometric detection (X = 280 nm). (c) 2006 Elsevier B.V. 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

4.6
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