![]() |
|
|
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Vol. 304, Issue 3, 1334-1340, March 2003
Division of Pharmaceutics and Pharmaceutical Chemistry, College of Pharmacy, The Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio (D.Y., W.G., J.D.K., H.X., J.T.D.); Department of Pharmaceutical Sciences, College of Pharmacy, University of Tennessee, Memphis, Tennessee (K.C., Y.H., C.A.M., D.D.M.); and GTx, Inc., Memphis, Tennessee (K.A.V.)
| |
Abstract |
|---|
|
|
|---|
The present study aimed to identify selective androgen receptor modulators (SARMs) with in vivo pharmacological activity. We examined the in vitro and in vivo pharmacological activity of four chiral, nonsteroidal SARMs synthesized in our laboratories. In the in vitro assays, these compounds demonstrated moderate to high androgen receptor (AR) binding affinity, with Ki values ranging from 4 to 37 nM, and three of the compounds efficaciously stimulated AR-mediated reporter gene expression. The compounds were then administered subcutaneously to castrated rats to appraise their in vivo pharmacological activity. Androgenic activity was evaluated by the ability of these compounds to maintain the weights of prostate and seminal vesicle, whereas levator ani muscle weight was used as a measure of anabolic activity. The maximal response (Emax) and dose for half-maximal effect (ED50) were determined for each compound and compared with that observed for testosterone propionate (TP). Compounds S-1 and S-4 demonstrated in vivo androgenic and anabolic activity, whereas compounds S-2 and S-3 did not. The activities of S-1 and S-4 were tissue-selective in that both compounds stimulated the anabolic organs more than the androgenic organs. These two compounds were less potent and efficacious than TP in androgenic activity, but their anabolic activity was similar to or greater than that of TP. Neither S-1 nor S-4 caused significant luteinizing hormone or follicle stimulating hormone suppression at doses near the ED50 value. Thus, compounds S-1 and S-4 were identified as SARMs with potent and tissue-selective in vivo pharmacological activity, and represent the first members of a new class of SARMs with selective anabolic effects.
| |
Introduction |
|---|
|
|
|---|
Endogenous
androgens play crucial physiological roles in establishing and
maintaining the male phenotype (George and Wilson, 1986
; Mooradian et
al., 1987
). Their actions are essential for the differentiation and
growth of male reproductive organs, initiation and regulation of
spermatogenesis, and control of male sexual behavior. In addition,
androgens are important for the development of male characteristics in
certain extragenital structures such as muscle, bone, hair, larynx,
skin, lipid tissue, and kidney (Takeda et al., 1990
). In females, the
precise physiological roles of androgens are not completely understood,
but the age-related decline in circulating androgen levels has been
linked to symptoms such as decreased libido and sexuality, lack of
vigor, diminished well being, and loss of bone mineral density in
postmenopausal women (Davis and Burger, 1996
; Davis, 1999a
,b
).
Synthesized steroidal androgens, due to their ability to mimic the
actions of their endogenous counterparts, have been used clinically as
valuable therapeutic agents to target a variety of male and female
disorders resulting from androgen deficiency. The principle clinical
indication of androgens is as replacement therapy for hypogonadal men
(Conway et al., 1988
; Wu, 1992
). Other documented clinical uses of
androgens include delayed puberty in boys, anemias, primary
osteoporosis, hereditary angioneurotic edema, endometriosis, estrogen
receptor-positive breast cancer, and muscular diseases (Wu,
1992
; Bagatell and Bremner, 1996
; Nieschlag, 1996
; Bhasin and Tenover,
1997
). Also, androgens have been investigated as hormone replacement
therapy for aging men and for regulation of male fertility (Wu, 1992
;
Tenover, 1997
).
Since the discovery of the therapeutic benefits of testosterone in the
1930s, a variety of androgen preparations have been introduced and
tested clinically. Unfortunately, virtually all currently available
androgen preparations have severe limitations (Wu, 1992
; Bhasin and
Bremner, 1997
). Unmodified testosterone is impractical for oral
administration due to its low systematic bioavailability (Handelsman et
al., 1990
). Testosterone esters (e.g., testosterone propionate and
testosterone enanthate) are presently the most widely used testosterone
preparations, usually administered by intramuscular injection in oil
vehicles (Snyder and Lawrence, 1980
; Velazquez and Bellabarba Arata,
1998
). A prolonged duration of action is achievable with these esters.
