Smith Jordan Ned, Campbell James A, Busby-Hjerpe Andrea L, Lee Sookwang, Poet Torka S, Barr Dana B, Timchalk Charles
Battelle, Pacific Northwest Division, Richland, WA 99354, USA.
Toxicology. 2009 Jun 30;261(1-2):47-58. doi: 10.1016/j.tox.2009.04.041. Epub 2009 May 3.
Chlorpyrifos (CPF) is a commonly used organophosphorus pesticide. A number of toxicity and mechanistic studies have been conducted in animals, where CPF has been administered via a variety of different exposure routes and dosing vehicles. This study compared chlorpyrifos (CPF) pharmacokinetics using oral, intravenous (IV), and subcutaneous (SC) exposure routes and corn oil, saline/Tween 20, and dimethyl sulfoxide (DMSO) as dosing vehicles. Two groups of rats were co-administered target doses (5 mg/kg) of CPF and isotopically labeled CPF (L-CPF). One group was exposed by both oral (CPF) and IV (L-CPF) routes using saline/Tween 20 vehicle; whereas, the second group was exposed by the SC route using two vehicles, corn oil (CPF) and DMSO (L-CPF). A third group was only administered CPF by the oral route in corn oil. For all treatments, blood and urine time course samples were collected and analyzed for 3,5,6-trichloro-2-pyridinol (TCPy), and isotopically labeled 3,5,6-trichloro-2-pyridinol (L-TCPy). Peak TCPy/L-TCPy concentrations in blood (20.2 micromol/l), TCPy/L-TCPy blood AUC (94.9 micromol/lh), and percent of dose excreted in urine (100%) were all highest in rats dosed orally with CPF in saline/Tween 20 and second highest in rats dosed orally with CPF in corn oil. Peak TCPy concentrations in blood were more rapidly obtained after oral administration of CPF in saline/Tween 20 compared to all other dosing scenarios (>1.5 h). These results indicate that orally administered CPF is more extensively metabolized than systemic exposures of CPF (SC and IV), and vehicle of administration also has an effect on absorption rates. Thus, equivalent doses via different routes and/or vehicles of administration could potentially lead to different body burdens of CPF, different rates of bioactivation to CPF-oxon, and different toxic responses. Simulations using a physiologically based pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic (PBPK/PD) model for CPF are consistent with these possibilities. These results suggest that exposure route and dosing vehicle can substantially impact target tissue dosimetry. This is of particular importance when comparing studies that use varying exposure paradigms, which are then used for extrapolation of risk to humans.
毒死蜱(CPF)是一种常用的有机磷农药。已经在动物身上进行了大量的毒性和作用机制研究,在这些研究中,CPF通过多种不同的暴露途径和给药载体进行给药。本研究比较了使用口服、静脉注射(IV)和皮下注射(SC)暴露途径以及玉米油、生理盐水/吐温20和二甲基亚砜(DMSO)作为给药载体时毒死蜱(CPF)的药代动力学。两组大鼠共同给予目标剂量(5毫克/千克)的CPF和同位素标记的CPF(L-CPF)。一组使用生理盐水/吐温20载体通过口服(CPF)和静脉注射(L-CPF)途径进行暴露;而第二组通过皮下注射途径使用两种载体,玉米油(CPF)和DMSO(L-CPF)进行暴露。第三组仅通过口服途径给予玉米油中的CPF。对于所有处理,收集血液和尿液的时间进程样本,并分析3,5,6-三氯-2-吡啶醇(TCPy)和同位素标记的3,5,6-三氯-2-吡啶醇(L-TCPy)。在使用生理盐水/吐温20口服给予CPF的大鼠中,血液中TCPy/L-TCPy的峰值浓度(20.2微摩尔/升)、TCPy/L-TCPy的血液药时曲线下面积(94.9微摩尔/升·小时)以及尿中排泄剂量的百分比(100%)均最高,在使用玉米油口服给予CPF的大鼠中次之。与所有其他给药情况相比,在使用生理盐水/吐温20口服给予CPF后,血液中TCPy的峰值浓度更快达到(>1.5小时)。这些结果表明,口服给予的CPF比CPF的全身暴露(SC和IV)代谢更广泛,给药载体也对吸收率有影响。因此,通过不同途径和/或给药载体给予的等效剂量可能会导致CPF的不同体内负荷、CPF-氧磷的不同生物活化速率以及不同的毒性反应。使用基于生理的毒死蜱药代动力学和药效学(PBPK/PD)模型进行的模拟与这些可能性一致。这些结果表明,暴露途径和给药载体可显著影响靶组织剂量测定。在比较使用不同暴露模式的研究时,这一点尤为重要,这些研究随后用于推断对人类的风险。