4.7 Article

Hepatic distribution of a phosphorothioate oligodeoxynucleotide within rodents following intravenous administration

期刊

BIOCHEMICAL PHARMACOLOGY
卷 62, 期 3, 页码 297-306

出版社

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/S0006-2952(01)00669-4

关键词

antisense; oligonucleotide; pharmacokinetics; rodent; capillary gel electrophoresis; hepatic

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The pharmacokinetics of ISIS 1082, a 21-base heterosequence phosphorothioate oligodeoxynucleotide, were characterized within rodent whole liver, and cellular and subcellular compartments. Cross-species comparisons were performed using Sprague-Dawley rat and CD-1 mouse strains. Although whole liver oligonucleotide deposition and the proportion of drug found within parenchymal and nonparenchymal cells were similar between the two rodent species as a function of both time and dose, dramatic differences in subcellular pharmacokinetics were observed. Specifically, within murine hepatocyte nuclei, drug was observed at the 10 mg/kg dose, whereas in the rat nuclear-associated levels required the administration of 25 mg/kg. Under all experimental regimens, murine hepatic nuclear-associated drug concentrations were at least 2-fold higher than those round in rat liver cells, More detailed metabolic analysis was also performed using high performance liquid chromatography/eleotrospray-mass spectrometry (HPLC/ES-MS) and demonstrated that although the extent of metabolism was similar for rat and mouse, the pattern of n-1 metabolites Varied as a function of both species and cell type. While rat and mouse hepatocytes and rat nonparenchymal cellular metabolites were predominantly products of 3'-exonuclease degradation, mouse nonparenchymal cells contained a majority of n-1 metabolites produced by 5'-exonucleolytic activity. Based upon these data, it would appear that subcellular oligonucleotide disposition and metabolism among rodent species are more divergent than whole organ pharmacokinetics might predict. (C) 2001 Elsevier Science 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