However, they produce highly variable testosterone levels.
17
-Alkylated testosterones (e.g., methyltestosterone and
oxandrolone) can be given orally. Nevertheless, they often cause
unacceptable hepatotoxicity and are less efficacious; hence, they are
not recommended for long-term androgen therapy (Heywood et al., 1977
;
Ishak and Zimmerman, 1987
; Velazquez and Bellabarba Arata, 1998
).
Another common concern about steroidal androgens is the undesirable
effects resulting from the cross-reactivity of the androgens or their
in vivo metabolites with steroid receptors other than the androgen
receptor (AR) (Wilson et al., 1980
; Bhasin and Bremner, 1997
).
During studies with affinity ligands for the AR, our group discovered a
group of nonsteroidal androgens that are structural derivatives of
bicalutamide and hydroxyflutamide, two known antiandrogens (Dalton et
al., 1998
; Mukherjee et al., 1999
). Other laboratories have also
reported the identification of nonsteroidal compounds that possess
androgen activity (Dalton et al., 1998
; Hamann et al., 1999
;
Negro-Vilar, 1999
). The discovery of these nonsteroidal androgens
offers an opportunity for the development of a new generation of
selective androgen receptor modulators (SARMs) superior to current
steroidal androgens. Theoretically, SARMs are advantageous over their
steroidal counterparts in that they can obtain better receptor
selectivity and allow greater flexibility in structural modification.
Thus, SARMs can potentially avoid the undesirable effects caused by
receptor cross-reactivity and achieve superior pharmacokinetic properties.
Subsequent to our initial discovery of several nonsteroidal androgens,
our laboratories designed and synthesized multiple series of
nonsteroidal compounds, and explored the structure-activity relationships for androgenic and anabolic activities, both in vitro and
in vivo (He et al., 2002
; Yin et al., 2003a
,b
). According to results
from these structure-activity relationship studies, we designed a group
of novel nonsteroidal compounds (Fig. 1) that were structurally
optimized. We report herein the results of our studies to examine the
in vitro AR binding affinity and the androgenic and anabolic activities
of these new compounds in an animal model. Two potent and
tissue-selective SARMs were identified from these structurally similar
compounds, and they are members of a promising new class of drug
candidates for further development.
| |
Materials and Methods |
|---|
|
|
|---|
Materials. The S-isomers of compounds 1, 2, 3, and 4, and the R-isomer of compound 1 were synthesized in our laboratories (synthetic procedures will be reported separately). The purities of these compounds were greater than 99%, as determined by high-performance liquid chromatography. Testosterone propionate (TP), polyethylene glycol 300 (PEG 300, reagent grade), and dimethyl sulfoxide (reagent grade) were purchased from Sigma-Aldrich (St. Louis, MO). Ethyl alcohol USP was purchased from Aaper Alcohol and Chemical (Shelbyville, KY). Alzet osmotic pumps (model 2002) were purchased from Alza (Palo Alto, CA).
In Vitro Pharmacological Activity.
Cytosolic AR was prepared
from ventral prostates of castrated male Sprague-Dawley rats (about
250 g). The binding affinity of compounds 1, 2, 3, and 4 to the AR
preparation was determined and analyzed as described previously
(Mukherjee et al., 1996
, 1999
). The ability of the compounds to
influence AR-mediated transcriptional activation was examined using a
cotransfection system, as described previously (Yin et al., 2003a
).
Transcriptional activation was measured using a single concentration
(10 nM) of the indicated compound and reported as a percentage of the
transcriptional activation observed for 1 nM DHT.
Animals. Male Sprague-Dawley rats, weighing 90 to 100 g, were purchased from Harlan Bioproducts for Science (Indianapolis, IN). The animals were maintained on a 12-h light/dark cycle with food and water available ad libitum. The animal protocol was reviewed and approved by the Institutional Laboratory Animal Care and Use Committee of The Ohio State University.
