|
Originally published In Press as doi:10.1074/jbc.M104628200 on June 7, 2001
J. Biol. Chem., Vol. 276, Issue 32, 29953-29960, August 10, 2001
Affinity of Human Serum Albumin for Bilirubin Varies with Albumin
Concentration and Buffer Composition
RESULTS OF A NOVEL ULTRAFILTRATION METHOD*
Richard A.
Weisiger §,
J. Donald
Ostrow¶ **,
Ronald
K.
Koehler ,
Cecile C.
Webster ,
Pasupati
Mukerjee ,
Lorella
Pascolo§§, and
Claudio
Tiribelli§§
From the Department of Medicine and the Liver Center,
University of California, San Francisco, California 94143-0538, the
¶ Department of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Academic Medical
Center, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands, the
Division of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Veterans Affairs
Lakeside Medical Center, Northwestern University Medical School,
Chicago, Illinois 60611, the  School of Pharmacy,
University of Wisconsin, Madison, Wisconsin 53706, and the
§§ Centro Studi Fegato, Dipartimento Biochimica, Biofisicae
Chimica Macromolecule, University of Trieste, Trieste, 34127 Italy
Received for publication, May 21, 2001
 |
ABSTRACT |
Albumin binding is a crucial determinant of
bilirubin clearance in health and bilirubin toxicity in certain disease
states. However, prior attempts to measure the affinity of
albumin for bilirubin have yielded highly variable results, reflecting
both differing conditions and the confounding influence of impurities. We therefore have devised a method based on serial ultrafiltration that
successively removes impurities in [14C]bilirubin
until a stable binding affinity is achieved, and then we used it to
assess the effect of albumin concentration and buffer composition on
binding. The apparent binding affinity of human serum albumin for
[14C]bilirubin was strongly dependent on assay
conditions, falling from (5.09 ± 0.24) × 107
liters/mol at lower albumin concentrations (15 µM) to
(0.54 ± 0.05) × 107 liters/mol at higher
albumin concentrations (300 µM). To determine whether
radioactive impurities were responsible for this change, we estimated
impurities in the stock bilirubin using a novel modeling approach and
found them to be 0.11-0.13%. Formation of new impurities during the
study and their affinity for albumin were also estimated. After
correction for impurities, the binding affinity remained heavily
dependent on the albumin concentration (range (5.37 ± 0.26) × 107 liters/mol to (0.65 ± 0.03) × 107 liters/mol). Affinities decreased by about half in the
presence of chloride (50 mM). Thus, the affinity of
human albumin for bilirubin is not constant, but varies with both
albumin concentration and buffer composition. Binding may be
considerably less avid at physiological albumin concentrations
than previously believed.
 |
INTRODUCTION |
Bilirubin is a potentially toxic product of heme catabolism that
is normally cleared from plasma by the liver, conjugated with
glucuronic acid and excreted into bile (1). Newborn infants with low
levels of bilirubin glucuronosyltransferase and people with a severe
genetic deficiency of this enzyme are at risk for developing bilirubin
toxicity, which occurs when bilirubin levels in cells become
sufficiently elevated to interfere with normal cellular functions (2).
Deposition in brain tissues produces the most severe toxicity, known as
kernicterus (1), whereas deposition in skin and mucous membranes
results in the yellow jaundice characteristic of liver disease.
Plasma albumin limits the toxicity of bilirubin by reducing the unbound
bilirubin concentration and thereby competing with tissues for
bilirubin binding (3). Extremely avid binding to albumin may be
detrimental, however, because it limits the rate of hepatic removal of
bilirubin from the plasma (4). Thus, the affinity of albumin for
bilirubin may reflect a compromise between the need to prevent
excessive binding to tissues and the need for efficient hepatic elimination.
Attempts to measure the equilibrium binding constant
(KF)1
of albumin for bilirubin have been hampered by the difficulty in measuring the extremely low concentrations of unbound bilirubin typically present in plasma, reportedly less than 0.005% of total bilirubin at physiological albumin concentrations (3). For this reason,
investigators have usually measured the binding affinity at much lower
albumin concentrations where the unbound fraction of bilirubin is
correspondingly larger. The value of KF thus
determined is then used to predict the unbound bilirubin concentration
for physiologic albumin and bilirubin concentrations. This approach assumes that KF is a constant that is
independent of the albumin concentration.
