Skip to main content
Advertisement

Main menu

  • Home
  • Articles
    • Current Issue
    • Fast Forward
    • Latest Articles
    • Archive
  • Information
    • Instructions to Authors
    • Submit a Manuscript
    • FAQs
    • For Subscribers
    • Terms & Conditions of Use
    • Permissions
  • Editorial Board
  • Alerts
    • Alerts
    • RSS Feeds
  • Virtual Issues
  • Feedback
  • Other Publications
    • Drug Metabolism and Disposition
    • Journal of Pharmacology and Experimental Therapeutics
    • Molecular Pharmacology
    • Pharmacological Reviews
    • Pharmacology Research & Perspectives
    • ASPET

User menu

  • My alerts
  • Log in
  • My Cart

Search

  • Advanced search
Journal of Pharmacology and Experimental Therapeutics
  • Other Publications
    • Drug Metabolism and Disposition
    • Journal of Pharmacology and Experimental Therapeutics
    • Molecular Pharmacology
    • Pharmacological Reviews
    • Pharmacology Research & Perspectives
    • ASPET
  • My alerts
  • Log in
  • My Cart
Journal of Pharmacology and Experimental Therapeutics

Advanced Search

  • Home
  • Articles
    • Current Issue
    • Fast Forward
    • Latest Articles
    • Archive
  • Information
    • Instructions to Authors
    • Submit a Manuscript
    • FAQs
    • For Subscribers
    • Terms & Conditions of Use
    • Permissions
  • Editorial Board
  • Alerts
    • Alerts
    • RSS Feeds
  • Virtual Issues
  • Feedback
  • Visit jpet on Facebook
  • Follow jpet on Twitter
  • Follow jpet on LinkedIn
Research ArticleResponse to Letter to the Editor

Response to “Tenofovir Disoproxil Fumarate Is Not an Inhibitor of Human Organic Cation Transporter 1”