Study Design.
Animals were randomly distributed into 30 groups, with five rats per group. Treatment groups are described in
Table 1. One day before the start of drug
treatment, animals in groups 2 through 30 were surgically castrated.
After 24 h of recovery, Alzet osmotic pumps (model 2002) prefilled
with a designated solution (Table 1) were implanted subcutaneously in
the scapular region of castrated animals. Drug solutions used to fill
the osmotic pumps were prepared using aseptic techniques. For solutions
of nonsteroidal compounds and low-dose (0.1 mg/day or lower) solutions
of TP, drugs were first dissolved in minimal amounts of ethanol and
then diluted to final concentrations with PEG 300 (this vehicle is
designated as vehicle 1). Because higher doses of TP could not be
completely solubilized in the above-mentioned vehicle, TP solutions for
0.3, 0.5, and 0.75 mg/day were prepared by dissolving the drug in a mixture of ethanol and dimethyl sulfoxide and adjusting with PEG 300 to
the desired final volume (this vehicle was designated as vehicle 2).
Due to the limited solubility of TP, two osmotic pumps were used in
each animal to deliver TP at 0.5 and 0.75 mg/day. One osmotic pump was
used in each animal for other groups.
|
Data Analyses.
The weights of all organs were normalized to
body weight, and analyzed for any statistically significant differences
between groups using single-factor ANOVA with the
value set a
priori at p < 0.05. The weights of prostates and
seminal vesicles were used as indices for evaluation of androgenic
activity, and the levator ani muscle weight was used to evaluate the
anabolic activity. Statistical analyses of parameters from complete
blood count or serum chemical profiling, wherever applicable, were
performed by single-factor ANOVA with the
value set a priori at
p < 0.05. For compounds demonstrating full-range
dose-response relationships in any of the measured parameters, the
maximal response produced by the compound
(Emax) and the dose rate that induced
50% of the maximal response (ED50) were obtained
by nonlinear regression analysis using WinNonlin (version 3.1;
Pharsight Corporation, Mountain View, CA) and the sigmoid
Emax model. The
Emax value indicated the efficacy of
each compound, whereas the ED50 indicated its
potency. The relative efficacy of each compound to TP was defined as
the ratio of (Emax of the compound) to
(Emax of TP). The relative potency was
defined as the ratio of (ED50 of TP) to
(ED50 of the compound).
| |
Results |
|---|
|
|
|---|
The in vitro AR binding of the R-isomer of compound 1 (designated as R-1) and the S-isomers of
compounds 1, 2, 3, and 4 (designated as S-1, S-2,
S-3, and S-4, respectively) was examined with a
radioligand competitive binding assay. R-1 demonstrated poor AR binding
affinity (Ki = 225 ± 15 nM),
whereas S-1, S-2, S-3, and
S-4 bound to the AR with moderate to high affinity, with
Ki values ranging from 4 to 37 nM
(Fig. 1). Next, the ability of these
compounds to stimulate AR-mediated transcription was determined in an
in vitro cotransfection system. At a concentration of 10 nM, compounds
S-3 and S-4 stimulated AR-mediated transcription
to 75 and 93%, respectively, of that observed for 1 nM DHT, whereas
compounds S-1 and S-2 demonstrated lesser
stimulation (i.e., 43 and 9.7%, respectively). Given previous studies
in our laboratories demonstrating that in vitro cotransfection models
poorly predict in vivo pharmacological activity (Yin et al., 2003a
), we
then examined the androgenic and anabolic activities of these
nonsteroidal compounds in a castrated rat model after 14 days of drug
administration. R-1 was included as a negative control. TP,
at increasing doses, was used as the positive control for anabolic and
androgenic effects.
|
In accordance with literature reports (Saksena and Chaudhury, 1970
;
Teutsch et al., 1994
; Battmann et al., 1998
), we observed significant
decreases in the weights of prostate, seminal vesicles, and levator ani
muscle in castrated, vehicle-treated rats (Figs. 2-5). The weights of the prostate,
seminal vesicles, and levator ani muscle in castrated rats were 6.2, 8.1, and 40.9%, respectively, of those in intact animals. The
reduction in masses of these androgen-targeted organs in castrated
animals is the result of ablation of endogenous androgen production
(Saksena and Chaudhury, 1970
). Exogenous administration of TP, an
androgenic and anabolic steroid, increased weights of the prostate,
seminal vesicles, and levator ani muscle in castrated rats (Fig. 2).