This assumption has never been adequately tested and has recently been
questioned (5, 6). Moreover, many properties of albumin are known to
depend on its concentration (7-10). In particular, the binding
affinity of albumin for a variety of metabolites and drugs is reduced
at higher albumin concentration (8, 9, 11-16). Thus, the assumption
that the KF for bilirubin is unaffected by
albumin concentration may not be valid.
Prior studies of bilirubin binding to human serum albumin have produced
estimates for KF that vary by more than 100-fold
(3). One possible explanation is the use of different experimental conditions. However, an even greater confounding factor may have been
contamination by impurities. Studies that use radiolabeled bilirubin
must contend with the presence of radiolabeled impurities, both those
present initially and those generated during the study (e.g.
by photodegradation, Ref. 17). Impurities that bind weakly to albumin
but cannot be distinguished from genuine bilirubin may reduce the
apparent binding affinity dramatically. For example, if the unbound
concentration of bilirubin is 0.01%, then the presence of a nonbinding
impurity at a level of 0.1% would reduce the apparent binding affinity
~10-fold. Current methods do not allow preparation of bilirubin with
a purity of >99.99%. Thus, any binding study using labeled bilirubin
must compensate in some way for impurities.
In the current study, we present a method that uses serial
ultrafiltration to progressively and selectively remove weakly bound
impurities until the KF value approaches a
constant. Our results indicate that the binding affinity of human serum
albumin for bilirubin is not a constant, as previously assumed (3), but
is modulated by both albumin concentration and buffer composition. Mathematical modeling of these data allowed us to estimate not only the
true binding affinity, but also the amount of initial impurity, the
rate of impurity formation during sample processing, and the affinity
of the impurities for albumin.
 |
EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURES |
To minimize photodegradation of bilirubin (18-20), samples were
maintained in complete darkness throughout all procedures except when
being transferred into and out of the centrifuge and during aliquot
removal and remixing of the retentates. Illumination was provided by
red lamps with no detectable emission below 600 nm; this has been shown
to produce no detectable photodegradation of bilirubin in deoxygenated
albumin solution at pH 7.4 (19). Photoisomerization is also unlikely
because of the lack of emission in the range of wavelengths at which
bilirubin absorbs light.
Preparation of Stock
[14C]Bilirubin--
Radiolabeled bilirubin conjugates
were purified from bile after intravenous infusion of
-[5-14C]aminolevulinic acid (PerkinElmer Life
Sciences, Boston, MA) to bile-fistula rats using a protocol approved by
the Animal Committee of Northwestern University Medical School and the
Chicago VA Lakeside Medical Center. Purified
14C-unconjugated bilirubin was then obtained by a
modification of the method of Ostrow et al. (21). Briefly,
proteins were removed from pooled bile using reverse-phase C18
cartridges (Mega Bond Elut, Analytichem, Harbor City, CA). Following
elution, the conjugated bilirubin was precipitated with lead ion, and
contaminating lipids were removed by ethanol extraction followed by two
water washes. Unconjugated bilirubin was produced by alkaline
hydrolysis of the resulting pigments. After extraction into chloroform,
the labeled bilirubin was further purified by two cycles of alkaline extraction followed by recrystallization to constant specific activity
according to McDonagh and Assisi (22). The resulting [14C]bilirubin had a specific radioactivity of 5 × 104 dpm/µg or 0.022 µCi/µg, as assessed by
scintillation counting and diazo assay (23), and met criteria for
purity described previously (21). The [14C]bilirubin
solution was distributed among glass vials, evaporated to dryness,
sealed under argon, and finally stored in the dark at 20 °C until
use (18). Assays at 4-week intervals confirmed the stability of the
stored [14C]bilirubin (specific activity within ±2% of baseline).