Gerard Minuesa, Christopher Albert, Marçal Pastor-Anglada, Javier Martinez-Picado and Hermann Koepsell
Journal of Pharmacology and Experimental Therapeutics February 2017, 360 (2) 343-345; DOI: https://doi.org/10.1124/jpet.116.239004
Gerard Minuesa
IrsiCaixa Foundation, Hospital Germans Trias i Pujol, Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona, Badalona, Spain (G.M., J.M.-P.); Institute of Anatomy and Cell Biology, University of Würzburg, Würzburg, Germany (C.A., H.K.); Departament de Bioquímica i Biomedicina Molecular, Facultat de Biologia, Institut de Biomedicina, Universitat de Barcelona (IBUB) and Centro de Investigación Biomédica en Red-Enfermedades Hepáticas y Digestivas (CIBER EHD), Barcelona, Spain (M.P.-A.); Institució Catalana de Recerca i Estudis Avançats, Barcelona, Spain (J.M.-P.); Department of Molecular Plant Physiology and Biophysics, Julius-von-Sachs-Institute, University of Würzburg, Würzburg, Germany (H.K.)
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Christopher Albert
IrsiCaixa Foundation, Hospital Germans Trias i Pujol, Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona, Badalona, Spain (G.M., J.M.-P.); Institute of Anatomy and Cell Biology, University of Würzburg, Würzburg, Germany (C.A., H.K.); Departament de Bioquímica i Biomedicina Molecular, Facultat de Biologia, Institut de Biomedicina, Universitat de Barcelona (IBUB) and Centro de Investigación Biomédica en Red-Enfermedades Hepáticas y Digestivas (CIBER EHD), Barcelona, Spain (M.P.-A.); Institució Catalana de Recerca i Estudis Avançats, Barcelona, Spain (J.M.-P.); Department of Molecular Plant Physiology and Biophysics, Julius-von-Sachs-Institute, University of Würzburg, Würzburg, Germany (H.K.)
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Marçal Pastor-Anglada
IrsiCaixa Foundation, Hospital Germans Trias i Pujol, Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona, Badalona, Spain (G.M., J.M.-P.); Institute of Anatomy and Cell Biology, University of Würzburg, Würzburg, Germany (C.A., H.K.); Departament de Bioquímica i Biomedicina Molecular, Facultat de Biologia, Institut de Biomedicina, Universitat de Barcelona (IBUB) and Centro de Investigación Biomédica en Red-Enfermedades Hepáticas y Digestivas (CIBER EHD), Barcelona, Spain (M.P.-A.); Institució Catalana de Recerca i Estudis Avançats, Barcelona, Spain (J.M.-P.); Department of Molecular Plant Physiology and Biophysics, Julius-von-Sachs-Institute, University of Würzburg, Würzburg, Germany (H.K.)
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Javier Martinez-Picado
IrsiCaixa Foundation, Hospital Germans Trias i Pujol, Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona, Badalona, Spain (G.M., J.M.-P.); Institute of Anatomy and Cell Biology, University of Würzburg, Würzburg, Germany (C.A., H.K.); Departament de Bioquímica i Biomedicina Molecular, Facultat de Biologia, Institut de Biomedicina, Universitat de Barcelona (IBUB) and Centro de Investigación Biomédica en Red-Enfermedades Hepáticas y Digestivas (CIBER EHD), Barcelona, Spain (M.P.-A.); Institució Catalana de Recerca i Estudis Avançats, Barcelona, Spain (J.M.-P.); Department of Molecular Plant Physiology and Biophysics, Julius-von-Sachs-Institute, University of Würzburg, Würzburg, Germany (H.K.)
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Hermann Koepsell
IrsiCaixa Foundation, Hospital Germans Trias i Pujol, Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona, Badalona, Spain (G.M., J.M.-P.); Institute of Anatomy and Cell Biology, University of Würzburg, Würzburg, Germany (C.A., H.K.); Departament de Bioquímica i Biomedicina Molecular, Facultat de Biologia, Institut de Biomedicina, Universitat de Barcelona (IBUB) and Centro de Investigación Biomédica en Red-Enfermedades Hepáticas y Digestivas (CIBER EHD), Barcelona, Spain (M.P.-A.); Institució Catalana de Recerca i Estudis Avançats, Barcelona, Spain (J.M.-P.); Department of Molecular Plant Physiology and Biophysics, Julius-von-Sachs-Institute, University of Würzburg, Würzburg, Germany (H.K.)
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • Article
  • Figures & Data
  • Info & Metrics
  • eLetters
  • PDF
Loading

On the basis of experiments reported in their letter, Shen and coworkers concluded that tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (TDF) is not an inhibitor of human organic cation transporter 1 (OCT1). They expressed their concern that high-affinity inhibition of the uptake of N-methyl-4-phenylpyridinium (MPP+) in OCT1-expressing Chinese hamster ovary (CHO) cells observed earlier (Minuesa et al., 2009) was the result of an experimental artifact. In response, we would like to emphasize that the measurements reported by Shen and coworkers do not justify such a general conclusion, because they were performed under experimental conditions that did not necessarily allow detection of the inhibition of OCT1 by TDF. In drawing their conclusion, Shen and coworkers did not consider data concerning the complex functional mechanism of polyspecific organic cation transporters and that OCT1 contains high-affinity cation binding sites that are supposed to modulate transport and affinities of inhibitors (Gorbunov et al., 2008; Koepsell, 2011, 2015; Nies et al., 2011). Shen and coworkers measured OCT1-mediated uptake under different experimental conditions and investigated effects of TDF and MPP+ uptake by using a 80-fold higher concentration of MPP+ for the uptake measurements. Whereas Shen and coworkers measured uptake of 1 μM MPP+ in confluent cell layers after incubation for 1 minute or longer, we measured uptake of 0.0125 μM MPP+ in dissociated cells using an incubation time of 1 second.

