4.7 Article

ABC transporters and the accumulation of imatinib and its active metabolite CGP74588 in rat C6 glioma cells

期刊

PHARMACOLOGICAL RESEARCH
卷 57, 期 3, 页码 214-222

出版社

ACADEMIC PRESS LTD ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.phrs.2008.01.006

关键词

imatinib; blood-brain barrier; ABC transporters; glioma

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Imatinib (Glivec(R), Gleevec(R), ST1571) is a small tyrosine kinase inhibitor that is currently in phase 11 clinical trials in patients with recurrent glioblastoma. Its therapeutic benefit is minimal, although it is greater in some patients when combined with hydroxyurea. Imatinib is transported by human and rodent ATP-binding cassette (ABC) transporters like P-glycoprotein (Pap) and the breast cancer resistance protein (BCRP). We have investigated whether ABC transporters determine the pharmacokinetics of imatinib and its pharmacological active metabolite CGP74588 in rat C6 glioma cells. ABC transporter expressions were measured by quantitative reverse transcriptase-polymerase chain reaction (qRT-PCR). C6 cells express high concentrations of the Pgp-encoding gene Mdr1b and a 10-fold smaller amount of the Pgp-encoding gene Mdr1a. The relative expression of ABC transporter genes are: Mdr1b>Mrp4>Mrp1>Mrp5>Mdr1a>Mrp3>Mrp2>Bcrp. The accumulation of imatinib into C6 cells increased linearly with the extracellular concentration of imatinib (0.5-50 mu M) and was not increased by zosuquidar (selective Pap inhibitor) or elacridar (inhibitor of both Pap and Bcrp). In contrast, there was less CGP74588 than imatinib in C6 cells and its concentration increased with the extracellular concentration in a sigmoid fashion. Lastly, 10 mu M valspodar (selective Pap inhibitor), elacridar and zosuquidar all increased the accumulation of CGP74588 by 2.5-fold. Thus CGP74588 is readily transported by the Pap in rat C6 gliomas cells, which raises the question of the role of Pap in the resistance of recurrent glioblastomas to imatinib. (C) 2008 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据