throbber
Riocht'mical Pharmncology. Vol. 33. No. 10. pp. 1695-l(i96, 1984.
`Printed in Great Britain.
`
`000&-2952/84 S3.00 + 0.00
`© 198.4 Pergamon Press Lld.
`
`Sho rt communications
`
`1695
`
`Effect of acute renal failure on the clearance and biliary excretion of indocyanine
`green in perfused rat liver
`
`(Received 23 September 1983; accepted 2 December 1983)
`
`Evidence has accumulated that the hepatic uptake of dyes
`such as indocyanine green (ICG), bromosulphophthalein
`(BSP) and rose bengal is decreased in rats with renal failure
`[1-4]. The reason for the diminished uptake of these dyes
`is unknown; but one possible explanation is that the influx
`of these dyes into the hepatocyte is competitively inhibited
`by endogenous metabolites which are retained in uraemic
`pla~ma.
`Substances present in uraemic plasma inhibit renal tubule
`transport of organic anions such as p-aminobenzoic acid
`(PABA) [5, 6] and hippuric acid [7). Many organic anions
`are known to accumulate in uraemic plasma [8] and Preuss
`eta/. [5) have suggested that these may compete for tubular
`transport. Furthermore, the hepatic uptake of hippuric acid
`and PABA is also decreased in rats with renal failure [7,
`9). ICG, BSP and rose bengal are anions and may enter
`the hepatocyte by carder-mediated transport [!OJ, so it is
`possible that uraemic metabolites could compete with these
`dyes for hepatic uptake.
`The purpose of this study was to clarify the role of
`uraemic metabolites as putative competitive inhibitors of
`the hepatic uptake of ICG. The plasma clearance and
`biliary excretion of ICG have been determined in livers of
`control rats and rats with glycerol-induced acute renal
`failure (ARF) that have been perfused with a medium free
`of uraemic metabolites.
`
`Materials and methods
`Chemicals. ICG U.S.P. was purchased from Hynson,
`Wescott & Dunning Lt d. (Baltimore, MD). Bovine serum
`albumin (BSA) and reagents for the assay of urea were
`obtained from Sigma Chemical Co. All other reagents were
`available commercially and of analytical grade.
`Glycerol-induced ARF. Male Wistar albino rats (3~
`400 g) were used and ARF was produced by an i.m. injec(cid:173)
`tion of 50% (v/v) glycerol in sterile saline (10 ml/kg body
`wt) [I). Control rats were injected with saline (10 ml/kg
`body wt) and both groups of rats were studied 48 hr after
`i.m. injection.
`Liver perfusion. Rats were anaesthetised with pen(cid:173)
`tobarbitone (60 mg/kg body wt. i.p.) and the subsequent
`opCrativc technique and liver perfusion were essentially as
`described by H ems eta/. [II]. The abdomen was opened
`by a midline incision and cannulae placed in the bile duct
`and portal vein. The thorax was opened and a blood sample,
`for plasma urea determination, was taken by left ventricular
`puncture before a cannula was placed in the inferior vena
`cava.
`The perfusion medium (150 ml) was Krebs-bicarbonate
`solution containing washed human erythrocytes (packed
`cell volume, 15-16% v/v) and BSA (2.6% w/ v) [11). The
`final pH of the medium was adjusted to 7.4 by addition
`of I M NaHCO, . The composition (mM) of the Krebs(cid:173)
`bicarbonate solution was: NaCI 118.0, KC14.7, CaC12 2.5,
`KH2PO, I .2. MgS0, .7H20 1.2, NaHCO, 25.0 and glucose
`10.0. The perfusion medium was oxygenated with a mixture
`of 95% 0 2 and 5% CO,.
`After completion of surgery the rat was transferred to a
`thermostated cabinet at 37' and the liver perfused via the
`portal vein. The height of the perfusate reservoir was
`adjusted to give sufficient hydrostntic pressure to allow a
`flow of 12.5 ml/min. This pressure varied between 25-30 em
`
`and did not cause swelling of the liver. The liver was allowed
`to recover for 30 min and then ICG was added to the
`collecting vessel as an aqueous solution (7.5 mg/kg body
`wt; 10 mg/ml). Samples of perfusion medium (0.5 ml) were
`removed from the collecting vessel at 5, 7.5, 10, 15. 20, 30
`and 40 min after the administration of ICG. In another
`series of experiments bile samples were collected at 10 min
`intervals for up to 40 min.
`Analytical methods. The concentration of ICG in the
`plasma of the perfusion medium and bile was determined
`spectrophotometrically at 800 nm as described previously
`[1, 12]. Plasma urea concentrations were measured using a
`commercial kit (Sigma No 535).
`Data analysis. Plasma concentration- time data were
`fitted to a monoexponential equation by linear regression
`and the elimination rate constant (kc~), elimination half(cid:173)
`life (to.s), volume of distribution (Vd) and plasma clearance
`(Cip) were calculated as described by Gibaldi and Perrier
`[13]. Results are given as mean ± S.E.M. and statistical
`comparisons were made by the non-paired Student's Hest.
`
`Results
`Rats injected with glycerol had significantly greater
`(P < 0.001) mean
`plasma
`urea
`concentrations
`(309 ::t 48 mg/ 100 ml; N = 10) than rats given i.m. saline
`(43 ± 3 mg/ IOOml; N = 10). However, there was no sig(cid:173)
`nificant difference in either body weight or liver weight
`between control cats (346 ±IS g and 11.7 ± 0.4 g respect(cid:173)
`ively; N = 10) '•and rats with ARF (353 ± 12 g and
`11.3 ± 0.3 g respectively; N = 10).
`Figure 1 shows the mean concentration of ICG in plasma
`perfusing livers from control and uraemic rats. It is clear
`that in both groups of livers ICG is eliminated in a mono(cid:173)
`exponential manner. Only at 40 min was the mean con(cid:173)
`centration of ICG significantly greater (P < 0.05) in plasma
`perfusing uraemic livers, but th.e fractional rate of dye
`removal, k,, was significantly smaller in the uraemic group
`(Table 1). In addition, los and Clp were also decreased
`while there was no significant difference in the Yd of ICG
`between control and uraemic groups (Table l).
`ICG could be detected in all the bile samples collected
`from control livers over the first 10 m in. By contrast in
`three out of four experiments with uraemic livers, no ICG
`could be detected in bile collec ted over the same time
`interval. The cumulative amount of dye excreted was sig(cid:173)
`nificantly lower in uraemic livers from 20 to 40 min (Fig.
`2). There was no significant difference in bile flow rate
`between control and uraemic livers during any collection
`interval and the mean bile flow r ate over the 40 min col(cid:173)
`lection period was 0.37 and 0.36 m l/hr in control and ura(cid:173)
`emic livers respectively. These results suggest that the
`biliary excretion of ICG by uraemic livers is less efficient
`than in control livers,
`
`Discussion
`The concentration of ICG in the plasma of the perfusion
`medium decreased in a monocxponential manner in both
`control and uraemic groups. By contrast, ICG shows
`biexponential kinetics in vivo [1, 2]. In perfusion experi(cid:173)
`ments the rale of delivery of ICG t.o the Jiver is considtaal.Jiy
`less than in vivo because of a larger initial Yd (135 ml
`
`Boehringer Ex. 2026
`Mylan v. Boehringer Ingelheim
`IPR2016-01565
`Page 1
`
`