We would first like to respond to the concerns raised by Shen and coworkers about whether OCT1-mediated MPP+ uptake expressed in CHO cells or nonspecific uptake of MPP+ had been determined in our 1-second uptake measurements. In CHO cells stably transfected with human OCT1 the uptake of 1 μM [3H]MPP+ was 10-times higher compared with CHO cells that were stably transfected with an empty vector (Fig. 1). Whereas the uptake of [3H]MPP+ in OCT1-expressing CHO cells was 95% inhibited when 5 mM nonradioactive MPP+ was present during the incubation, [3H]MPP+ uptake in mock-transfected CHO cells was not significantly decreased by 5 mM nonradioactive MPP+. The data confirm that high-affinity inhibition of TDF and the other compounds, as described previously, are attributable to inhibition of OCT1-mediated transport.

Fig. 1.
  • Download figure
  • Open in new tab
  • Download powerpoint
Fig. 1.

MPP+ uptake in CHO cells stably transfected with human OCT1 compared with CHO cells that had been stably transfected with the empty vector pcDNA5. In dissociated cells 1-second uptake of 1 μM radioactively labeled MPP+ was measured in the absence or presence of 5 mM nonradioactive MPP+. A representative experiment is shown. Mean values ± SEM of four determinations are indicated. ***P < 0.001 tested by ANOVA with posthoc Tukey comparison; n.s., difference is not significant.

The different assay conditions employed by Shen and coworkers may have contributed to the failure to observe inhibition of OCT1-mediated uptake by TDF, because in confluent cells using relatively long incubation times for uptake measurements lower affinities of cations are observed compared with 1-second measurements in dissociated cells. In recent measurements, we observed a 6-fold higher Km value for MPP+ uptake in human embryonic kidney (HEK)293 cells stably transfected with rat OCT1, when uptake was measured in confluent cells when 2-minute uptake measurements were performed compared with 1-second uptake measurements in dissociated cells (S. Rahman, V. Gorboulev, C. M. Albert, U. Roth, M. Meyer, M. Tzvetkov, T. D. Mueller, H. Koepsell, unpublished data). Likewise, for MPP+ uptake by HEK293 cells stably transfected with human OCT1, a Km value of 79 ± 17 μM was obtained using 2-minute uptake measurements in confluent cells (see Supplemental Table 1 in Matthaei et al., 2016), whereas we determined a Km value of 9.95 ± 0.32 μM for MPP+ uptake by dissociated CHO cells stably transfected with human OCT1 using 1-second uptake measurements (see Fig. S4C in Minuesa et al., 2009). The different Km values obtained in the different uptake assays could be the result of three factors. First, in the absence of intracellular substrate, OCT1 operates as an electrogenic cation uniporter, whereas OCT1 operates as electroneutral cation exchanger in the presence of a saturating intracellular substrate concentration (Koepsell, 2011). When 1-second uptake measurements are performed, most probably the electrogenic uniport transport mode is determined, whereas the electroneutral antiporter mode may be analyzed when uptake is measured using an incubation time of 1 or 2 minutes. Different transport modes are also suggested by the observation that the rate of MPP+ uptake within the first seconds is much higher than later on (see Fig. S4A in Minuesa et al., 2009, and Fig. D in the letter of Shen and coworkers). Second, the regulatory state of OCT1, which has an impact on affinities of substrates and inhibitors (Ciarimboli and Schlatter, 2005), may be different in confluent versus dissociated cells, as has been discussed for human OCT2 (Thévenod et al., 2013). Third, during incubation of confluent cells with substrate using gentle shaking, unstirred layer effects may lead to determination of high apparent Km and IC50 values compared with 1-second uptake measurements in dissociated cells performed using vigorous shaking (Minuesa et al., 2009).

