Bile acid binding to sevelamer HCl

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Kamyar Kalantar-Zadeh  Kidney International 
Advertisements

Volume 63, Issue 3, Pages (March 2003)
Volume 54, Issue 2, Pages (August 1998)
Yongsheng Yang, Adil Mohammad, Robert T
Enhancement of Dietary Protein Digestion by Conjugated Bile Acids
Acids and bases.
Kinetic Analysis of High Affinity Forms of Interleukin (IL)-13 Receptors: Suppression of IL-13 Binding by IL-2 Receptor γ Chain  Vladimir A. Kuznetsov,
Iman M Shammat, Sharona E Gordon  Neuron 
Volume 113, Issue 12, Pages (December 2017)
Volume 96, Issue 8, Pages (April 2009)
Michael L. Morgan, Gregory C. DeAngelis, Dora E. Angelaki  Neuron 
Volume 54, Issue 2, Pages (August 1998)
Marek Nebyla, Michal Přibyl, Igor Schreiber  Biophysical Journal 
Volume 59, Issue 5, Pages (May 2001)
Volume 91, Issue 10, Pages (November 2006)
Kamyar Kalantar-Zadeh  Kidney International 
Volume 84, Issue 2, Pages (August 2013)
The progression of chronic kidney disease: A 10-year population-based study of the effects of gender and age  B.O. Eriksen, O.C. Ingebretsen  Kidney International 
Mixtures of glucosamine and chondroitin sulfate reverse fibronectin fragment mediated damage to cartilage more effectively than either agent alone  G.A.
Structure-Guided Design of Fluorescent S-Adenosylmethionine Analogs for a High- Throughput Screen to Target SAM-I Riboswitch RNAs  Scott F. Hickey, Ming C.
Methotrexate in the urine
Experimental and Computational Studies Investigating Trehalose Protection of HepG2 Cells from Palmitate-Induced Toxicity  Sukit Leekumjorn, Yifei Wu,
The KDIGO guideline for dialysate calcium will result in an increased incidence of calcium accumulation in hemodialysis patients  Frank A. Gotch, Peter.
Volume 43, Issue 3, Pages (August 2011)
Volume 74, Issue 3, Pages (August 2008)
Volume 22, Issue 8, Pages (August 2014)
Volume 110, Issue 9, Pages (May 2016)
Volume 100, Issue 3, Pages (February 2011)
Volume 86, Issue 2, Pages (August 2014)
Francis D. Appling, Aaron L. Lucius, David A. Schneider 
Immunoglobulin light chains in uremia
Volume 68, Issue 2, Pages (August 2005)
Prospective randomized study of individual and group psychotherapy versus controls in recipients of renal transplants1  Lyndsay S. Baines, John T. Joseph,
Volume 110, Issue 1, Pages (January 2016)
NikR Repressor Chemistry & Biology
Volume 93, Issue 12, Pages (December 2007)
Volume 61, Issue 4, Pages (April 2002)
Smaller left kidney in low birth weight children
Volume 63, Issue 1, Pages (January 2003)
Volume 95, Issue 9, Pages (November 2008)
Volume 89, Issue 1, Pages (July 2005)
Volume 69, Issue 12, Pages (June 2006)
Volume 69, Issue 3, Pages (February 2006)
Covalent Modification Regulates Ligand Binding to Receptor Complexes in the Chemosensory System of Escherichia coli  Guoyong Li, Robert M. Weis  Cell 
Felix Ruhnow, David Zwicker, Stefan Diez  Biophysical Journal 
DNA Unwinding Is the Primary Determinant of CRISPR-Cas9 Activity
Volume 56, Issue 4, Pages (October 1999)
Volume 79, Issue 2, Pages (August 2000)
Binding-Linked Protonation of a DNA Minor-Groove Agent
Peptides derived from the human transferrin receptor stimulate endosomal acidification via a Gi-type protein1  Juan Codina, Richard Gurich, Thomas D.
Free serum concentrations of the protein-bound retention solute p-cresol predict mortality in hemodialysis patients  B. Bammens, P. Evenepoel, H. Keuleers,
The course of the remnant kidney model in mice
Interaction of Oxazole Yellow Dyes with DNA Studied with Hybrid Optical Tweezers and Fluorescence Microscopy  C.U. Murade, V. Subramaniam, C. Otto, Martin.
Volume 80, Issue 10, Pages (November 2011)
Andreas Fibich, Karl Janko, Hans-Jürgen Apell  Biophysical Journal 
Volume 70, Issue 3, Pages (August 2006)
Volume 82, Issue 9, Pages (November 2012)
T cells and T-cell receptors in acute renal failure
Thomas C. Dowling, Reginald F. Frye, Donald S. Fraley, Gary R. Matzke 
Rebound kinetics of β2-microglobulin after hemodialysis
Prediction in idiopathic membranous nephropathy
Volume 81, Issue 4, Pages (October 2001)
Attitudes and predictive factors for live kidney donation: A comparison of live kidney donors versus nondonors  Lynn Stothers, William A. Gourlay, Li.
Phase-Separation and Domain-Formation in Cholesterol-Sphingomyelin Mixture: Pulse- EPR Oxygen Probing  Laxman Mainali, Marija Raguz, Witold K. Subczynski 
Stephen Pastan, J. Michael Soucie, William M. McClellan 
Volume 63, Issue 3, Pages (March 2003)
Protein Structure and Hydration Probed by SANS and Osmotic Stress
Probing the Endocytic Pathway in Live Cells Using Dual-Color Fluorescence Cross- Correlation Analysis  Kirsten Bacia, Irina V. Majoul, Petra Schwille 
The Effects of Force Inhibition by Sodium Vanadate on Cross-Bridge Binding, Force Redevelopment, and Ca2+ Activation in Cardiac Muscle  D.A. Martyn, L.
Volume 97, Issue 2, Pages (July 2009)
Presentation transcript:

Bile acid binding to sevelamer HCl William Braunlin, Eugene Zhorov, Amy Guo, William Apruzzese, Qiuwei Xu, Patrick Hook, David L. Smisek, W. Harry Mandeville, S. Randall Holmes-Farley  Kidney International  Volume 62, Issue 2, Pages 611-619 (August 2002) DOI: 10.1046/j.1523-1755.2002.00459.x Copyright © 2002 International Society of Nephrology Terms and Conditions

Figure 1 Structure of sevelamer HCl. a and b denote the number of primary amine groups; c is the number of cross linking groups; n is the fraction of protonated amines; and m is the large number to indicate the polymer network. Kidney International 2002 62, 611-619DOI: (10.1046/j.1523-1755.2002.00459.x) Copyright © 2002 International Society of Nephrology Terms and Conditions

Figure 2 Binding of cholyl glycine (GC; •), cholyl taurine (TC; ○), chendeoxycholyl glycine (GCDC; ▾), and deoxycholyl glycine (GDC; ▿) to sevelamer HCl. The curves are the best fits to the data to the parameters summarized in Table 2. Kidney International 2002 62, 611-619DOI: (10.1046/j.1523-1755.2002.00459.x) Copyright © 2002 International Society of Nephrology Terms and Conditions

Figure 3 Binding of a physiological mixture of bile acids to sevelamer in physiological buffer. In this experiment, the ratio of GC:TC:GCDC:GDC:TCDC:TDC was 10:4:2:2:1:1. Symbols are: (▪) total bile acid; (•) GC, (○) TC; (▾) GCDC + GDC; (▿) TCDC + TDC. The curves are spline fits, and are presented as a visualization aid. Kidney International 2002 62, 611-619DOI: (10.1046/j.1523-1755.2002.00459.x) Copyright © 2002 International Society of Nephrology Terms and Conditions

Figure 4 Binding of a physiological mixture of bile acids to sevelamer in physiological buffer (conditions as inFigure 3), plotted as % bound versus free bile acid concentration. Symbols are: (•) GC, (○) TC; (▾) GCDC + GDC; (▿) TCDC + TDC. Kidney International 2002 62, 611-619DOI: (10.1046/j.1523-1755.2002.00459.x) Copyright © 2002 International Society of Nephrology Terms and Conditions

Figure 5 Binding of a physiological mixture of bile acids to sevelamer in 100 mmol/L BES in the presence of 20 mmol/L CHAPS. As before, the ratio of GC:TC:GCDC:GDC:TCDC:TDC was 10:4:2:2:1:1. Symbols are: (•) total bile acid bound; (▾) CHAPS bound; (▿) CHAPS + bile acid bound. The curves are spline fits, and are presented as a visualization aid. Kidney International 2002 62, 611-619DOI: (10.1046/j.1523-1755.2002.00459.x) Copyright © 2002 International Society of Nephrology Terms and Conditions

Figure 6 Binding of a physiological mixture of bile acids to sevelamer in 100 mmol/L BES in the presence of 20 mmol/L CHAPS and 10 mmol/L oleic acid. As before, the ratio of GC:TC:GCDC:GDC:TCDC:TDC was 10:4:2:2:1:1. Symbols are: (•) total bile acid bound; (♦) oleic acid bound; (⋄) oleic acid plus bile acid bound; (□) CHAPS bound; (○) TC bound; (▾) GC bound; (▿) TDC + TCDC bound; (▪) GDC + GCDC bound. CHAPS was added to ensure the aqueous solubility of oleic acid. The curves are spline fits, and are presented as a visualization aid. Kidney International 2002 62, 611-619DOI: (10.1046/j.1523-1755.2002.00459.x) Copyright © 2002 International Society of Nephrology Terms and Conditions

Figure 7 Time course of bile acid binding and oleic acid binding to sevelamer HCl in a stirred flow experiment. The ‘minus’ plots show binding in the absence of oleic acid, whereas the ‘plus’ plots show binding in the presence of oleic acid. In this experiment the input ratio of GC:GDC was 70:30. During the first 30 minutes, a solution containing either 15 mmol/L total bile acid (minus) or 15 mmol/L bile acid plus 15 mmol/L oleic acid (plus) flowed into the cell. From 30 to 60 minutes, in both cases, 15 mmol/L bile acid—but not oleic acid—flowed into the cell. From 60 to 150 minutes, the cell was flushed with buffer. In order to verify mass balance, the cell was then flushed with methanol/sodium acetate from 150 to 240 minutes, in order to displace residual bound bile acid. The length of the black bars gives the amount of GC bound, and the length of the light gray bars gives the amount of GDC bound. The total bound bile acid is equal to the sum of these two lengths. The dark gray bars correspond to the amount of oleic acid bound. Hence, the total ligand bound (bile acid plus oleic acid) is equal to the sum of all three lengths. Kidney International 2002 62, 611-619DOI: (10.1046/j.1523-1755.2002.00459.x) Copyright © 2002 International Society of Nephrology Terms and Conditions