`
`Short communications
`
`1696
`
`100
`
`10
`
`Table 1. Effect of glycerol-induced acute renal failure on
`the pharmacokinetics of ICG (7.5 mg/ kg) in perfused rat
`livers'
`
`Pharmacokinetic
`parameters
`
`k.,/ (min)
`to.s (min)
`Clp (ml/ min/100 g
`body wt)
`Vd(ml)
`
`Control rats
`(N = 6)
`0.027 ± 0.001
`26 ± 1
`1.1 ± 0.1
`
`Uraemic rats
`(N= 6)
`
`0.015 ± 0.002t
`51 ± 8t
`0.69 ± 0.10+
`
`142 ± 4
`
`155 ± 12
`
`• Results are given as mean ± S.E.M.
`t p < 0.05.
`t P < 0.01 relative to respective control group.
`
`Moreover, Howie and Burke [9) found decreased uptake
`of PABA into isolated perfused livers from rats with chronic
`renal failure, and another study [ 15) reported that a small
`number of uraemic metabolites failed to inhibit the uptake
`of BSP into isolated perfused rat livers. In view of these
`reports and the evidence presented here, it would seem
`unlikely that competition by uraemic metabolites could
`explain the impaired hepatic uptake of PABA or dyes such
`as ICG and BSP. However, it is possible that uraemic
`metabolites have a direct effect upon the liver and thereby
`induce changes in liver function which lead to impaired
`uptake of dyes.
`
`Acknowledgement- This work was supported by a grant
`from the Wellcome Trust.
`
`Department of Pharmacology
`University of Leeds
`Leeds LS2 9JT, U.K.
`
`MICHAELS. YATES'
`CHRISTOPHER J. BOWMER
`JANE EMMERSON
`
`REFERENCES
`
`1. C. J. Bowmer, M. S. Yates andJ. Emmerson, Biochem.
`Pharmac. 31, 2531 (1982).
`2. M.S. Yates, J. Emmerson and C. J. Bowmer,]. Pharm.
`Pharmac. 35, 335 (1983).
`3. C. J. Bowmer, S. T. Hall and M. S. Yates, Br. J.
`Pharmac. 75, llOP (1982).
`4. J. W. Tse. L. I. Wiebe. C. Ediss and A. Shysh. Tnt. J.
`nuc/. Med. Bioi. 3, 134 (1976).
`5. H. G. Preuss, S. G. Massry, J. F. Maher. M. Gilliece
`and G. E. Schreiner, Nephron 3, 265 (1966).
`6. A. G. White, Proc. Soc. exp. Bioi. Med. 123, 309
`(1966).
`7. J. R. Ciccone, A. I. Keller, S. R. Braun, H. V.
`Murdaugh and H. G. Preuss, Biochim. biophys. A era
`163, 108 (1968).
`8. D. Seligson, L. W. B1uemle, G. D. Webster and D.
`Senesky, J. clin. Invest. 38, 1042 (1959).
`9. M. B. Howie and E. Bourke, Clin. Sci. 56, 9 (1979).
`10. B. F. Scharschmidt, J. G. Waggoner and P. D. Berk,
`1. c/in. Invest. 56, 1280 (1975).
`11. R. Hems, B. D. Ross, M. N. Berry and H. A. Krebs,
`Biochem. J. 101, 284 (1966).
`12. C. J. Bowmer,J. Emmerson and M.S. Yates, Biochem.
`Pharmac. 32, 1641 (1983).
`13. M. Gibaldi and D. Perrier, Pharmacokinetics, Marcel
`Dekker, New York (1975).
`14. D. K. F. Meijer, R. J. Vonk, K. Keulemans and J. G.
`Weitering, J. Pharmac. exp. Ther. 202, 8 (1977).
`15. M. Y. Liang, M. Toporek and B. Schepartz, Nephron
`22, 306 (1978).
`
`10
`
`20
`Timo(min)
`
`.lO
`
`Fig. I. Concentrations of ICG (7.5 mg/ kg) in plasma
`perfusing livers of control (e ) and uraemic (6) rats. Each
`point is the mean ± S.E.M. obtained in six rats. Key:
`P < 0.05 relative to respective control value.
`
`compared to about 8 ml in vivo (1, 2]) which cannot be
`compensated for by a proportional increase in flow rate.
`Meijer et at. [14] have pointed out that uptake may be
`further retarded by the relatively large amount of albumin
`in the perfusion medium. The binding capacity of the
`medium is likely to be much greater than that of hepatic
`binding proteins, so that a larger fraction of the dose will
`remain within the perfusion medium. The combination of
`decreased delivery of dye and higher binding capacity
`means that the initial disposition phase will be much less
`pronounced in perfusion studies than in vivo [14).
`Livers from rats wit h ARF have been perfused with a
`medium free of uraemic metabolites. The results show
`that these livers were less efficient than control livers at
`removing ICG from plasma and excreting it into bile.
`
`50
`
`Time {min}
`
`Fig. 2. Cumulative biliary excretion of ICG (7.5 mg/kg) in
`perfused livers of control (e ) and uraemic (6) rats. Each
`point is the mean ± S.E.M. obtained in four rats. Key tin
`three out of four experiments with livers of uraemic animals
`no ICG could be detected in bile collected over the first
`10 min; • P < 0.05, •• P < 0.01 relative to respective con-
`trol value.
`
`• To whom correspondence should be addressed.
`
`Boehringer Ex. 2026
`Mylan v. Boehringer Ingelheim
`IPR2016-01565
`Page 2

