Vatier J, Célice-Pingaud C, Farinotti R
INSERM, Châtenay-Malabry, France.
Fundam Clin Pharmacol. 1998;12(6):573-83. doi: 10.1111/j.1472-8206.1998.tb00989.x.
In this overview, the methods for assessing antacid activity in vitro are surveyed, and the problems of their comparison with in vivo methods of evaluation are discussed. In vitro assessment is based on two types of method: static and dynamic. The static method of titration, with end-of-titration pH values ranging between 3.0 and 1.0, has been used to quantify the number of sites capable of binding H+ ions at each end-of-titration pH, and to identify certain chemical mechanisms involved in this binding; in other words, this approach provides the pharmacological characteristics of the drugs tested. In contrast, it does not take into account physiological factors modulating antacid activity, such as gastroduodenal fluxes (including gastric emptying), drug adherence to the mucosa, and acid secretion. The dynamic method was initially based on an artificial stomach model, which has gradually been upgraded to a computer-controlled artificial stomach-duodenum model. This model overcomes certain weaknesses of the static method by simulating flux and pH conditions in the gastroduodenal tract, by taking into account interactions with the gastric mucosa and thereby reproducing the in vivo medium encountered by antacids. It is therefore capable of reflecting the characteristics of antacids, namely their effect on gastric pH and resistance to acidification, at the same time helping to identify the underlying chemicophysical mechanisms. In vivo, the antacid effect can be assessed qualitatively by means of pH-meter studies in healthy volunteers, both in baseline conditions and during secretory stimulation, and also quantitatively by methods based on intragastric titration in response to a liquid meal (IGT). pH-meter studies in baseline conditions come up against the variability of the basal pH and antacid homogenization with gastric contents, which results in a wide range of individual values. This variability is found in pH-meter studies during pentagastrin infusion and, to a lesser degree, in response to a meal. Close correlations have, however, been established between results obtained with the artificial stomach model and in healthy volunteers submitted to pH-metric or IGT studies, with several antacids. It seems that the artificial stomach method is sufficiently reproducible to make it the method of choice for investigating the antacid activity of all drugs aimed at treating acid hypersecretion disorders. In contrast, in vivo studies may be warranted for precise therapeutic indications, such as treatment of duodenal ulcer or gastro-esophageal reflux, in which the therapeutic effect is judged on the basis of an improvement in symptoms and endoscopic criteria, without the need to demonstrate the antacid effect itself.
在本综述中,对体外评估抗酸活性的方法进行了调查,并讨论了将其与体内评估方法进行比较时存在的问题。体外评估基于两种方法:静态法和动态法。滴定的静态方法,滴定终点的pH值在3.0至1.0之间,已被用于量化在每个滴定终点pH下能够结合H⁺离子的位点数量,并确定参与这种结合的某些化学机制;换句话说,这种方法提供了所测试药物的药理学特性。相比之下,它没有考虑调节抗酸活性的生理因素,如胃十二指肠通量(包括胃排空)、药物对粘膜的粘附以及酸分泌。动态方法最初基于人工胃模型,该模型已逐渐升级为计算机控制的人工胃十二指肠模型。该模型通过模拟胃十二指肠中的通量和pH条件,考虑与胃粘膜的相互作用,从而再现抗酸剂在体内遇到的介质,克服了静态方法的某些弱点。因此,它能够反映抗酸剂的特性,即它们对胃pH值的影响和对酸化的抵抗力,同时有助于确定潜在的化学物理机制。在体内,抗酸作用可以通过在健康志愿者中进行pH计研究来定性评估,包括在基线条件下和分泌刺激期间,也可以通过基于对液体餐的胃内滴定(IGT)的方法进行定量评估。在基线条件下的pH计研究面临基础pH值的变异性以及抗酸剂与胃内容物的均匀化问题,这导致了广泛的个体值。在五肽胃泌素输注期间的pH计研究中也发现了这种变异性,在较小程度上,对餐食的反应中也存在这种变异性。然而,使用人工胃模型获得的结果与接受pH测量或IGT研究的健康志愿者使用几种抗酸剂获得的结果之间已经建立了密切的相关性。人工胃方法似乎具有足够的可重复性,使其成为研究所有旨在治疗胃酸分泌过多疾病的药物抗酸活性的首选方法。相比之下,对于精确的治疗指征,如十二指肠溃疡或胃食管反流的治疗,可能需要进行体内研究,在这些疾病中,治疗效果是根据症状和内镜标准的改善来判断的,而无需证明抗酸作用本身。