![[Feedback]](/icons/banner/feedbackACT.gif){kind=icon}
![[For Subscribers]](/icons/banner/subscriberACT.gif){kind=icon}
![[Archive]](/icons/banner/archiveACT.gif){kind=icon}
![[Search]](/icons/banner/searchACT.gif){kind=icon}
![[Contents]](/icons/banner/tocACT.gif){kind=icon}
|
|
|
|
|
||
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
ABSORPTION, DISTRIBUTION, METABOLISM, AND EXCRETION
Department of Drug Metabolism, Merck & Co., Inc., Rahway, New Jersey (X.-Y.C., S.-E.W.H., M.P.B., D.C.E., R.E.); and National Medical Center, Institute of Haematology and Immunology, Budapest, Hungary (B.S.)
Received October 31, 2003; accepted December 18, 2003.
 |
Abstract |
|---|
 Top Abstract Materials and MethodsResultsDiscussionReferences |
|---|
-estradiol-17-D-glucuronide. Interestingly, EE-S stimulated strongly MRP2- and MRP3-mediated uptake of EE-G by increasing its apparent transport affinity, whereas no reciprocal stimulation of EE-S uptake by EE-G was observed. These data indicate that EE-S allosterically stimulates MRP2- and MRP3-mediated transport of EE-G and is not cotransported with EE-G. Our studies demonstrate specific active transport of a pharmacologically relevant drug conjugate by human MRP2 and MRP3, involving complex interactions with other organic anions. We also suggest that caution needs to be taken when using only competition studies as screening tools to identify substrates or inhibitors of MRP-mediated transport.
-Ethinyl estradiol (EE), a synthetic estrogen, is an essential constituent of oral contraceptives, which have been widely prescribed since the 1970s. Over 60 million women currently take oral contraceptives, and their safety profile is well established. Numerous examples are known (Stockley, 1999
) where coadministration of EE with a range of other drugs can result in decreased plasma levels of EE with the commensurate failure of contraception and breakthrough bleedings. Alterations in EE metabolism and disposition are proposed to occur via induction of hepatic or gut enzymes involved in the metabolism and/or transport of EE and its metabolites.
The pharmacokinetics and metabolism of EE in humans occurs both in gut and liver, respectively, where the mean bioavailability is reported to be 45% (Back et al., 1982; Rogers et al., 1987). EE mainly undergoes sulfation and glucuronidation, resulting in the formation of EE-3-O-sulfate (EE-S) and EE-3-O-glucuronide (EE-G). EE-G and EE-S have been detected in bile, intestinal mucosa, and urine (Maggs et al., 1983; Pacifici and Back, 1988; Orme et al., 1989). However, the mechanisms involved in the transport and elimination of these metabolites are unknown.
Multidrug resistance proteins (MRPs), transporters belonging to the ATP-binding cassette (ABC) superfamily, have been suggested to play an important role in the transport and detoxification of a wide range of endogenous compounds and xenobiotics (Borst et al., 2000; Borst and Elferink, 2002). The MRP family consists of nine members, which are referred to as MRP1–9 (Borst and Elferink, 2002). MRP1 (ABCC1) is localized in the basolateral membranes of polarized cells (Evers et al., 1996; Cole and Deeley, 1998) and is expressed in all tissues except the liver (Zaman et al., 1994). In contrast, MRP2 (ABCC2) is expressed in the canalicular membrane of hepatocytes, the apical membrane of the small intestine, the apical membrane of the proximal tubules of the kidney, and placental trophoblasts (Paulusma and Oude Elferink, 1997; Schaub et al., 1997, 1999; St-Pierre et al., 2000). MRP2 therefore may be involved in hepatobiliary-, renal-, and intestinal excretion of compounds, and protection of the fetus. MRP3 (ABCC3) is localized in the basolateral membranes of polarized cells (Kõnig et al., 1999). It is expressed in the gut, pancreas, liver cholangiocytes, adrenals, and kidney, and it is highly induced in hepatocytes under cholestatic condition (Donner and Keppler, 2001; Scheffer et al., 2002). MRP3 may play a role in enterocytes by transporting compounds from the intestine into the bloodstream, and under cholestatic conditions by removing toxic organic anions from hepatocytes (Keppler and Kõnig, 2000).
MRP1–3 are able to transport conjugated and nonconjugated organic anions (Borst et al., 2000; Borst and Elferink, 2002). The substrate specificity of MRP1 and MRP2 is overlapping and includes glutathione (GSH), glucuronide, and sulfate conjugates, some nonconjugated organic anions, and various neutral or positively charged drugs (Cole et al., 1994; Cui et al., 1999). MRP3 also transports organic anions but prefers glucuronide and sulfate conjugates over glutathione conjugates (Hirohashi et al., 1999, 2000; Zelcer et al., 2003b).
MRP1–3 have been shown to interact with a wide range of substrates, including several physiologically or pharmacologically active organic anions. For instance, GSH plays an important role in MRP1- and MRP2-mediated transport of a number of compounds. In some cases, compounds are cotransported with GSH but in others not (Loe et al., 1998; Renes et al., 1999; Evers et al., 2000; Leslie et al., 2001; Qian et al., 2001). Bodo et al. (2003) showed that some organic anions, including indomethacin, furosemide, probenecid, and some bile acids, significantly stimulated MRP2-mediated 17-estradiol-17-D-glucuronide (E217G) uptake, but inhibited its uptake by MRP3. In MDCKII-MRP2 cells, probenecid enhanced vectorial transport of the human immunodeficiency virus protease inhibitors saquinavir, ritonavir, and indinavir (Huisman et al., 2002). So far, the mechanism explaining these complex stimulation and inhibition effects has not been elucidated, but they suggest that MRP1–3 have multiple drug binding sites (Loe et al., 1998; Daoud et al., 2000; Borst and Elferink, 2002; Deeley and Cole, 2003).