The relatively high substrate concentrations used by Shen and coworkers in their uptake measurements (1 μM MPP+ and 2 μM for metformin) are probably a major reason for the failure to detect inhibition of OCT1 by TDF. Recently we observed that rat OCT1 contains two MPP+ binding sites per transporter monomer with relatively low dissociation constant KD values similar to the Km value of MPP+ (T. Keller, V. Gorboulev, F. Bernhard, V. Dötsch, H. Koepsell, unpublished data). These binding sites are supposed to be directly involved in cation translocation. In addition, rat OCT1 contains high-affinity cation binding sites that probably modulate cation transport allosterically (Gorbunov et al., 2008; Koepsell, 2015). When transport is measured in the presence of different cation concentrations far below the respective Km value, different loading of the high-affinity cation binding sites by the substrate may alter the structure of the cation binding region and thereby influence binding and effects of inhibitors. In a previous review, the impact of substrate concentrations on affinities of inhibitors was suggested to explain different inhibitor affinities reported from different laboratories (Nies et al., 2011). As an example, for inhibition of MPP+ uptake in HEK293 cells transfected with human OCT1, an IC50 value of 0.4 μM was reported using a MPP+ concentration of 0.1 μM and 1-minute incubation of confluent cells for uptake measurements (Jung et al., 2008), whereas in confluent CHO cells transfected with human OCT1, an IC50 of 16 μM was determined using 1 μM MPP+ and 4-minute incubation (Ming et al., 2009). In Fig. 2 we present data showing clear differences in IC50 values for inhibition by pentamidine of HEK293 cells transfected with human OCT1 and for inhibition of human OCT2 by quinindine when different MPP+ concentrations far below the Km value of MPP+ were used for the uptake measurements. For inhibition of OCT1-expressed uptake by pentamidine, respective IC50 values of 11.1 ± 3.2 μM and 7.8 ± 2.5 μM were obtained when uptake was measured with 0.1 μM or 1 μM MPP+, whereas an IC50 of 0.46 ± 0.2 μM was determined when uptake of 0.1 nM MPP+ was measured (mean values ± S.D. from three independent experiments, P < 0.01 significances for difference of measurements with 0.1 and 1 μM MPP+ versus measurement with 0.1 nM MPP+). Measuring the inhibition of OCT2-expressed MPP+ uptake by quinindine using 1 nM, 0.1 μM, or 1 μM MPP+ for the uptake measurements, we observed lower IC50 values with 0.1 μM and 1 μM MPP+ (4.6 ± 0.7 μM and 5.6 ± 3.6 μM, respectively) compared with 1 nM MPP+ (124 ± 20 μM) (mean values ± S.D. from three independent experiments, P < 0.001 significance for difference of measurements with 0.1 and 1 μM MPP+ versus measurement with 1 nM MPP+).

Fig. 2.
  • Download figure
  • Open in new tab
  • Download powerpoint
Fig. 2.

Inhibition of cation uptake mediated by OCT1 and OCT2 may be inhibited with different affinities when different substrate concentrations far below their Km values are employed. Inhibition of human OCT1 by different concentrations of pentamidine or of human OCT2 by different concentrations of quinidine was measured in HEK293 cells that had been stably transfected with OCT1 or OCT2. Uptake in the presence of pentamidine or quinidine was measured by incubating dissociated cells for 1 second with MPP+ concentrations of 0.1 nM, 1 nM, 0.1 μM, or 1 μM. Mean values ± S.E.M. of 12 determinations from three experiments are indicated. The curves were obtained by fitting the Hill equation to the data.

The observation that not only the molecular structure of OCT substrates (Thévenod et al., 2013) but also their concentration may have a dramatic impact on the affinity of inhibitors must be considered for in vitro testing of new drugs for drug-drug interactions (Koepsell, 2015). In fact, rilpivirine, a non-nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor approved for use in treatment-naive adult HIV-infected patients and frequently administered in combination with TDF and emtricitabine (FTC), has shown inhibition of OCT1 in vitro (Moss et al., 2013). Thus, interaction of multiple antiretroviral drugs with OCT1 should always be considered to unveil potential drug-drug interactions. To determine a potential interaction of a new drug with OCT1, OCT2, and/or OCT3 with a drug that is translocated by the respective transporter, inhibition of clinically relevant free concentrations of the transported drug by the new drug has to be investigated.

