4.6 Article

Effects of fish cytochromes P450 inducers and inhibitors on difloxacin N-demethylation in kidney of Chinese idle (Ctenopharyngodon idellus)

期刊

ENVIRONMENTAL TOXICOLOGY AND PHARMACOLOGY
卷 29, 期 3, 页码 202-208

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE BV
DOI: 10.1016/j.etap.2009.11.008

关键词

Cytochromes P450; Difloxacin; Inhibition; Induction; Kinetic

资金

  1. earmarked fund for Modern Agro-Industry Technology Research System [NYCYTX-49-17]
  2. Eleventh Five-Year Plan [2006BAD03B04]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Cytochromes P450 (CYPs) play key roles in drug metabolism which are widely distributed in kidney in aquatic organisms. CYP(s) mainly catalyzed the N-demethylation reaction of difloxacin (DIF) biotransformation to sarafloxacin (SAR). However, limited information is available about CYP investigation in fish. In order to supply useful information on CYP(s) characterization for DIF N-demethylation, the present study assessed the effects of fish potent CYP inducers and inhibitors on DIF N-demethylation and the inductive and inhibitive enzyme kinetics in kidney of Chinese idle (Ctenopharyngodon idellus) by reversed-phase high-performance liquid chromatography (RP-HPLC). Results demonstrated that the amounts of SAR formation pretreated by beta-naphthoflavone (BNF) increased by 1.1-fold and alpha-naphthoflavone (ANF) inhibited SAR formation level by 0.6-fold at the third day. Enzymatic parameters V-max and Cl-int of DIF N-demethylase were increased by 0.56- and 0.38-fold due to beta-naphthoflavone (BNF) pretreatment. DIF N-demethylation inhibition by varying ANF concentrations represented a mixed-type inhibition with the value of the inhibition constants (K-i) 12.9 mg/kg. BNF and ANF are the separate typical inducer and inhibitor for CYP1A in fish. Thus, we suggest that CYP1A may be responsible for DIF N-demethylation in kidney. This study provides instructive information to ensure treatment success in fisheries medication with two or more drugs. (C) 2009 Published by Elsevier B.V.

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

4.6
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