Here, we investigate the ability of MRP1–3 to transport EE-G and EE-S using membrane vesicles isolated from baculovirus infected Spodoptera frugiperda (Sf9) insect cells expressing MRP1, MRP2, or MRP3. Although we determined that EE-G was a good substrate for MRP2 and MRP3, neither MRP1, MRP2, nor MRP3 was capable of transporting EE-S. Interestingly, EE-S stimulated strongly MRP2- and MRP3-mediated transport of EE-G and had variable effects on the transport of other substrates. The interpretation of our findings in light of models explaining MRP-mediated transport is discussed. In addition, our data suggest that MRP2 and MRP3 are the relevant transporters in vivo for the export of EE-G from intestine and liver.
|
Materials and Methods |
|---|
|
TopAbstractMaterials and MethodsResultsDiscussionReferences |
|---|
). [14C]Ethacrynic acid was obtained by substituting [14C]paraformaldehyde into the method described in U.S. Patent 3,255,241 for preparation of unlabeled material. The purity of [14C]EA-SG verified by high-performance liquid chromatography was 98%. [3H]E217G (40.5 Ci/mmol) was obtained from PerkinElmer Life Sciences (Boston, MA). EE-G and EE-S was obtained from Steraloids (Newport, RI). E217G, creatine phosphate, and creatine phosphokinase were purchased from Sigma-Aldrich (St. Louis, MO). All chemicals were of the highest analytical purity grade.
Preparation of Membrane Vesicles. Recombinant baculovirus containing MRP1, MRP2 cDNAs, and -galactosidase gene (control) were obtained from Solvo Biotechnology (Szeged, Hungary). Baculovirus containing MRP3 cDNA was kindly provided by Dr. Piet Borst (The Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands). Sf9 cells in suspension were grown in Sf-900 II SFM medium in the absence of serum (Invitrogen, Carlsbad, CA). About 4 x 107 Sf9 cells were seeded in 175-cm2 tissue culture flasks. After the cells became attached, the medium was removed, and 3 ml of medium and 3 ml of virus stock containing MRP1, MRP2, or MRP3 (about 5–8 x 107 virus/ml) was added to infect the cells. One hour after addition of the virus to the cells, cell culture medium was added up to a final volume of 30 ml. After incubation for 72 h at 26°C, the cells were harvested and washed twice in ice-cold washing buffer (50 mM Tris/HCl, 300 mM mannitol, 0.5 mM phenylmethylsulfonyl fluoride, pH 7.0) and centrifuged at 800g for 5 min at 4°C. The cell pellet was resuspended in ice-cold TMEP buffer (50 mM Tris, 50 mM mannitol, 2 mM EGTA-Tris, 2 mM dithiothreitol, aprotinin (8 µg/ml), leupeptin (10 µg/ml), phenylmethylsulfonyl fluoride (50 µg/ml), pH 7.0) and homogenized for 10 min on ice using a tight-fitting Dounce homogenizer. After centrifugation at 800g for 10 min at 4°C, the supernatant was collected and centrifuged at 100,000g for 1 h at 4°C. The pellet was resuspended in TMEP buffer and passed 20 times through a 27-gauge needle. The vesicles were dispensed in aliquots, frozen in liquid nitrogen, and stored at –80°C until use.
Vesicular Uptake Studies. Vesicular uptake studies were performed using the rapid filtration technique as reported previously (Chu et al., 1997). The transport medium contained the radiolabeled ligand, 250 mM sucrose, 10 mM Tris/HCl (pH 7.4), 10 mM MgCl2, 5 mM ATP, or 5 mM AMP, and an ATP-regenerating system (10 mM creatine phosphate and 100 µg/ml creatine phosphokinase). The uptake study was performed at 37°C. After preincubation for 3 min at 37°C, the uptake study was started by the addition of vesicle suspension (10 µg of protein). The final incubation volume was 20 µl. In the inhibition study, the inhibitors were dissolved in transport buffer and preincubated with ligands for 3 min. At designated time points, transport was terminated by adding 1 ml of ice-cold stop solution containing 10 mM Tris/HCl (pH 7.4), 250 mM sucrose, and 100 mM NaCl. The stopped reaction mixture was filtered through 0.45-µm HA Millipore filters (Millipore Corporation, Bedford, MA) and subsequently washed twice with 5 ml of ice-cold stop solution. For the uptake study with EE-S, glass fiber (type A/E) filters (Gelman Sciences, Dorval, QC, Canada) were used to minimize nonspecific binding to membrane filters. The radioactivity retained on the filter and in the reaction mixture was measured in a liquid scintillation counter (LS 6000; Beckman Coulter Inc., Fullerton, CA). ATP-dependent uptake was determined as the difference in uptake in the presence and absence of ATP.
Western Blot Analysis. Membrane vesicles isolated from baculovirus infected Sf9 cells were solubilized in Laemmli sample buffer (Bio-Rad, Hercules, CA) containing 2.5% of -mercaptoethanol and separated in a 7.5% denaturing polyacrylamide gel. Gels were immunoblotted onto nitrocellulose membranes. MRP1, 2, and 3 were detected with the specific monoclonal antibodies MRP-R1 (1:500), M2I4 (1:500), and MRP-III21 (1:40), respectively, as described previously (Bakos et al., 2000). The blots were then developed with the enhanced chemiluminescence kit (Amersham Biosciences Inc., Piscataway, NJ) and exposed to enhanced chemiluminescence hyperfilm (Amersham Biosciences Inc.).