The increases in organ weights induced by TP were dose rate-dependent.
|
Figure 3 shows that compound
S-1 had no significant effect on prostate, seminal vesicles,
and levator ani muscle in castrated animals at 0.1 and 0.3 mg/day, but
significantly stimulated the growth of these organs at higher doses.
The weights of prostate, seminal vesicles, and levator ani muscle were
maximally restored by S-1 to 14.9, 13.4, and 74.3%,
respectively, of those in intact animals. The
ED50 values of S-1 in prostate,
seminal vesicle, and levator ani muscle, as obtained by nonlinear
regression analysis of dose-response relationships, were 0.42 ± 0.04, 0.38 ± 0.26, and 0.44 ± 0.01 mg/day, respectively
(Fig. 3B; Table 2), corresponding to
1.63, 1.47, and 1.70 mg/kg, respectively, based on the mean body weight
of S-1-treated animals at the end of the study. The elevations in organ weights by S-1 demonstrated its
androgenic and anabolic activities in animals. In comparison to TP,
corresponding dose rates of S-1 induced significantly
smaller increases in the weight of the prostate and seminal vesicles
but a similar degree of increase in levator ani muscle weight (compare
Fig. 2A with 3A). This result denoted the tissue selective androgenic
and anabolic activity of S-1 in rats. The selectivity was
also demonstrated by its relative efficacy compared with TP (Table 2).
The relative efficacy in maintaining levator ani muscle weight was
0.72, much higher than the relative efficacies in maintaining prostate
and seminal vesicle weights, which were less than 0.20.
|
|
Despite their high AR binding affinity, compounds S-2 and
S-3 failed to exert any significant effect on the weights of
prostate, seminal vesicles, and levator ani muscle in castrated
animals, with dose rates up to 1 mg/day (Fig.
4). This suggests that rapid metabolism
or clearance of these compounds led to lower plasma concentrations of
these drugs, and thus no pharmacological activity. Likewise, compound
R-1 (the stereoisomer of S-1), at 1 mg/day, produced no apparent effect on the weights of prostate, seminal vesicles, and levator ani muscle in castrated animals, demonstrating the stereoselective pharmacological action of these compounds.
|
Compound S-4 (Fig. 5) caused
dose-dependent stimulation of growth in prostate, seminal vesicles, and
levator ani muscle, with their weights in castrated animals being
maximally promoted to 33.8, 28.2, and 101% of intact controls,
respectively. Nonlinear regression analysis of dose-response
relationships showed that the ED50 values of
S-4 were 0.43 ± 0.01, 0.55 ± 0.02, and 0.14 ± 0.01 mg/day in prostate, seminal vesicles, and levator ani muscle, respectively (Fig. 5B; Table 2), corresponding to 1.62, 2.07, and 0.53 mg/kg, respectively, based on the mean body weight of S-4-treated animals at the end of the study. These results
clearly revealed the androgenic and anabolic activities of
S-4 in animals. In particular, S-4 exhibited
potent and efficacious anabolic activity, as indicated by its ability
to fully maintain the levator ani muscle weight in castrated animals at
the same level as intact controls, at a dose rate as low as 0.3 mg/day
(Fig. 5A). The relative potency and efficacy of S-4 in
androgenic tissues were less than 0.3 and 0.4, respectively, compared
with 1 for TP, whereas its relative potency and efficacy in the levator
ani muscle was 1.07 and 0.97, respectively, compared with 1 for TP
(Table 2).
|
Table 2 compares the androgenic and anabolic activities of S-1 and S-4, two compounds that exhibited in vivo functional activity in the present study, with those of TP. The efficacy for androgenic activity of S-4 (as indicated by relative efficacies in prostate and seminal vesicle) was about twice that of S-1, but the potency for androgenic activity (as indicated by relative potencies in prostate and seminal vesicle) was similar between these two compounds. As to anabolic activity, S-4 displayed much higher efficacy (as indicated by relative efficacy in levator ani muscle) and 2-fold greater potency (as indicated by relative potency in levator ani muscle) than S-1. These results suggest the greater selectivity of S-4 toward the anabolic target organ.
