4.7 Article

Impact of protein binding on the availability and cytotoxic potency of organochlorine pesticides and chlorophenols in vitro

期刊

TOXICOLOGY
卷 175, 期 1-3, 页码 201-213

出版社

ELSEVIER SCI IRELAND LTD
DOI: 10.1016/S0300-483X(02)00085-9

关键词

protein bindings; Balb/c 3T3 cells; bioavailability in vitro; chlorophenols; organochlorine pesticides; cytotoxic potency

向作者/读者索取更多资源

In vitro toxicity data are generally based on nominal concentrations and thus depend on both activity and availability of a compound. The aims of the present study were to examine the influence of protein binding on the cytotoxicity of selected organochlorine pesticides and chlorophenols in Balb/c 3T3 cell cultures and to determine parameters of protein binding which can be used to estimate protein bound fractions and to model distribution in vitro. EC50-values derived from concentration-effect relationships determined in the presence of various concentrations of bovine serum albumin (BSA) were linearly correlated to BSA concentration. Increasing the BSA concentration from about 1.2 to 40 mg/ml increased the EC50-values by factors between 3.4 and 34.4. Molar ratios of substance bound to albumin ranged from 0.11 to 2.42. Calculated fractions bound to albumin in the normal growth medium were 0.075-0.17 (p,p'-DDT. p,p'-DDE. dieldrin. lindane). 0.09-0.1 (4-mono- and 2.4-dichlorophenol), 0.68 (2.4.5-trichlorphenol) and almost 1.0 (pentachlorophenol). At 40 mg nil BSA any Compound was largely bound to albumin (fractions bound greater than or equal to 0.74). Distribution modelling revealed that the availability of the highly hydrophobic organochlorines additionally was significantly reduced by partitioning into lipids. The results clearly demonstrate that nominal and relative toxic potencies of organochlorine pesticides and chlorophenols determined in vitro are substantially influenced by effects of protein binding on availability. (C) 2002 Elsevier Science Ireland Ltd. 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