Data Analysis. Kinetic parameters for the ATP-dependent uptake were obtained by fitting the data to the following equation:
 | (1) |
The inhibition constant (Ki) values for evaluating the inhibitory effect of EE-G on the uptake of [14C]EA-SG by MRP2 and [3H]E217G by MRP3 were obtained by fitting the following equation to the data as described previously (Chu et al., 1997):
 | (2) |
G concentration (0.4 µM) used was much lower than the Km value (27 µM for MRP3; data not shown). |
Results |
|---|
|
TopAbstractMaterials and MethodsResultsDiscussionReferences |
|---|
) (data not shown). No signal was detected in vesicles isolated from control -galactosidase-expressing cells (lanes 1 and 2). Because MRP1, MRP2, and MRP3 were detected using different monoclonal antibodies, it was not possible to compare the exact expression levels of the proteins in these membrane vesicles. Bodo et al. (2003), however, detected comparable amounts of MRP1–3 in Sf9 membrane vesicles after staining gels with Coomassie Brilliant Blue. Because we do not know what percentage of MRP was transport competent, the absolute values of the transport measured by different transporters should be compared with care. As a positive control for the quality of the vesicles, functional activity of MRP1, MRP2, and MRP3 was confirmed by ATP-dependent uptake of EA-SG and E217G (data not shown).
|
Transport of EE-G by MRP1, MRP2, and MRP3. To evaluate whether EE-G was a substrate for MRP1, MRP2, or MRP3, uptake of [3H]EE-G (0.2 µM) into membrane vesicles containing MRP1, MRP2, and MRP3 was investigated (Fig. 2). ATP-dependent uptake of [3H]EE-G (0.2 µM) in MRP1-containing vesicles was low and comparable with that observed in control Sf9 membrane vesicles (Fig. 2A). In contrast, ATP-dependent uptake of [3H]EE-G (0.2 µM) was much higher in MRP2-containing vesicles and showed linearity within 5 min (Fig. 2B). As shown in Fig. 2C, significant time- and ATP-dependent uptake of EE-G was also observed in MRP3-containing vesicles. Several studies have shown that MRP1-mediated transport of some compounds, including 4-(methylnitrosamino)-1-(3-pyridyl)-1-butanol glucuronide and estrone-3-sulfate, is GSH-dependent (Loe et al., 1998; Sakamoto et al., 1999; Leslie et al., 2001; Qian et al., 2001). We therefore evaluated whether GSH stimulates MRP1-mediated EE-G uptake. In this experiment, 10 mM dithiothreitol was added to the reaction mixture as a reducing agent (Leslie et al., 2001). Our results, however, indicated that 3 mM GSH did not have an effect on MRP1-mediated EE-G uptake (data not shown).
|
Concentration dependence of ATP-dependent uptake of EE-G was studied in MRP2 and MRP3 containing membrane vesicles. Because the uptake of [3H]EE-G (0.2 µM) in the presence of 5 mM ATP was linear for up to 5 min (Fig. 2, B and C), the initial rate for the uptake of EE-G at various substrate concentrations was determined after a 5-min incubation. Kinetic analysis revealed that the ATP-dependent uptake of EE-G by MRP2- and MRP3-containing vesicles was saturable with a Km of 35 ± 3.5 µM and a Vmax of 310 ± 10 pmol/min/mg protein for MRP2-mediated uptake (Fig. 3A), and a Km of 9.2 ± 2.3 µM and a Vmax of 58 ± 4.2 pmol/min/mg protein for MRP3-mediated uptake (Fig. 3B).
|
Transport of EE-S by MRP1, MRP2, and MRP3. To evaluate whether EE-S was a substrate for MRP1, MRP2, or MRP3, uptake of [3H]EE-S (0.2 µM) was investigated in MRP1-, MRP2-, and MRP3-containing vesicles, and control Sf9 membrane vesicles containing -galactosidase. No ATP-dependent uptake of EE-S higher than in the control vesicles was observed by any of these transporters (Fig. 4, A–C). Our studies also showed that GSH up to 3 mM did not stimulate MRP1-, MRP2-, and MRP3-mediated EE-S uptake (data not shown). Studies using membrane vesicles isolated from MDCKII-MRP2 cells also indicated that EE-S was not a substrate of MRP2 (our unpublished observation).
