The Influence of OAT1 Density and Functionality on Indoxyl Sulfate Transport in the Human Proximal Tubule: An Integrated Computational and In Vitro Study.
albumin conformational changes
indoxyl sulfate
kinetic modeling
organic anionic transporter
uremic toxins
Journal
Toxins
ISSN: 2072-6651
Titre abrégé: Toxins (Basel)
Pays: Switzerland
ID NLM: 101530765
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
22 09 2021
22 09 2021
Historique:
received:
15
07
2021
revised:
08
09
2021
accepted:
17
09
2021
entrez:
22
10
2021
pubmed:
23
10
2021
medline:
16
2
2022
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Research has shown that traditional dialysis is an insufficient long-term therapy for patients suffering from end-stage kidney disease due to the high retention of uremic toxins in the blood as a result of the absence of the active transport functionality of the proximal tubule (PT). The PT's function is defined by the epithelial membrane transporters, which have an integral role in toxin clearance. However, the intricate PT transporter-toxin interactions are not fully explored, and it is challenging to decouple their effects in toxin removal in vitro. Computational models are necessary to unravel and quantify the toxin-transporter interactions and develop an alternative therapy to dialysis. This includes the bioartificial kidney, where the hollow dialysis fibers are covered with kidney epithelial cells. In this integrated experimental-computational study, we developed a PT computational model that focuses on indoxyl sulfate (IS) transport by organic anionic transporter 1 (OAT1), capturing the transporter density in detail along the basolateral cell membrane as well as the activity of the transporter and the inward boundary flux. The unknown parameter values of the OAT1 density (1.15×107 transporters µm-2), IS uptake (1.75×10-5 µM-1 s-1), and dissociation (4.18×10-4 s-1) were fitted and validated with experimental LC-MS/MS time-series data of the IS concentration. The computational model was expanded to incorporate albumin conformational changes present in uremic patients. The results suggest that IS removal in the physiological model was influenced mainly by transporter density and IS dissociation rate from OAT1 and not by the initial albumin concentration. While in uremic conditions considering albumin conformational changes, the rate-limiting factors were the transporter density and IS uptake rate, which were followed closely by the albumin-binding rate and IS dissociation rate. In summary, the results of this study provide an exciting avenue to help understand the toxin-transporter complexities in the PT and make better-informed decisions on bioartificial kidney designs and the underlining transporter-related issues in uremic patients.
Identifiants
pubmed: 34678967
pii: toxins13100674
doi: 10.3390/toxins13100674
pmc: PMC8538816
pii:
doi:
Substances chimiques
Albumins
0
Membrane Transport Proteins
0
Organic Anion Transport Protein 1
0
Toxins, Biological
0
Indican
N187WK1Y1J
Types de publication
Journal Article
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Références
Eur J Pharmacol. 2011 Dec 15;672(1-3):70-6
pubmed: 22004608
Acta Physiol (Oxf). 2015 Sep;215(1):13-23
pubmed: 25939450
PLoS One. 2011 Apr 04;6(4):e18438
pubmed: 21483698
Blood Purif. 2019;48(4):299-314
pubmed: 31563911
J Am Soc Nephrol. 2012 Jul;23(7):1258-70
pubmed: 22626821
Int Rev Cell Mol Biol. 2010;283:1-56
pubmed: 20801417
Biopharm Drug Dispos. 2013 Apr;34(3):165-75
pubmed: 23300093
Am J Physiol. 1986 May;250(5 Pt 2):F860-73
pubmed: 3706537
AAPS J. 2016 Mar;18(2):465-75
pubmed: 26821801
J Neurosci. 1998 Nov 1;18(21):8751-7
pubmed: 9786982
BMC Nephrol. 2017 Jan 25;18(1):35
pubmed: 28122514
Cell Tissue Res. 2010 Feb;339(2):449-57
pubmed: 19902259
Am J Kidney Dis. 2015 Oct;66(4):547-51
pubmed: 26243584
PLoS Comput Biol. 2016 Jul 22;12(7):e1004922
pubmed: 27447287
Nat Rev Drug Discov. 2010 Mar;9(3):215-36
pubmed: 20190787
Mol Pharm. 2019 Nov 4;16(11):4551-4562
pubmed: 31525064
Semin Dial. 2005 May-Jun;18(3):203-11
pubmed: 15934967
Toxins (Basel). 2020 Jun 12;12(6):
pubmed: 32545617
Drug Metab Dispos. 2019 Aug;47(8):802-808
pubmed: 31123036
Sci Rep. 2016 May 31;6:26715
pubmed: 27242131
Lancet. 2020 Feb 29;395(10225):709-733
pubmed: 32061315
PLoS Comput Biol. 2019 Feb 25;15(2):e1006108
pubmed: 30802242