Search

Sacubitril was recently approved by the Food and Drug Administration for use in combination with valsartan for the treatment of patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction. As a prodrug, sacubitril must be metabolized (hydrolyzed) to its active metabolite sacubitrilat (LBQ657) to exert its intended therapeutic effects. Thus, understanding the determinants of sacubitril activation will lead to the improvement of sacubitril pharmacotherapy. The objective of this study was to identify the enzyme(s) responsible for the activation of sacubitril, and determine the impact of genetic variation on sacubitril activation. First, an incubation study of sacubitril with human plasma and the S9 fractions of human liver, intestine, and kidney was conducted. Sacubitril was found to be activated by human liver S9 fractions only. Moreover, sacubitril activation was significantly inhibited by the carboxylesterase 1 (CES1) inhibitor bis-(p-nitrophenyl) phosphate in human liver S9. Further incubation studies with recombinant human CES1 and carboxylesterase 2 confirmed that sacubitril is a selective CES1 substrate. The in vitro study of cell lines transfected with wild-type CES1 and the CES1 variant G143E (rs71647871) demonstrated that G143E is a loss-of-function variant for sacubitril activation. Importantly, sacubitril activation was significantly impaired in human livers carrying the G143E variant. In conclusion, sacubitril is selectively activated by CES1 in human liver. The CES1 genetic variant G143E can significantly impair sacubitril activation. Therefore, CES1 genetic variants appear to be an important contributing factor to interindividual variability in sacubitril activation, and have the potential to serve as biomarkers to optimize sacubitril pharmacotherapy., (Copyright © 2016 by The American Society for Pharmacology and Experimental Therapeutics.)

Olmesartan medoxomil (OM) is a prodrug-type angiotensin II type 1 receptor blocker (ARB). We recently identified carboxymethylenebutenolidase homolog (CMBL) as the responsible enzyme for OM bioactivation in humans. In the present study, we compared the bioactivating properties of OM with those of other prodrug-type ARBs, candesartan cilexetil (CC) and azilsartan medoxomil (AM), by focusing on interspecies differences and tissue specificity. In in-vitro experiments with pooled tissue subcellular fractions of mice, rats, monkeys, dogs, and humans, substantial OM-hydrolase activities were observed in cytosols of the liver, intestine, and kidney in all the species tested except for dog intestine, which showed negligible activity, whereas lung cytosols showed relatively low activities compared with the other tissues. AM-hydrolase activities were well correlated with the OM-hydrolase activities. In contrast, liver microsomes exhibited the highest CC-hydrolase activity among various tissue subcellular fractions in all the species tested. As a result of Western blot analysis with the tissue subcellular fractions, the band intensities stained with anti-human CMBL and carboxylesterase 1 (CES1) antibodies well reflected OM- and AM-hydrolase activities and CC-hydrolase activity, respectively, in animals and humans. Recombinant human CMBL and CES1 showed significant AM- and CC-hydrolase activities, respectively, whereas CC hydrolysis was hardly catalyzed with recombinant carboxylesterase 2 (CES2). In conclusion, OM is bioactivated mainly via intestinal and additionally hepatic CMBL not only in humans but also in mice, rats, and monkeys, while CC is bioactivated via hepatic CES1 rather than intestinal enzymes, including CES2. AM is a substrate for CMBL.

It has been reported that in vivo biliary clearance can be predicted using sandwich-cultured rat and human hepatocytes. The predicted apparent biliary clearance (CL(bile, app)) from sandwich- cultured rat hepatocytes (SCRH) based on medium concentrations correlates to in vivo CL(bile, app) based on plasma concentrations of angiotensin II receptor blockers (ARBs), HMG-CoA reductase inhibitors (statins), β-lactam antibiotics, and topotecan. However, the predicted biliary clearance from SCRH was 7- to 300-fold lower than in vivo biliary clearance. We speculated that the process of biliary excretion might not have been evaluated using sandwich-cultured hepatocytes. To evaluate this issue, intrinsic biliary clearance (CL(bile, int)) based on intracellular compound concentrations was evaluated to investigate the in vitro-in vivo correlation of this process among ARBs, statins, β-lactam antibiotics, and topotecan. Intrinsic biliary clearance in SCRH correlated to in vivo values obtained by constant intravenous infusion of six compounds, but not rosuvastatin and cefmetazole, to rats. Moreover, differences between SCRH and in vivo CL(bile, int) (0.7-6-fold) were much smaller than those of CL(bile, app) (7-300-fold). Therefore, in vivo CL(bile, int) is more accurately reflected using SCRH than CL(bile, app). In conclusion, to predict in vivo biliary clearance more accurately, CL(bile, int) should be evaluated instead of CL(bile, app) between SCRH and in vivo.