|
Effect of EE-G and EE-S on MRP2- and MRP3-Mediated Transport by EA-SG and E217G. Recently, it has been shown that compounds can have both an inhibitory and/or stimulatory effect on MRP-mediated transport both in intact cells and in membrane vesicles (Bakos et al., 2000; Evers et al., 2000; Qian et al., 2001; Huisman et al., 2002). We therefore investigated the effect of EE-G and EE-S on MRP2- and MRP3-mediated uptake by EA-SG and E217G, known substrates for these transporters (Evers et al., 1998; Hirohashi et al., 1999). Uptake of EA-SG and E217G by MRP2 and MRP3, respectively, was ATP-dependent and saturable. The Km value for EA-SG uptake by MRP2 was 15 µM, and the Km value for E217G uptake by MRP3 was 27 µM (data not shown). Recent studies showed that the rate of E217G transport by MRP2 increased sigmoidally with half-maximal transport of 120 µM (Bodo et al., 2003; Zelcer et al., 2003a). EE-G significantly inhibited ATP-dependent uptake of EA-SG in MRP2 containing vesicles with a Ki value of 20 ± 1.1 µM (Fig. 5A). EE-G also significantly inhibited MRP3-mediated uptake of E217G in MRP3-expressing vesicles with a Ki value of 5.0 ± 0.6 µM (Fig. 5B). In contrast, EE-S at relatively low concentrations (2–20 µM) stimulated MRP2-mediated uptake of EA-SG up to 1.5-fold (Fig. 6A). EE-S at high concentration (100 µM), however, inhibited MRP2-mediated uptake of EA-SG by approximately 50% (Fig. 6A). Unlike its effect on EA-SG, EE-S only showed a strong stimulatory effect on MRP2-mediated E217G uptake within the concentrations tested (2–100 µM) (Fig. 6B). EE-S at a concentration of 100 µM enhanced E217G uptake up to 17-fold (Fig. 6B). EE-S at low concentration (2–20 µM) also showed a stimulatory effect (3.8-fold) on MRP3-mediated uptake of E217G but slightly inhibited its uptake at a very high concentration (100 µM; Fig. 6C).
|
|
Effect of EE-S on MRP1–3-Mediated Uptake of EE-G. A possible stimulatory effect of EE-S on MRP1–3-mediated uptake of EE-G was also evaluated. EE-S at 2 to 100 µM had no stimulatory effect on ATP-dependent uptake of EE-G in MRP1-containing vesicles (Fig. 7A), but rather inhibited its low-level uptake. Because EE-G uptake by MRP1 was not higher than in control vesicles (Fig. 2A), this effect was possibly due to inhibition of a low endogenous MRP-like activity present in Sf9 cells. In contrast, EE-S (2–100 µM) stimulated MRP2-mediated ATP-dependent uptake of EE-G strongly (Fig. 7B). EE-S at a concentration of 20 µM increased the ATP-dependent initial uptake rate of EE-G 15-fold. Stimulation was further enhanced up to 22-fold in the presence of 100 µM EE-S, the highest concentration tested. EE-S (2–100 µM) also showed a significant stimulatory effect on MRP3-mediated uptake of EE-G (Fig. 7C). Strongest stimulation was observed at EE-S concentration of 20 µM (about 5-fold), whereas the stimulatory effect slowly decreased at higher concentrations (Fig. 7C). The effects of EE-S on MRP2- and MRP3-mediated uptake of EE-G were further characterized by determining the initial uptake rates of EE-G at various substrate concentrations in the presence of EE-S (20 µM; Fig. 8, A and B, respectively). In the presence of EE-S (20 µM), the Km for uptake of EE-G by MRP2 was calculated to be 4.1 ± 0.7 µM, which was about 9-fold lower than the Km determined in the absence of EE-S (Fig. 3A; Km = 35 ± 3.5 µM). In the presence of EE-S, the Vmax was 435 ± 16 pmol/min/mg protein, which was slightly higher than that in the absence of EE-S (Fig. 3A; Vmax = 310 ± 10 pmol/min/mg protein). For MRP3-mediated uptake of EE-G, in the presence of 20 µM EE-S, the Km was estimated to be 0.5 ± 0.2 µM, which was about 18-fold lower than the Km obtained in the absence of EE-S (Fig. 3B; Km = 9.2 ± 2.3 µM). The Vmax value was 88 ± 5.6 pmol/min/mg protein, which was again slightly higher than that in the absence of EE-S (Fig. 3B; Vmax = 58 ± 4.2 pmol/min/mg protein).
|
|
Effect of EE-G on MRP2- and MRP3-Mediated [3H]EE-S Uptake. The stimulatory effect of EE-S on transport of EE-G could be explained by a mechanism in which both compounds are cotransported or by an allosteric effect of EE-S on MRP2 or MRP3 resulting in an increased transport of EE-G. To investigate whether transport of EE-S could be reciprocally stimulated by EE-G, the effect of EE-G on uptake of [3H]EE-S (20 µM) by MRP2 and MRP3 was evaluated. As shown in Fig. 9, EE-G (0.5–100 µM) did not cause a significant stimulation of ATP-dependent uptake of EE-S by MRP2- (Fig. 9A) or MRP3 (Fig. 9B)-containing vesicles. The slight ATP-dependent uptake of EE-S observed in MRP2-containing vesicles at EE-G concentrations of 5, 20, and 100 µM was not significant, as this stimulatory effect could not be confirmed in a subsequent time-course experiment. No significant ATP-dependent uptake of EE-S in the presence of various concentrations of EE-G was detected in these experiments (data not shown).
|
|
Discussion |
|---|
|
TopAbstractMaterials and MethodsResultsDiscussionReferences |
|---|
), MRP2 and MRP3 may be the physiologically relevant transporters for the export of EE-G from these organs. These transporters do not transport EE-S, however. Furthermore, we find a strong allosteric stimulation between two pharmacologically relevant conjugated metabolites of EE, EE-G, and EE-S. The stimulatory effect of EE-S on MRP2- and MRP3-mediated transport of EE-G (Fig. 7) might be relevant in vivo, and therefore could potentially have an impact on the in vivo disposition of EE and its interaction with other drugs. Interestingly, EE-S showed a pronounced effect on MRP2- and MRP3-mediated uptake of EE-G, but the extent of this interaction varied among these transporters. EE-S stimulated MRP2-mediated uptake of EE-G strongly (Fig. 7B). Uptake was enhanced up to 22-fold at an EE-S concentration of 100 µM. EE-S also significantly stimulated MRP3-mediated uptake of EE-G (5-fold) at an EE-S concentration of 20 µM, but this stimulatory effect was decreased at higher concentration (Fig. 7C). In contrast, EE-S had no stimulatory effect on MRP1-mediated EE-G uptake (Fig. 7A). Such a differential modulatory effect of EE-S on uptake of EE-G by MRP1–3 suggests that the modulator binding sites vary greatly between MRP1–3 in terms of their affinity to various substrates.
