Skip to main content
Log in

Hydrogen Bonding Potential as a Determinant of the in Vitro and in Situ Blood–Brain Barrier Permeability of Peptides

  • Published:
Pharmaceutical Research Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

With the exception of various central nervous system (CNS)-required nutrients for which specific, saturable transport systems exist, the passage of most water-soluble solutes through the blood–brain barrier (BBB) is believed to depend largely on the lipid solubility of the solutes. Most peptides, therefore, do not enter the CNS because of their hydrophilic character. Recently, utilizing homologous series of model peptides and Caco-2 cell monolayers as a model of the intestinal mucosa, it was concluded that the principal determinant of peptide transport across the intestinal cellular membrane is the energy required to desolvate the polar amide bonds in the peptide (P. S. Burton et al., Adv. Drug Deliv. Rev. 7:365–386, 1991). To determine whether this correlation can be extended to the BBB, the permeabilities of the same peptides were determined using an in vitro as well as an in situ BBB model. The peptides, blocked on the N- and C-terminal ends, consisted of D-phenylalanine (F) residues: AcFNH2, AcF2NH2, AcF3NH2, AcF2(NMeF)NH2, AcF(NMeF)2NH2, Ac(NMeF)3NH2, and Ac(NMeF)3NHMe. A good correlation among the permeabilities of these model peptides across the bovine brain microvessel endothelial cell (BBMEC) monolayers, an in vitro model of the BBB, and their permeabilities across the BBB in situ was observed (r = 0.928, P < 0.05). The permeabilities of these peptides did not correlate with the octanol–buffer partition coefficients of the peptides (r = 0.389 in vitro and r = 0.155 in situ; P < 0.05). However, correlations were observed between the permeabilities of these peptides and the number of potential hydrogen bonds the peptides can make with water (r = 0.837 in vitro and r = 0.906 in situ; P < 0.05), suggesting that desolvation of the polar bonds in the molecule is a determinant of permeability. Consistent with this, good correlations were found between the permeabilities of these peptides and their partition coefficients between heptane–ethylene glycol (r = 0.981 in vitro and r = 0.940 in situ ; P < 0.05) or the differences in partition coefficients between octanol–buffer and isooctane–buffer (ΔlogPC) (r = 0.961 in vitro and r = 0.962 in situ; P < 0.05), both of which are experimental estimates of hydrogen bond or desolvation potential. These results suggest that the permeability of peptides through the BBB is governed by the same physicochemical parameter (hydrogen bonding potential) as their permeability through the intestinal mucosa.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

REFERENCES

  1. G. W. Goldstein and A. L. Betz. The blood-brain barrier. Sci. Am. 255:74–83 (1986).

    Google Scholar 

  2. W. M. Pardridge. Receptor-mediated transport through the blood-brain barrier. Endocr. Rev. 7:314–330 (1986).

    Google Scholar 

  3. M. W. Brightman. Morphology of the blood-brain barrier. Exp. Eye Res. Suppl. 1–25 (1977).

  4. T. S. Reese and M. J. Karnovsky. Fine structural localization of a blood-brain barrier to exogenous peroxidase. J. Cell Biol. 34:207–217 (1967).

    Google Scholar 

  5. S. I. Rapoport. In S. I. Rapoport (ed.), Blood Brain Barrier in Physiology and Medicine, Raven Press, New York, 1976, pp. 153–176.

    Google Scholar 

  6. K. L. Audus, P. J. Chikhale, D. W. Miller, S. E. Thompson, and R. T. Borchardt. Brain uptake of drugs: The influence of chemical and biological factors. Adv. Drug Res. 23:1–64 (1992).

    Google Scholar 

  7. Y. Takakura, K. L. Audus, and R. T. Borchardt. Blood-brain barrier: Transport studies in isolated brain capillaries and in cultured brain endothelial cells. Adv. Pharmacol. 22:137–165 (1991).

    Google Scholar 

  8. R. A. Conradi, A. R. Hilgers, N. F. H. Ho, and P. S. Burton. The influence of peptide structure on transport across Caco-2 cells. Pharm. Res. 8:1453–1460 (1991).

    Google Scholar 

  9. R. A. Conradi, A. R. Hilgers, N. F. H. Ho, and P. S. Burton. The influence of peptide structure on transport across Caco-2 cells. II. Peptide bond modification which results in improved permeability. Pharm. Res. 9:435–439 (1992).

    Google Scholar 

  10. P. S. Burton, R. A. Conradi, and A. R. Hilgers. Mechanisms of peptide and protein absorption. (2) Transcellular mechanism of peptide and protein absorption: passive aspects. Adv. Drug Del. Rev. 7:365–386 (1991).