We also determined the serum levels of LH and FSH in animals that
received S-1 and S-4, and compared them with the
levels of these hormones observed in the intact, castrated, or
TP-treated animals. As shown in Table 3,
castration led to a significant elevation in FSH and LH levels,
compared with intact animals. TP showed no dose-dependent effect on
castration-induced change in FSH, but partially inhibited the
castration-induced increase in LH levels at higher doses. The
activities of S-4 on LH and FSH were similar to those
produced by TP. S-1 and S-4 partially suppressed
LH production at dose rates of 0.5 mg/day or higher. However, it is
important to note that S-1 and S-4 did not
suppress LH production at the dose levels needed to produce the desired pharmacological effects in the levator ani muscle or prostate. Interestingly, S-1 also partially suppressed FSH production
at dose rates of 0.5 mg/day or higher. The FSH suppression noted at
higher doses of S-1 suggested that this compound might
interact with other steroid receptors, most probably progesterone
receptors, in addition to the AR. Although statistically significant
differences were noted in some instances, GH, AST-SGOT,
ALT-SGPT, and serum lipids (including cholesterol, high-density
liprotein, and triglyceride) were all within normal ranges for
drug-treated animals. No drug- or dose-related changes in these indices
were observed.
|
We also examined the effects of all compounds on total body weight and the weights of a variety of nonreproductive organs, including liver, heart, kidney, spleen, and lungs of treated animals. None of the compounds led to a dose-related change in these weights (data not shown). To further check for any signs of acute toxicity in animals from the studied compounds, complete diagnostic hematology studies of compound-treated animals were also performed. No drug- or dose-related changes were observed in any of the hematology diagnostic indices. These data suggest that all compounds manifested no acute toxicity during treatment.
| |
Discussion |
|---|
|
|
|---|
With in vitro AR binding and transcription activation assays, our
laboratories previously identified a group of potent and efficacious
nonsteroidal androgens that are structurally related to antiandrogen
pharmacophores (Yin et al., 2003a
). However, in vivo studies in a rat
model with one of these nonsteroidal androgens, acetothiolutamide,
failed to show androgenic activity (Yin et al., 2003b
). Subsequent
pharmacokinetic and metabolism studies in rats demonstrated that the
lack of in vivo androgenic activity of acetothiolutamide in the
pharmacology study was caused by its insufficient plasma exposure,
which in turn resulted from its extensive hepatic degradation. Also, we
found that oxidation at the sulfur linkage position was one major
metabolic pathway for acetothiolutamide in rats, and that this
oxidation likely produced deactivated or even antagonizing metabolites
(Yin et al., 2003b
). Considering these facts, we proposed to modify the
linkage sulfur atom to block the oxidation at this position, thereby
reducing the overall hepatic metabolism. As a result, a series of novel molecules that carry an ether linkage instead of a thio linkage in the
structure were designed and synthesized. The present studies demonstrated that two of these ether-bearing molecules, S-1
and S-4, were androgen receptor modulators with
tissue-selective activity in animals.
Despite structural similarities, this series of ether-carrying
compounds exhibited diverse in vitro and in vivo activity profiles. The
S-isomers of compounds 1, 2, 3, and 4 displayed moderate to high binding affinity for the AR, whereas the R-isomer of
compound 1 had poor receptor binding. This finding was consistent with our previous observation regarding the stereoselective AR binding of
nonsteroidal ligands (Mukherjee et al., 1996
, 1999
). Compounds S-1, S-3, and S-4 were further
characterized as AR agonists with the in vitro cotransfection assay.