To further investigate the mechanism explaining the stimulatory effect of EE-S on MRP2- and MRP3-mediated uptake of EE-G, we compared the kinetic parameters of EE-G uptake in the presence and absence of EE-S. In the presence of EE-S (20 µM), the Km values for EE-G uptake by MRP2 and MRP3 were considerably decreased compared with those in the absence of EE-S, whereas the Vmax values were only slightly higher than those in the absence of EE-S (Figs. 3 and 8). The Vmax/Km, which represents the intrinsic clearance of EE-G transport, was calculated to be 110 in the presence of EE-S (20 µM) and 8.8 in the absence of EE-S for MRP2-mediated uptake, whereas the Vmax/Km ratio was 180 in the presence of EE-S (20 µM) compared with 6.3 in the absence of EE-S for MRP3-mediated uptake. Together, these data demonstrate that EE-S stimulates MRP2- and MRP3-mediated uptake of EE-G by increasing its apparent affinity. Therefore, EE-S could potentially enhance the excretion of EE-G in vivo from the organs where these transporters are expressed. Although it is important to note that EE is administered to humans at a low dose (35 µg/day), local, intracellular concentrations of these metabolites might well be in the micromolar range, as studied here. Therefore, the effects of EE-S on MRP2- and MRP3-mediated transport of EE-G might also be relevant in vivo. Because EE-G and EE-S are highly charged, they do not readily diffuse over the plasma membrane. We therefore could not investigate the effect of EE-S on MRP2 and MRP3-mediated EE-G transport in intact cells by (vectorial) transport studies.
Earlier studies have shown that some modulators of MRP1 and MRP2 were cotransported with substrates (Loe et al., 1998; Evers et al., 2000). The stimulation of MRP2 and MRP3-mediated uptake by EE-S raises the possibility that EE-S might be cotransported with the MRP2 and MRP3 substrates EE-G, E217G, and EA-SG. However, no ATP-dependent uptake of EE-S was observed in the presence of EE-G (Fig. 9), suggesting that EE-S was not cotransported with EE-G. We also determined that EE-S was not cotransported with E217G in MRP3-containing vesicles (data not shown). We can not rule out that some ATP-dependent cotransport of EE-S with EE-G occurs, which we might have missed in our studies due to the relatively high nonspecific binding of EE-S to membrane filters. However, even if this would be the case, the transport of EE-S in the presence of EE-G was very weak compared with its strong stimulatory effect on EE-G transport. Together, the above-mentioned studies suggest that EE-S has an allosteric effect on MRP2 and MRP3, resulting in an increased transport rate of EE-G, and that EE-S is not transported itself at an appreciable rate.
EE-S showed strong stimulatory effects on both MRP2- and MRP3-mediated EE-G and E217G uptake. Hirohashi et al. (1999) and Akita et al. (2001) found that the sulfate conjugates of E3040 and 4-methyl umbelliferone also stimulated both rat and human MRP3-mediated E217G uptake. Our studies demonstrated that the stimulatory effect of EE-S on the uptake of EE-G and E217G varied between MRP2 and MRP3. EE-S showed a stimulatory effect on MRP2-mediated uptake of EE-G and E217G at all concentrations tested (Figs. 6B and 7B), whereas EE-S only showed a strong stimulatory effects on MRP3-mediated EE-G and E217G uptake at lower concentration (<20 µM). This stimulation by EE-S decreased at higher concentrations (Figs. 6C and 7C). This suggests that MRP2 and MRP3 might have a different binding affinity for EE-S. The finding that EE-S showed a much stronger stimulatory effect on MRP2-mediated EE-G and E217G uptake than on EA-SG uptake suggests that sulfate conjugates may stimulate the transport of glucuronides stronger than of glutathione conjugates. Further experiments are needed, however, to verify this possibility.
Recently, various cotransport and allosteric activation models have been proposed to explain the complex interactions between MRP1–3 and substrates. Evers et al. (2000) proposed a working model to explain the cotransport of MRP2 substrates, including sulfinpyrazone or vinblastine, with GSH. However, this model does not explain the lack of cotransport of EE-S with EE-G and other MRP2 and MRP3 substrates, including E217G. Similarly, several recent studies also indicated that some MRP1–3 modulators are not detectably cotransported with MRP substrates, whereas they had a strong stimulatory effect (Leslie et al., 2001, 2003; Qian et al., 2001; Zelcer et al., 2003a).
