TABLE 3.
Mouse Line | Dose | Route | Clearance | Reference | CYP1A2 Contribution |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
mg/kg | ml/(h*kg) | % | |||
CYP1A2−/− | 2 | i.p. | 276 | Buters et al., 1996 | 0 |
C57BL/6N | 2 | i.p. | 2268 | Buters et al., 1996 | 88 |
Cyp1a KO | 5 | PO | 286 | This study | 0 |
C57BL/6J | 5 | PO | 905 | This study | 68 |
hCYP1A1/1A2 | 5 | PO | 614 | This study | 53 |
C57BL/6J | 5 | PO | 472a | Li et al., 2017 | 39 |
Swiss | 20 | PO | 311b | Samojlik et al., 2016 | 8 |
Swiss | 20 | i.p. | 398b | Samojlik et al., 2016 | 28 |
C57BL/6J | 5 | PO | 726 | Scheer et al., 2014 | 61 |
CD-COBS | 1 | i.v. | 732 | Walton et al., 2001 | 61 |
CD-1 | 20 | i.p. | 640 | Kaplan et al., 1990 | 55 |
CD-1 | 40 | i.p. | 380 | Kaplan et al., 1990 | 25 |
PO, per os (oral gavage).
As it was not clear if the AUC reported in the paper was an AUCinf, caffeine clearance was calculated from the C57BL/6J mean pharmacokinetic profile presented in Fig. 2 in the publication (Li et al., 2017).
Clearance was calculated by dividing dose by AUCinf.