Footnotes

    • Received November 11, 2016.
    • Accepted November 11, 2016.
  • This Letter to the Editor is in response to

    “Tenofovir Disoproxil Fumarate Is Not an Inhibitor of Human Organic Cation Transporter 1” by Shen H, Li W, Humphreys WG, and Lai Y” found in J Pharmacol Exp Ther 2017, 360:341–342.

  • dx.doi.org/10.1124/jpet.116.239004.

Abbreviations

CHO
Chinese hamster ovary
HEK
human embryonic kidney
MPP+
N-methyl-4-phenylpyridinium
OCT1
organic cation transporter 1
TDF
tenofovir disoproxil fumarate
  • Copyright © 2017 by The American Society for Pharmacology and Experimental Therapeutics

References

  1. ↵
    1. Ciarimboli G and
    2. Schlatter E
    (2005) Regulation of organic cation transport. Pflugers Arch 449:423–441.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  2. ↵
    1. Gorbunov D,
    2. Gorboulev V,
    3. Shatskaya N,
    4. Mueller T,
    5. Bamberg E,
    6. Friedrich T, and
    7. Koepsell H
    (2008) High-affinity cation binding to organic cation transporter 1 induces movement of helix 11 and blocks transport after mutations in a modeled interaction domain between two helices. Mol Pharmacol 73:50–61.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  3. ↵
    1. Jung N,
    2. Lehmann C,
    3. Rubbert A,
    4. Knispel M,
    5. Hartmann P,
    6. van Lunzen J,
    7. Stellbrink H-J,
    8. Faetkenheuer G, and
    9. Taubert D
    (2008) Relevance of the organic cation transporters 1 and 2 for antiretroviral drug therapy in human immunodeficiency virus infection. Drug Metab Dispos 36:1616–1623.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  4. ↵
    1. Koepsell H
    (2011) Substrate recognition and translocation by polyspecific organic cation transporters. Biol Chem 392:95–101.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  5. ↵
    1. Koepsell H
    (2015) Role of organic cation transporters in drug-drug interaction. Expert Opin Drug Metab Toxicol 11:1619–1633.
    OpenUrl
  6. ↵
    1. Matthaei J,
    2. Kuron D,
    3. Faltraco F,
    4. Knoch T,
    5. Dos Santos Pereira JN,
    6. Abu Abed M,
    7. Prukop T,
    8. Brockmöller J, and
    9. Tzvetkov MV
    (2016) OCT1 mediates hepatic uptake of sumatriptan and loss-of-function OCT1 polymorphisms affect sumatriptan pharmacokinetics. Clin Pharmacol Ther 99:633–641.
    OpenUrl
  7. ↵
    1. Ming X,
    2. Ju W,
    3. Wu H,
    4. Tidwell RR,
    5. Hall JE, and
    6. Thakker DR
    (2009) Transport of dicationic drugs pentamidine and furamidine by human organic cation transporters. Drug Metab Dispos 37:424–430.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  8. ↵
    1. Minuesa G,
    2. Volk C,
    3. Molina-Arcas M,
    4. Gorboulev V,
    5. Erkizia I,
    6. Arndt P,
    7. Clotet B,
    8. Pastor-Anglada M,
    9. Koepsell H, and
    10. Martinez-Picado J
    (2009) Transport of lamivudine [(-)-beta-L-2′,3′-dideoxy-3′-thiacytidine] and high-affinity interaction of nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitors with human organic cation transporters 1, 2, and 3. J Pharmacol Exp Ther 329:252–261.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  9. ↵
    1. Moss DM,
    2. Liptrott NJ,
    3. Curley P,
    4. Siccardi M,
    5. Back DJ, and
    6. Owen A
    (2013) Rilpivirine inhibits drug transporters ABCB1, SLC22A1, and SLC22A2 in vitro. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 57:5612–5618.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  10. ↵
    1. Nies AT,
    2. Koepsell H,
    3. Damme K, and
    4. Schwab M
    (2011) Organic cation transporters (OCTs, MATEs), in vitro and in vivo evidence for the importance in drug therapy. Handb Exp Pharmacol (201):105–167.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  11. ↵
    1. Thévenod F,
    2. Ciarimboli G,
    3. Leistner M,
    4. Wolff NA,
    5. Lee W-K,
    6. Schatz I,
    7. Keller T,
    8. Al-Monajjed R,
    9. Gorboulev V, and
    10. Koepsell H
    (2013) Substrate- and cell contact-dependent inhibitor affinity of human organic cation transporter 2: studies with two classical organic cation substrates and the novel substrate cd2+. Mol Pharm 10:3045–3056.
    OpenUrlCrossRef
PreviousNext
Back to top