This document is available on Docket Alarm but you must sign up to view it.


Or .

Accessing this document will incur an additional charge of $.

After purchase, you can access this document again without charge.

Accept $ Charge
throbber

Still Working On It

This document is taking longer than usual to download. This can happen if we need to contact the court directly to obtain the document and their servers are running slowly.

Give it another minute or two to complete, and then try the refresh button.

throbber

A few More Minutes ... Still Working

It can take up to 5 minutes for us to download a document if the court servers are running slowly.

Thank you for your continued patience.

This document could not be displayed.

We could not find this document within its docket. Please go back to the docket page and check the link. If that does not work, go back to the docket and refresh it to pull the newest information.

Your account does not support viewing this document.

You need a Paid Account to view this document. Click here to change your account type.

Your account does not support viewing this document.

Set your membership status to view this document.

With a Docket Alarm membership, you'll get a whole lot more, including:

  • Up-to-date information for this case.
  • Email alerts whenever there is an update.
  • Full text search for other cases.
  • Get email alerts whenever a new case matches your search.

Become a Member

One Moment Please

The filing “” is large (MB) and is being downloaded.

Please refresh this page in a few minutes to see if the filing has been downloaded. The filing will also be emailed to you when the download completes.

Your document is on its way!

If you do not receive the document in five minutes, contact support at support@docketalarm.com.

Sealed Document

We are unable to display this document, it may be under a court ordered seal.

If you have proper credentials to access the file, you may proceed directly to the court's system using your government issued username and password.


Access Government Site

We are redirecting you
to a mobile optimized page.





Document Unreadable or Corrupt

Refresh this Document
Go to the Docket

We are unable to display this document.

Refresh this Document
Go to the Docket