Carboxylesterase 1 (CES1) metabolizes methylphenidate and other drugs. CES1 gene variation only partially explains pharmacokinetic (PK) variability. Biomarkers predicting the PKs of drugs... Show moreCarboxylesterase 1 (CES1) metabolizes methylphenidate and other drugs. CES1 gene variation only partially explains pharmacokinetic (PK) variability. Biomarkers predicting the PKs of drugs metabolized by CES1 are needed. We identified lipids in plasma from 44 healthy subjects that correlated with CES1 activity as determined by PK parameters of methylphenidate including a ceramide (q value = 0.001) and a phosphatidylcholine (q value = 0.005). Carriers of the CES1 143E allele had decreased methylphenidate metabolism and altered concentration of this phosphatidylcholine (q value = 0.040) and several high polyunsaturated fatty acid lipids (PUFAs). The half‐maximal inhibitory concentration (IC50) values of chenodeoxycholate and taurocholate were 13.55 and 19.51 μM, respectively, consistent with a physiological significance. In silico analysis suggested that bile acid inhibition of CES1 involved both binding to the active and superficial sites of the enzyme. We initiated identification of metabolites predicting PKs of drugs metabolized by CES1 and suggest lipids to regulate or be regulated by this enzyme. Show less
Adverse outcome pathways (AOPs) are a recent toxicological construct that connects, in a formalized, transparent and quality-controlled way, mechanistic information to apical endpoints for... Show moreAdverse outcome pathways (AOPs) are a recent toxicological construct that connects, in a formalized, transparent and quality-controlled way, mechanistic information to apical endpoints for regulatory purposes. AOP links a molecular initiating event (MIE) to the adverse outcome (AO) via key events (KE), in a way specified by key event relationships (KER). Although this approach to formalize mechanistic toxicological information only started in 2010, over 200 AOPs have already been established. At this stage, new requirements arise, such as the need for harmonization and re-assessment, for continuous updating, as well as for alerting about pitfalls, misuses and limits of applicability. In this review, the history of the AOP concept and its most prominent strengths are discussed, including the advantages of a formalized approach, the systematic collection of weight of evidence, the linkage of mechanisms to apical end points, the examination of the plausibility of epidemiological data, the identification of critical knowledge gaps and the design of mechanistic test methods. To prepare the ground for a broadened and appropriate use of AOPs, some widespread misconceptions are explained. Moreover, potential weaknesses and shortcomings of the current AOP rule set are addressed (1) to facilitate the discussion on its further evolution and (2) to better define appropriate vs. less suitable application areas. Exemplary toxicological studies are presented to discuss the linearity assumptions of AOP, the management of event modifiers and compensatory mechanisms, and whether a separation of toxicodynamics from toxicokinetics including metabolism is possible in the framework of pathway plasticity. Suggestions on how to compromise between different needs of AOP stakeholders have been added. A clear definition of open questions and limitations is provided to encourage further progress in the field. Show less