In this issue

Journal of Pharmacology and Experimental Therapeutics: 360 (2)
Journal of Pharmacology and Experimental Therapeutics
Vol. 360, Issue 2
1 Feb 2017
  • Table of Contents
  • Table of Contents (PDF)
  • About the Cover
  • Index by author
  • Editorial Board (PDF)
  • Front Matter (PDF)
Download PDF
Article Alerts
Sign In to Email Alerts with your Email Address
Email Article

Thank you for sharing this Journal of Pharmacology and Experimental Therapeutics article.

NOTE: We request your email address only to inform the recipient that it was you who recommended this article, and that it is not junk mail. We do not retain these email addresses.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
Response to “Tenofovir Disoproxil Fumarate Is Not an Inhibitor of Human Organic Cation Transporter 1”
(Your Name) has forwarded a page to you from Journal of Pharmacology and Experimental Therapeutics
(Your Name) thought you would be interested in this article in Journal of Pharmacology and Experimental Therapeutics.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
Citation Tools
Research ArticleResponse to Letter to the Editor

Response Letters

Gerard Minuesa, Christopher Albert, Marçal Pastor-Anglada, Javier Martinez-Picado and Hermann Koepsell
Journal of Pharmacology and Experimental Therapeutics February 1, 2017, 360 (2) 343-345; DOI: https://doi.org/10.1124/jpet.116.239004

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero
Share
Research ArticleResponse to Letter to the Editor

Response Letters

Gerard Minuesa, Christopher Albert, Marçal Pastor-Anglada, Javier Martinez-Picado and Hermann Koepsell
Journal of Pharmacology and Experimental Therapeutics February 1, 2017, 360 (2) 343-345; DOI: https://doi.org/10.1124/jpet.116.239004
del.icio.us logo Digg logo Reddit logo Twitter logo CiteULike logo Facebook logo Google logo Mendeley logo
  • Tweet Widget
  • Facebook Like
  • Google Plus One

Jump to section

  • Article
    • Footnotes
    • Abbreviations
    • References
  • Figures & Data
  • Info & Metrics
  • eLetters
  • PDF

Related Articles

Cited By...

Similar Articles

  • Home
  • Alerts
Facebook   Twitter   LinkedIn   RSS

Navigate

  • Current Issue
  • Fast Forward by date
  • Fast Forward by section
  • Latest Articles
  • Archive
  • Search for Articles
  • Feedback
  • ASPET

More Information

  • About JPET
  • Editorial Board
  • Instructions to Authors
  • Submit a Manuscript
  • Customized Alerts
  • RSS Feeds
  • Subscriptions
  • Permissions
  • Terms & Conditions of Use

ASPET's Other Journals

  • Drug Metabolism and Disposition
  • Molecular Pharmacology
  • Pharmacological Reviews
  • Pharmacology Research & Perspectives
ISSN 1521-0103 (Online)

Copyright © 2021 by the American Society for Pharmacology and Experimental Therapeutics