While this work was in progress, Zelcer et al. (2003a) proposed a transport model for MRP2, in which MRP2 has two similar but nonidentical ligand binding sites: one site from which substrate is transported (S site) and another site able to modulate the transport (M site). Binding of a modulator to the M site would induce a structural change that results in a better fit of the substrate at the S site. According to this model, EE-S might bind only to the M site of MRP2, leading to a conformational change in the S site and there-with causing a strong stimulation of MRP2-mediated transport of EE-G. However, this model may not explain all our experiments. For instance, EE-S stimulated MRP2-mediated uptake of EA-SG at relatively low EE-S concentrations (2–20 µM), but uptake was inhibited at higher concentrations of EE-S (Fig. 6). Based on the "bell-shaped" stimulation curve, we speculate that EE-S could bind to both the M and S site. Therefore, at lower concentrations, it predominantly binds to the M site and stimulates EA-SG uptake; at higher concentrations, it competes with EA-SG for the S site, resulting in the inhibition of EA-SG transport. At present, we have no evidence indicating that the competition between EE-S and EA-SG for the S site could result in transport of EE-S. On the other hand, EE-G might have a much higher binding affinity for the S site than EA-SG. Therefore, also at high concentrations, EE-S can not compete with EE-G for binding to the S site. Like for MRP2, our results also show that EE-S allosterically stimulates MRP3-mediated transport of EE-G and E217G, but was not cotransported with these compounds. We infer that MRP3 might contain similar multiple ligand-binding sites as postulated for MRP2. Together, these observations suggest that binding of some compounds to MRP2 and MRP3 has an allosteric effect resulting in a conformational change in the protein and increasing its affinity for substrates.
In our studies, uptake of EE-G by MRP2 and MRP3 followed simple Michaelis-Menten kinetics. Also upon close inspection of the data from multiple experiments, we were not able to observe a sigmoidal uptake rate versus concentration curve as found by Zelcer et al. (2003a) and Bodo et al. (2003) for MRP2-mediated uptake of E217G. To explain this apparent discrepancy, we hypothesize that EE-G only binds to the S site and has no detectable affinity for the M site.
Our data suggest that the transporters responsible in vivo for the export of EE-G from enterocytes and hepatocytes could be MRP2 and MRP3. Because several organic anions, which show stimulation of MRP-mediated uptake, are physiologically or pharmacologically active, it has been speculated that these might cause clinically relevant drug-drug interactions (Bakos et al., 2000; Huisman et al., 2002). It is important to note, however, that all these studies were performed in vitro with either inside-out membrane vesicles or polarized cell lines. In future studies, it therefore will be important to address whether these effects can be mimicked in animals or perfused organ systems.
The complex interaction between MRP transporters and organic anions suggests that caution needs to be taken in using inhibition studies as a screening tool to predict whether compounds could cause inhibition of MRP-mediated transport under physiological conditions. Probably, such experiments should be performed with physiologically relevant substrates, such as bilirubin glucuronide for MRP2, for example.
|
Acknowledgements |
|---|
|
Footnotes |
|---|
ABBREVIATIONS: EE, ethinylestradiol; EE-S, 3-O-sulfate of EE; EE-G, 3-O-glucuronide of EE; MRP, multidrug resistance protein; ABC, ATP-binding cassette; GSH, glutathione; E217G, 17-estradiol-17-D-glucuronide; EA-SG, ethacrynic acid glutathione.
Address correspondence to: Dr. Xiao-Yan Chu, Department of Drug Metabolism, RY80M-112, Merck & Co., Inc., 126 East Lincoln Ave., Rahway, NJ. E-mail: xiaoyan_chu{at}merck.com
|
References |
|---|
|
TopAbstractMaterials and MethodsResultsDiscussionReferences |
|---|
Akita H, Suzuki H, Hirohashi T, Takikawa H, and Sugiyama Y (2001) Transport activity of human MRP3 expressed in Sf9 cells: comparative studies with rat MRP3. Pharm Res (NY) 19: 34-41.
Back DJ, Breckenridge AM, MacIver M, Orme M, Purba HS, Rowe PH, and Taylor I (1982) The gut wall metabolism of ethinyloestradiol and its contribution to the pre-systemic metabolism of ethinyloestradiol in humans. Br J Clin Pharmacol 13: 325-330.[Medline]
Bakos E, Evers R, Sinko E, Varadi A, Borst P, and Sarkadi B (2000) Interactions of the human multidrug resistance proteins MRP1 and MRP2 with organic anions. Mol Pharmacol 57: 760-768.
Bodo A, Bakos E, Szeri F, Varadi A, and Sarkadi B (2003) Differential modulation of the human liver conjugate transporters MRP2 and MRP3 by bile acids and organic anions. J Biol Chem 278: 23529-23537.
Borst P and Elferink RO (2002) Mammalian ABC transporters in health and disease. Annu Rev Biochem 71: 537-592.[CrossRef][Medline]
Borst P, Evers R, Kool M, and Wijnholds J (2000) A family of drug transporters: the multidrug resistance-associated proteins. J Natl Cancer Inst 92: 1295-1302.
Chu XY, Kato Y, Niinuma K, Sudo KI, Hakusui H, and Sugiyama Y (1997) Multispecific organic anion transporter is responsible for the biliary excretion of the camptothecin derivative irinotecan and its metabolites in rats. J Pharmacol Exp Ther 281: 304-314.
Cole SP and Deeley RG (1998) Multidrug resistance mediated by the ATP-binding cassette transporter protein MRP. Bioassays 20: 931-940.[CrossRef][Medline]
Cole SP, Sparks KE, Fraser K, Loe DW, Grant CE, Wilson GM, and Deeley RG (1994) Pharmacological characterization of multidrug resistant MRP-transfected human tumor cells. Cancer Res 54: 5902-5910.