The failure of S-2, a moderate AR binder, to stimulate
AR-mediated gene transcription confirmed our previous finding that high
receptor binding affinity is a prerequisite for agonist activity (Yin
et al., 2003a
). When tested in the castrated rat model, S-1
and S-4 demonstrated potent in vivo functional activity, and
compounds S-2 and S-3 were inactive. Specifically, S-4 produced the greatest androgenic and
anabolic activity in animals, with anabolic activity greater than that of TP. S-1 had a similar degree of anabolic activity as TP,
but had much less androgenic activity. Interestingly, the
ED50 values for S-1 in prostate,
seminal vesicle, and levator ani muscle were approximately the same
(i.e., about 0.4 mg/day), whereas S-4 demonstrated more than
2-fold greater potency in levator ani muscle compared with prostate and
seminal vesicle, as indicated by the ED50 values (Table 2). The distinction in functional activities in vivo among the
four structurally related compounds could be caused by difference in
any of numerous factors, including intrinsic activity, in vivo disposition and metabolism, or intracellular signaling pathway. Further
studies to explore the physicochemical, physiological, and
cellular/molecular determinants for nonsteroidal androgenic and
anabolic activity will lead to insights into the mechanism of action of
these nonsteroidal agents, and thereby provide a basis for future
structural optimization.
The in vitro cotransfection assay is generally regarded as a valuable tool for screening of nonsteroidal AR ligands. With this assay, compounds S-1, S-3, and S-4 were successfully identified as potential AR agonists. However, as demonstrated in the animal study, S-3 did not show any measurable in vivo functional activity. Thus, the observation of in vitro agonist activity in the cotransfection assay can be but is not always predictive of in vivo activity. The pharmacological activity in vivo is determined not only by the ability of the compound to interact with the receptor, but also limited by complicated factors governing the accessibility of the compound to the effect site, such as disposition and metabolism. To fully predict the in vivo behavior and understand the structure-activity relationships, it is necessary to perform further studies examining the pharmacokinetics and metabolism of the compound. As a result of these and other studies, we abandoned use of the in vitro cotransfection assay in favor of in vivo pharmacologic assessment for discovery of SARMs.
The tissue-selective anabolic activity exhibited by S-1 and
S-4 validated the feasibility of developing SARMs as a new
generation of androgens. The possible mechanisms underlying the
tissue-selectivity of these agents could be tissue-specific recruitment
of cofactors/corepressors during the AR signaling pathway, or very
likely for our nonsteroidal ligands, their distinct in vivo disposition
from testosterone and its ester derivatives. The effects of
testosterone in certain tissues, including most accessory reproductive
organs and skin, are amplified through local conversion to DHT, the
more potent bioactive form, by 5
-reductase (Mooradian et al., 1987
).
Nevertheless, testosterone exerts direct effects in the testis,
skeletal muscles, and bone (Mukherjee et al., 1996
). For
nonsteroidal ligands, their actions in accessory reproductive organs
such as prostate would not be amplified as they are for testosterone;
therefore, such a nonsteroidal androgen with equivalent activity to
testosterone on bone and muscle would likely have less activity on
prostate or other accessory reproductive organs than testosterone.
Compounds S-1 and S-4 are the first nonsteroidal androgens with in vivo functional activity among our series of compounds. More significantly, the discovery of these two in vivo functional drug candidates represents a major progress toward the development of therapeutically useful SARMs. SARMs, like the clinically available selective estrogen receptor modulators, would offer unique therapeutic advantages over their steroidal counterparts. The tissue selectivity of these agents offers an exciting opportunity to differentially regulate the androgen effects in various target tissues, thus minimizing the interference to normal physiological processes while targeting desirable therapeutic goals. For example, SARMs with potent anabolic activity but minimal androgenic activity would be ideal for the treatment of patients who bear muscular diseases (such as sarcopenia or trauma-induced muscle wasting) but are contraindicated for androgenic stimuli (such as for aging population or prostate cancer patients). In perspective, not only could SARMs be used as superior alternatives to current steroidal androgens in therapy of male hypogonadism but also they could expand the scope of androgen therapy to include wasting syndromes, aging-related disorders due to declined androgen levels, male fertility regulation, and other androgen deficiency-related diseases.
