The human placenta fulfills a variety of essential functions during prenatal life. Several ABC transporters are expressed in the human placenta, where they play a role in the transport of endogenous compounds and may protect the fetus from exogenous compounds such as therapeutic agents, drugs of abuse, and other xenobiotics. To date, considerable progress has been made toward understanding ABC transporters in the placenta. Recent studies on the expression and functional activities are discussed. This review discusses the placental expression and functional roles of several members of ABC transporter subfamilies B, C, and G including MDR1/P-glycoprotein, the MRPs, and BCRP, respectively. Since placental ABC transporters modulate fetal exposure to various compounds, an understanding of their functional and regulatory mechanisms will lead to more optimal medication use when necessary in pregnancy.

The dynorphin (Dyn) A analog zyklophin ([N-benzyl-Tyr1-cyclo(D-Asp5,Dap8)]dynorphin A(1-11)NH2) is a kappa opioid receptor (KOR) selective antagonist in vitro, is active in vivo and antagonizes KOR in the CNS after systemic administration. Hence, we synthesized zyklophin analogs to explore the structure-activity relationships of this peptide. The synthesis of selected analogs required modification to introduce the N-terminal amino acid due to poor solubility and/or to avoid epimerization of this residue. Among the N-terminal modifications the N-phenethyl and the N-cyclopropylmethyl substitutions resulted in the analogs with the highest KOR affinities. Pharmacological results for the alanine-substituted analogs indicated that Phe4 and Arg6, but interestingly not the Tyr1, phenol are important for zyklophin’s KOR affinity, and Arg7 was important for KOR antagonist activity. In the GTPγS assay while all of the cyclic analogs exhibited negligible KOR efficacy, the N-phenethyl-Tyr1, N-CPM-Tyr1 and the N-benzyl-Phe1 analogs were 8- to 24-fold more potent KOR antagonists than zyklophin.

The present study investigated the potential of generally recognized as safe (GRAS) compounds or dietary substances to inhibit the presystemic metabolism of buprenorphine and to increase its oral bioavailability. Using IVIVE, buprenorphine extraction ratios in intestine and liver were predicted as 96% and 71%, respectively. In addition, the relative fraction of buprenorphine metabolized by oxidation and glucuronidation in these two organs was estimated using pooled human intestinal and liver microsomes. In both organs, oxidation appeared to be the major metabolic pathway with a 6 and 4 fold higher intrinsic clearance than glucuronidation in intestine and liver, respectively. The oral bioavailability of buprenorphine was predicted to be 1.16%. Inhibition of 75% and 50% of intestinal and hepatic presystemic metabolism would result in an F of 49%, which is comparable to the bioavailability of sublingual buprenorphine. In human liver microsomes, chrysin, curcumin, ginger extract, hesperitin, magnolol, quercetin and silybin inhibited ≥50% glucuronidation, whereas chrysin, curcumin, ginger extract, 6-gingerol, pterostilbene, resveratrol and silybin exhibited ≥30% inhibition of oxidation. In human intestinal microsomes, curcumin, ginger extract, α-mangostin, quercetin and silybin inhibited ≥50% glucuronidation while chrysin, ginger extract, α-mangostin, pterostilbene and resveratrol exhibited ≥30% inhibition of oxidation. These results demonstrate the feasibility of our proposed approach of using GRAS or dietary compounds to inhibit the presystemic metabolism of buprenorphine and thus improve its oral bioavailability. An oral buprenorphine formulation containing these inhibitors or their combinations has promising potential to replace sublingual buprenorphine. Copyright © 2016 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

A rapid and sensitive LC-MS/MS method was developed and validated for the simultaneous determination of buprenorphine and its three metabolites (buprenorphine glucuronide, norbuprenorphine and norbuprenorphine glucuronide) as well as naloxone and its metabolite naloxone glucuronide in the rat plasma. A hydrophilic interaction chromatography column and a mobile phase containing acetonitrile and ammonium formate buffer (pH 3.5) were used for the chromatographic separation. Mass spectrometric detection was achieved by an electrospray ionization source in the positive mode coupled to a triple quadrupole mass analyzer. The calibration curves for the six analytes displayed good linearity over the concentration range 1.0 or 5.0-1000 ng/mL. The intra and inter-day precision (CV) ranged from 2.68 to 16.4% and from 9.02 to 14.5%, respectively. The intra- and inter-day accuracy (bias) ranged from -14.2 to 15.2% and from -9.00 to 4.80%, respectively. The extraction recoveries for all the analytes ranged from 55 to 86.9%. The LC-MS/MS method was successfully applied to a pharmacokinetic study of buprenorphine-naloxone combination in rats.

Purpose: Carboplatin dose is calculated based on kidney function, commonly estimated with imperfect creatinine-based formulae. Iohexol is used to measure glomerular filtration rate (GFR) and allows calculation of a more appropriate carboplatin dose. To address potential concerns that iohexol administered during a course of chemotherapy impacts that therapy, we performed in vitro and in vivo pharmacokinetic drug-drug interaction evaluations of iohexol.Methods: Carboplatin was administered IV to female mice at 60 mg/kg with or without iohexol at 300 mg/kg. Plasma ultrafiltrate, kidney and bone marrow platinum was quantitated by atomic absorption spectrophotometry. Paclitaxel microsomal and gemcitabine cytosolic metabolism as well as metabolism of CYP and UGT probes was assessed with and without iohexol at 300 μg/mL by LC-MS/MS. Results:In vivo carboplatin exposure was not significantly affected by iohexol co-administration (platinum AUC combination vs alone: plasma ultrafiltrate 1,791 vs 1,920 μg/mL•min; kidney 8,367 vs 9,757 μg/g•min; bone marrow 12.7 vs 12.7 μg/mg-protein•min). Paclitaxel microsomal metabolism was not impacted (combination vs alone: 6-α-OH-paclitaxel 38.3 versus 39.4 ng/mL/ 60min; 3-p-OH-paclitaxel 26.2 versus 27.7 ng/mL/60min). Gemcitabine human cytosolic elimination was not impacted (AUC combination vs gemcitabine alone: dFdU 24.1 versus 23.7