Cui Y, Kõnig J, Buchholz JK, Spring H, Leier I, and Keppler D (1999) Drug resistance and ATP-dependent conjugate transport mediated by the apical multidrug resistance protein, MRP2, permanently expressed in human and canine cells. Mol Pharmacol 55: 929-937.
Daoud R, Desneves J, Deady LW, Tilley L, Scheper RJ, Gros P, and Georges E (2000) The multidrug resistance protein is photoaffinity labeled by a quinoline-based drug at multiple sites. Biochemistry 39: 6094-6102.[CrossRef][Medline]
Deeley RG and Cole SP (2003) Multidrug resistance protein 1 (ABCC1), in ABC Proteins from Bacteria to Man (Holland IB, Cole SP, Kuchler K, and Higgins CF eds) pp 393-422, Academic Press, London.
Donner MG and Keppler D (2001) Up-regulation of basolateral multidrug resistance protein 3 (Mrp3) in cholestatic rat liver. Hepatology 34: 351-359.[CrossRef][Medline]
Evers R, de Haas M, Sparidans R, Beijnen J, Wielinga PR, Lankelma J, and Borst P (2000) Vinblastine and sulfinpyrazone export by the multidrug resistance protein MRP2 is associated with glutathione export. Br J Cancer 83: 375-383.[CrossRef][Medline]
Evers R, Kool M, van Deemter L, Janssen H, Calafat J, Oomen LC, Paulusma CC, Oude Elferink RP, Baas F, Schinkel AH, et al. (1998) Drug export activity of the human canalicular multispecific organic anion transporter in polarized kidney MDCK cells expressing cMOAT (MRP2) cDNA. J Clin Investig 101: 1310-1319.[Medline]
Evers R, Zaman GJ, van Deemter L, Jansen H, Calafat J, Oomen LC, Oude Elferink RP, Borst P, and Schinkel AH (1996) Basolateral localization and export activity of the human multidrug resistance-associated protein in polarized pig kidney cells. J Clin Investig 97: 1211-1218.[Medline]
Hirohashi T, Suzuki H, and Sugiyama Y (1999) Characterization of the transport properties of cloned rat multidrug resistance-associated protein 3 (MRP3). J Biol Chem 274: 15181-15185.
Hirohashi T, Suzuki H, Takikawa H, and Sugiyama Y (2000) ATP-dependent transport of bile salts by rat multidrug resistance-associated protein 3 (Mrp3). J Biol Chem 275: 2905-2910.
Huisman MT, Smit JW, Crommentuyn KM, Zelcer N, Wiltshire HR, Beijnen JH, and Schinkel AH (2002) Multidrug resistance protein 2 (MRP2) transports HIV protease inhibitors and transport can be enhanced by other drugs. AIDS 16: 2295-2301.[CrossRef][Medline]
Keppler D and Kõnig J (2000) Hepatic secretion of conjugated drugs and endogenous substances. Semin Liver Dis 20: 265-272.[CrossRef][Medline]
Kõnig J, Rost D, Cui Y, and Keppler D (1999) Characterization of the human multidrug resistance protein isoform MRP3 localized to the basolateral hepatocyte membrane. Hepatology 29: 1156-1163.[CrossRef][Medline]
Leslie EM, Deeley RG, and Cole SP (2003) Bioflavonoid stimulation of glutathione transport by the 190-kDa multidrug resistance protein 1 (MRP1). Drug Metab Dispos 31: 11-15.
Leslie EM, Ito K, Upadhyaya P, Hecht SS, Deeley RG, and Cole SP (2001) Transport of the beta-O-glucuronide conjugate of the tobacco-specific carcinogen 4-(methylnitrosamino)-1-(3-pyridyl)-1-butanol (NNAL) by the multidrug resistance protein 1 (MRP1). Requirement for glutathione or a non-sulfur-containing analog. J Biol Chem 276: 27846-27854.
Loe DW, Deeley RG, and Cole SP (1998) Characterization of vincristine transport by the M(r) 190, 000 multidrug resistance protein (MRP): evidence for cotransport with reduced glutathione. Cancer Res 58: 5130-5136.
Maggs JL, Grimmer SF, Orme ML, Breckenridge AM, Park BK, and Gilmore IT (1983) The biliary and urinary metabolites of [3H]17 alpha-ethynylestradiol in women. Xenobiotica 13: 421-431.[Medline]
Orme ML, Back DJ, and Ball S (1989) Interindividual variation in the metabolism of ethynylestradiol. Pharmacol Ther 43: 251-260.[CrossRef][Medline]
Pacifici GM and Back DJ (1988) Sulphation and glucuronidation of ethinyloestradiol in human liver in vitro. J Steroid Biochem 31: 345-349.[CrossRef][Medline]
Paulusma CC and Oude Elferink RP (1997) The canalicular multispecific organic anion transporter and conjugated hyperbilirubinemia in rat and man. J Mol Med 75: 420-428.[CrossRef][Medline]
Ploemen J, van Ommen B, and van Bladeren PJ (1990) Inhibition of rat and human glutathione S-transferase isoenzymes by ethacrynic acid and its glutathione conjugate. Biochem Pharmacol 40: 1631-1635.[CrossRef][Medline]
Qian YM, Song WC, Cui H, Cole SP, and Deeley RG (2001) Glutathione stimulates sulfated estrogen transport by multidrug resistance protein 1. J Biol Chem 276: 6404-6411.
