Rats are extensively used as a preclinical model for assessing drug pharmacokinetics (PK) and tissue distribution; however, successful translation of the rat data requires information on the differences in drug metabolism and transport mechanisms between rats and humans. To partly fill this knowledge gap, we quantified clinically relevant drug-metabolizing enzymes and transporters (DMETs) in the liver and different intestinal segments of Sprague-Dawley rats. The levels of DMET proteins in rats were quantified using the global proteomics-based total protein approach (TPA) and targeted proteomics. The abundance of the major DMET proteins was largely comparable using quantitative global and targeted proteomics. However, global proteomics-based TPA was able to detect and quantify a comprehensive list of 66 DMET proteins in the liver and 37 DMET proteins in the intestinal segments of SD rats without the need for peptide standards. Cytochrome P450 (Cyp) and UDP-glycosyltransferase (Ugt) enzymes were mainly detected in the liver with the abundance ranging from 8 to 6502 and 74 to 2558 pmol/g tissue. P-gp abundance was higher in the intestine (124.1 pmol/g) as compared to that in the liver (26.6 pmol/g) using the targeted analysis. Breast cancer resistance protein (Bcrp) was most abundant in the intestinal segments, whereas organic anion transporting polypeptides (Oatp) 1a1, 1a4, 1b2, and 2a1 and multidrug resistance proteins (Mrp) 2 and 6 were predominantly detected in the liver. To demonstrate the utility of these data, we modeled digoxin PK by integrating protein abundance of P-gp and Cyp3a2 into a physiologically based PK (PBPK) model constructed using PK-Sim software. The model was able to reliably predict the systemic as well as tissue concentrations of digoxin in rats. These findings suggest that proteomics-informed PBPK models in preclinical species can allow mechanistic PK predictions in animal models including tissue drug concentrations.
Keywords: PBPK modeling; digoxin; drug metabolism; drug transport; interspecies differences; quantitative proteomics; total protein approach.