In summary, the present studies examined the in vitro and in vivo activity profiles of a series of novel nonsteroidal AR ligands, among which two were identified as in vivo functional androgens with selective anabolic activity. These SARMs, with many advantages over current steroidal androgen preparations, implicate potential therapeutic significance in a scope of androgen-deficiency related disorders. Continued studies in our laboratories will focus on preclinical and clinical development of identified SARMs and further optimization of chemical structures based on understanding the mechanisms underlying nonsteroidal androgenic and anabolic activities.
| |
Footnotes |
|---|
Accepted for publication December 9, 2002.
Received for publication June 25, 2002.
The in vivo studies reported herein were supported by a grant from GTx, Inc. (Memphis, TN). In vitro pharmacological evaluation was supported by Grant R01 DK59800-01 from the National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases (to J.T.D. and D.D.M.).
DOI: 10.1124/jpet.102.040840
Address correspondence to: James T. Dalton, 500 West 12th Ave., L.M. Parks Hall, Room 242, Columbus, OH 43210. E-mail: dalton.1{at}osu.edu
| |
Abbreviations |
|---|
AR, androgen receptor; SARM, selective androgen receptor modulator; TP, testosterone propionate; PEG 300, polyethylene glycol 300; FSH, follicle stimulating hormone; LH, luteinizing hormone; ANOVA, analysis of variance; DHT, dihydrotestosterone; AST-SGOT, serum glutamicoyaloacetic transominase; ALT-SGPT, serum glutamic pyruvic transaminase.
| |
References |
|---|
|
|
|---|
This article has been cited by other articles:
![]() |
W. Gao and J. T. Dalton Ockham's Razor and Selective Androgen Receptor Modulators (SARMs): Are We Overlooking the Role of 5{alpha}-Reductase? Mol. Interv., February 1, 2007; 7(1): 10 - 13. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
N. Z. Lu, S. E. Wardell, K. L. Burnstein, D. Defranco, P. J. Fuller, V. Giguere, R. B. Hochberg, L. McKay, J.-M. Renoir, N. L. Weigel, et al. International Union of Pharmacology. LXV. The Pharmacology and Classification of the Nuclear Receptor Superfamily: Glucocorticoid, Mineralocorticoid, Progesterone, and Androgen Receptors Pharmacol. Rev., December 1, 2006; 58(4): 782 - 797. [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
M. A. Perera, D. Yin, D. Wu, K. K. Chan, D. D. Miller, and J. Dalton In Vivo Metabolism and Final Disposition of a Novel Nonsteroidal Androgen in Rats and Dogs Drug Metab. Dispos., October 1, 2006; 34(10): 1713 - 1721. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
S. M. Dehm and D. J. Tindall Ligand-independent Androgen Receptor Activity Is Activation Function-2-independent and Resistant to Antiandrogens in Androgen Refractory Prostate Cancer Cells J. Biol. Chem., September 22, 2006; 281(38): 27882 - 27893. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
A.-M. Axell, H. E. MacLean, D. R. Plant, L. J. Harcourt, J. A. Davis, M. Jimenez, D. J. Handelsman, G. S. Lynch, and J. D. Zajac Continuous testosterone administration prevents skeletal muscle atrophy and enhances resistance to fatigue in orchidectomized male mice Am J Physiol Endocrinol Metab, September 1, 2006; 291(3): E506 - E516. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
J. Yang, C. E. Bohl, V. A. Nair, S. M. Mustafa, S. S. Hong, D. D. Miller, and J. T. Dalton Preclinical Pharmacology of a Nonsteroidal Ligand for Androgen Receptor-Mediated Imaging of Prostate Cancer J. Pharmacol. Exp. Ther., April 1, 2006; 317(1): 402 - 408. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