    Google Scholar 

  11. P. Seiler. Interconversion of lipophilicities from the hydrogen/water systems into the octanol/water system. Eur. J. Med. Chem. 9:474–479 (1974).

    Google Scholar 

  12. P. S. Burton, R. A. Conradi, A. R. Hilgers, N. F. H. Ho, and L. L. Maggiora. The relationship between peptide structure and transport across epithelial cell monolayers. J. Control. Release 19:87–98 (1992).

    Google Scholar 

  13. K. L. Audus and R. T. Borchardt. Characterization of an in vitro blood-brain barrier model system for studying drug transport and metabolism. Pharm. Res. 3:81–87 (1986).

    Google Scholar 

  14. Y. Takasato, S. I. Rapoport, and Q. R. Smith. An in situ brain perfusion technique to study cerebrovascular transport in the rat. Am. J. Physiol. 247:H484–H493 (1984).

    Google Scholar 

  15. K. Y. Ng, D. W. Miller, A. Kato, and R. T. Borchardt. An improved in vitro model of the blood-brain barrier for determining macromolecule transport into the brain (in preparation).

  16. L. L. Rubin, D. E. Hall, S. Porter, K. Barbu, C. Cannon, H. Horner, M. Janatpour, C. W. Liaw, K. Manning, J. Morales, L. I. Tanner, K. J. Tomasell and F. Bard. A cell culture model of the blood-brain barrier. J. Cell Biol. 115:1725–1735 (1992).

    Google Scholar 

  17. N. F. H. Ho, J. Y. Park, P. F. Ni, and W. I. Higuchi. Advancing quantitative and mechanistic approaches in interfacing gastrointestinal drug absorption studies in animals and humans. In W. Crouthamel and A. C. Sugars (eds). Animal Models for Oral Drug Delivery in Man, Am. Pharm. Assoc., Washington, DC, 1983, pp. 27–106.

    Google Scholar 

  18. K. Ng, G. Grass, H. Lane, and R. T. Borchardt. Characterization of the unstirred water layer in cultured brain microvessel endothelial cells. In Vitro Cell. Dev. Biol. 29A:627–629 (1993).

    Google Scholar 

  19. K. Ohno, K. D. Pettigrew, and S. I. Rapoport. Lower limits of cerebrovascular permeability to nonelectrolytes in the conscious rat. Am. J. Physiol. 235:H299–H307 (1978).

    Google Scholar 

  20. Q. R. Smith. Quantitation of blood-brain barrier permeability. In E. A. Neuwelt (ed.), Implications of the Blood-Brain Barrier and Its Manipulation, Vol. 1, Plenum Press, New York, 1989, pp. 85–118.

    Google Scholar 

  21. S. Fukiu, R. Schwarcs, S. I. Rapoport, Y. Takada, and Q. R. Smith. Blood-brain barrier transport of kynurenines: Implications for brain synthesis and metabolism. J. Neurochem. 56:2007–2017 (1991).

    Google Scholar 

  22. C. Crone and D. G. Levitt. Capillary permeability to small solutes. In E. M. Renkin and C. C. Michel (eds.), Handbook of Physiology, Section 2: The Cardiovascular System, Vol. 4. Microcirculation, Part 1, American Physiological Society, Bethesda, MD, 1984, pp. 411–466.

    Google Scholar 

  23. H. Metzer, S. Heuber-Metzer, A. Steinacker, and J. Struber. Staining PO2 measurement sides in the rat brain and quantitative morphometry of the surrounding capillaries. Pfleugers Arch. 388:21–27 (1980).

    Google Scholar 

  24. R. R. Sokal and F. J. Rohlf (eds.). Biometry, W. H. Freeman, New York, 1981, pp. 583–591.

    Google Scholar 

  25. F. J. Rohlf and R. R. Sokal (eds.). Statistical Tables, W. H. Freeman, New York, 1981, pp. 61–63, 80–81, 166–168.

    Google Scholar 

  26. S. Momma, M. Aoyagi, S. I. Rapoport, and Q. R. Smith. Phenylalanine transport across the blood-brain barrier studied with the in situ brain perfusion technique. J. Neurochem. 48:1291–1300 (1987).

    Google Scholar 

  27. M. D. Josten. Hydrogen bonding and proton transfer. J. Chem. Ed. 59:362–366 (1982).

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Chikhale, E.G., Ng, KY., Burton, P.S. et al. Hydrogen Bonding Potential as a Determinant of the in Vitro and in Situ Blood–Brain Barrier Permeability of Peptides. Pharm Res 11, 412–419 (1994). https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1018969222130

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1018969222130

Navigation