Renes J, de Vries EG, Nienhuis EF, Jansen PL, and Muller M (1999) ATP- and glutathione-dependent transport of chemotherapeutic drugs by the multidrug resistance protein MRP1. Br J Pharmacol 126: 681-688.[CrossRef][Medline]
Rogers SM, Back DJ, and Orme ML (1987) Intestinal metabolism of ethinyloestradiol and paracetamol in vitro: studies using Ussing chambers. Br J Clin Pharmacol 23: 727-734.[Medline]
Sakamoto H, Hara H, Hirano K, and Adachi T (1999) Enhancement of glucuronosyl etoposide transport by glutathione in multidrug resistance-associated protein-overexpressing cells. Cancer Lett 135: 113-119.[CrossRef][Medline]
Schaub TP, Kartenbeck J, Kõnig J, Spring H, Dorsam J, Staehler G, Storkel S, Thon WF, and Keppler D (1999) Expression of the MRP2 gene-encoded conjugate export pump in human kidney proximal tubules and in renal cell carcinoma. J Am Soc Nephrol 10: 1159-1169.
Schaub TP, Kartenbeck J, Kõnig J, Vogel O, Witzgall R, Kriz W, and Keppler D (1997) Expression of the conjugate export pump encoded by the mrp2 gene in the apical membrane of kidney proximal tubules. J Am Soc Nephrol 8: 1213-1221.[Abstract]
Scheffer GL, Kool M, de Haas M, de Vree JM, Pijnenborg AC, Bosman DK, Elferink RP, van der Valk P, Borst P, and Scheper RJ (2002) Tissue distribution and induction of human multidrug resistant protein 3. Lab Investig 82: 193-201.[Medline]
St-Pierre MV, Serrano MA, Macias RI, Dubs U, Hoechli M, Lauper U, Meier PJ, and Marin JJ (2000) Expression of members of the multidrug resistance protein family in human term placenta. Am J Physiol 279: R1495-R1503.
Stockley IH (1999) Oral contraceptive and related sex hormone drug interactions, in Drug Interactions (Stockley IH ed) pp 417-433, The Pharmaceutical Press, London.
Zaman GJ, Flens MJ, van Leusden MR, de Haas M, Mulder HS, Lankelma J, Pinedo HM, Scheper RJ, Baas F, and Broxterman HJ (1994) The human multidrug resistance-associated protein MRP is a plasma membrane drug-efflux pump. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 91: 8822-8826.
Zelcer N, Huisman MT, Reid G, Wielinga P, Breedveld P, Kuil A, Knipscheer P, Schellens JH, Schinkel AH, and Borst P (2003a) Evidence for two interacting ligand binding sites in human multidrug resistance protein 2 (ATP binding cassette C2). J Biol Chem 278: 23538-23544.
Zelcer N, Saeki T, Bot I, Kuil A, and Borst P (2003b) Transport of bile acids in multidrug-resistance-protein 3-overexpressing cells co-transfected with the ileal Na+-dependent bile-acid transporter. Biochem J 369: 23-30.[CrossRef][Medline]
This article has been cited by other articles:
|
|
 |
|
  P. M. Gerk, W. Li, V. Megaraj, and M. Vore Human Multidrug Resistance Protein 2 Transports the Therapeutic Bile Salt Tauroursodeoxycholate J. Pharmacol. Exp. Ther., February 1, 2007; 320(2): 893 - 899. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 R. G. Deeley, C. Westlake, and S. P. C. Cole Transmembrane Transport of Endo- and Xenobiotics by Mammalian ATP-Binding Cassette Multidrug Resistance Proteins. Physiol Rev, July 1, 2006; 86(3): 849 - 899. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 Y.-H. Huang, C.-Y. Lee, P.-J. Tai, C.-C. Yen, C.-Y. Liao, W.-J. Chen, C.-J. Liao, W.-L. Cheng, R.-N. Chen, S.-M. Wu, et al. Indirect Regulation of Human Dehydroepiandrosterone Sulfotransferase Family 1A Member 2 by Thyroid Hormones Endocrinology, May 1, 2006; 147(5): 2481 - 2489. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 C. S. Morrow, C. Peklak-Scott, B. Bishwokarma, T. E. Kute, P. K. Smitherman, and A. J. Townsend Multidrug Resistance Protein 1 (MRP1, ABCC1) Mediates Resistance to Mitoxantrone via Glutathione-Dependent Drug Efflux Mol. Pharmacol., April 1, 2006; 69(4): 1499 - 1505. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
H.-L. Fang, S. C. Strom, H. Cai, C. N. Falany, T. A. Kocarek, and M. Runge-Morris Regulation of Human Hepatic Hydroxysteroid Sulfotransferase Gene Expression by the Peroxisome Proliferator-Activated Receptor {alpha} Transcription Factor Mol. Pharmacol., April 1, 2005; 67(4): 1257 - 1267. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
Z.-S. Chen, Y. Guo, M. G. Belinsky, E. Kotova, and G. D. Kruh Transport of Bile Acids, Sulfated Steroids, Estradiol 17-{beta}-D-Glucuronide, and Leukotriene C4 by Human Multidrug Resistance Protein 8 (ABCC11) Mol. Pharmacol., February 1, 2005; 67(2): 545 - 557. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 P. M. Gerk, W. Li, and M. Vore ESTRADIOL 3-GLUCURONIDE IS TRANSPORTED BY THE MULTIDRUG RESISTANCE-ASSOCIATED PROTEIN 2 BUT DOES NOT ACTIVATE THE ALLOSTERIC SITE BOUND BY ESTRADIOL 17-GLUCURONIDE Drug Metab. Dispos., October 1, 2004; 32(10): 1139 - 1145. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