D. Wu, Z. Wu, J. Yang, V. A. Nair, D. D. Miller, and J. T. Dalton PHARMACOKINETICS AND METABOLISM OF A SELECTIVE ANDROGEN RECEPTOR MODULATOR IN RATS: IMPLICATION OF MOLECULAR PROPERTIES AND INTENSIVE METABOLIC PROFILE TO INVESTIGATE IDEAL PHARMACOKINETIC CHARACTERISTICS OF A PROPANAMIDE IN PRECLINICAL STUDY Drug Metab. Dispos., March 1, 2006; 34(3): 483 - 494. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
W. Gao, Z. Wu, C. E. Bohl, J. Yang, D. D. Miller, and J. T. Dalton CHARACTERIZATION OF THE IN VITRO METABOLISM OF SELECTIVE ANDROGEN RECEPTOR MODULATOR USING HUMAN, RAT, AND DOG LIVER ENZYME PREPARATIONS Drug Metab. Dispos., February 1, 2006; 34(2): 243 - 253. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
W. Gao, J. S. Johnston, D. D. Miller, and J. T. Dalton INTERSPECIES DIFFERENCES IN PHARMACOKINETICS AND METABOLISM OF S-3-(4-ACETYLAMINO-PHENOXY)-2-HYDROXY-2-METHYL-N-(4-NITRO-3-TRIFLUOROMETHYLPHENYL)-PROPIONAMIDE: THE ROLE OF N-ACETYLTRANSFERASE Drug Metab. Dispos., February 1, 2006; 34(2): 254 - 260. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
J. Chen, D. J. Hwang, K. Chung, C. E. Bohl, S. J. Fisher, D. D. Miller, and J. T. Dalton In Vitro and in Vivo Structure-Activity Relationships of Novel Androgen Receptor Ligands with Multiple Substituents in the B-Ring Endocrinology, December 1, 2005; 146(12): 5444 - 5454. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
W. Gao, P. J. Reiser, C. C. Coss, M. A. Phelps, J. D. Kearbey, D. D. Miller, and J. T. Dalton Selective Androgen Receptor Modulator Treatment Improves Muscle Strength and Body Composition and Prevents Bone Loss in Orchidectomized Rats Endocrinology, November 1, 2005; 146(11): 4887 - 4897. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
J. Kim, D. Wu, D. J. Hwang, D. D. Miller, and J. T. Dalton The Para Substituent of S-3-(Phenoxy)-2-hydroxy-2-methyl-N-(4-nitro-3-trifluoromethyl-phenyl)-propionamides Is a Major Structural Determinant of in Vivo Disposition and Activity of Selective Androgen Receptor Modulators J. Pharmacol. Exp. Ther., October 1, 2005; 315(1): 230 - 239. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
Y. Chen, J. D Zajac, and H. E MacLean Androgen regulation of satellite cell function J. Endocrinol., July 1, 2005; 186(1): 21 - 31. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
J. Chen, J. Kim, and J. T. Dalton Discovery and Therapeutic Promise of Selective Androgen Receptor Modulators Mol. Interv., June 1, 2005; 5(3): 173 - 188. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
J. Chen, D. J. Hwang, C. E. Bohl, D. D. Miller, and J. T. Dalton A Selective Androgen Receptor Modulator for Hormonal Male Contraception J. Pharmacol. Exp. Ther., February 1, 2005; 312(2): 546 - 553. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
P. Y. Liu, R. C. Christian, M. Ruan, V. M. Miller, and L. A. Fitzpatrick Correlating Androgen and Estrogen Steroid Receptor Expression with Coronary Calcification and Atherosclerosis in Men without Known Coronary Artery Disease J. Clin. Endocrinol. Metab., February 1, 2005; 90(2): 1041 - 1046. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
T. R. Brown Nonsteroidal Selective Androgen Receptors Modulators (SARMs): Designer Androgens with Flexible Structures Provide Clinical Promise Endocrinology, December 1, 2004; 145(12): 5417 - 5419. [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
W. Gao, J. D. Kearbey, V. A. Nair, K. Chung, A. F. Parlow, D. D. Miller, and J. T. Dalton Comparison of the Pharmacological Effects of a Novel Selective Androgen Receptor Modulator, the 5{alpha}-Reductase Inhibitor Finasteride, and the Antiandrogen Hydroxyflutamide in Intact Rats: New Approach for Benign Prostate Hyperplasia Endocrinology, December 1, 2004; 145(12): 5420 - 5428. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
|