Preparation of Solutions--
Sucrose buffer solutions contained
10-300 µM human serum albumin (fatty acid free, catalog
A-3782, lot 93H9343, Sigma) plus 0.25 M sucrose and 20 mM HEPES, adjusted with Tris to pH 7.4. For chloride buffer
solutions, 50 mM KCl was substituted isosmotically for 100 mM sucrose. In two experiments at albumin concentrations of
30-35 µM, 50 mM NaCl, or potassium gluconate
were used instead of KCl. On the day of the study,
[14C]bilirubin from one vial was dissolved in
deoxygenated chloroform, and the last measurable traces of polar
impurities were removed by serial extraction with 20 volumes of 0.1 M phosphate buffer, pH 7.0, until a constant solvent
partition ratio was obtained (five cycles). The chloroform was
evaporated under a stream of argon and the [14C]bilirubin
dissolved in 30 µl of Me2SO and diluted into 3.0 ml of
deoxygenated albumin solution. The target bilirubin/HSA molar ratio was
0.25 for most experiments but was reduced to 0.10 at the highest
albumin concentrations to conserve [14C]bilirubin.
Radioassay and diazo assay (23) were performed in duplicate on 0.5 ml
of the solution, and the remaining 2.5 ml was used immediately for
ultrafiltration studies.
Measurement of Bilirubin Albumin Binding by Serial
Ultrafiltration--
Ultrafiltration was performed at 25 °C using
Centricon 10 ultrafiltration devices (Amicon, Danvers, MA). Experiments
for each day were performed in duplicate, and each experiment using
chloride buffer was paired with an identical experiment using sucrose
buffer (four tubes total). Centricons, presoaked overnight in
appropriate buffer, were flushed dry with argon and loaded with 2.5 ml
of buffered [14C]bilirubin-HSA solution. Five sequential
centrifugation cycles were then performed at 42 ± 6 min intervals
(mean ± S.D., n = 112). An initial centrifugation
(10 min at 2500 × g) allowed the Centricon membrane to
become equilibrated with unbound bilirubin so that the ultrafiltrate
composition would accurately reflect the unbound bilirubin
concentration in the albumin solution. Subsequent centrifugations
(cycles 2 through 5) were for 20 min at 4500 × g.
After each centrifugation, 30 µl of stirred retentate, and the entire
filtrate were taken for analysis of protein concentration and
radioactivity. The residual retentate was then diluted back to its
original volume with the same buffer, mixed gently for 2 min, and 30 µl taken for analysis. In selected experiments to assess gradient
formation, 10-µl fluid samples were taken from the extreme top and
bottom of the retentate fluid column immediately following the final
centrifugation using a 25 µl fine-tip Hamilton syringe.
Retentate samples (10 µl) were assayed for total albumin
concentration by the bicinchonic acid method (24) with correction for
the small reactivity of the HEPES buffer using a protein-free blank.
Control studies indicated that bilirubin did not interfere with this
assay at the concentrations used. Radioactivity in the remaining 20 µl of retentate, and the entire ultrafiltrate was determined by
scintillation counting. Apparent total [Bt] and unbound
[Bf] bilirubin concentrations were calculated from the specific activity of [14C]bilirubin and the dpm/ml of the
retentate (sampled before and after each centrifugation) and filtrate,
respectively. Apparent bound bilirubin concentrations were calculated
as Bt-Bf using the mean dpm/ml and HSA
concentrations in the retentate fluid before and after the
centrifugation. Control studies were performed in the absence of HSA,
using 30 and 45 nM [14C]bilirubin, comparable
with Bf values observed in the presence of HSA.
Calculation of the Apparent Equilibrium Binding
Constant--
The apparent equilibrium binding constant,
K'f, was calculated using the
familiar mass action equation, Equation 1, in which the numerator
contains the apparent concentration of albumin-bilirubin complexes,
while the denominator is the product of the apparent unbound bilirubin
concentration [Bf] and the concentration of unoccupied
albumin binding sites [HSA-Bt +Bf].
[Bt] is the measured total bilirubin concentration.
|
(Eq. 1)
|
As used here, K'f is the first
stepwise binding constant of albumin as defined by Spector et
al. (25). Although albumin has multiple bilirubin binding sites
(3), this study considers only the first sequential site to be occupied
because the molar ratio of Bt to HSA was always
1.0.
Equation for Predicting K'f from the Impurity
Concentration--
Equation 1 may be modified to express
K'f in terms of actual concentrations
by replacing Bf and Bt with their equivalents, BF + I and BT + I, as shown in Equation 2,
|
(Eq. 2)
|
where BF and BT are the true
concentrations of unbound and total bilirubin and I is the
concentration of unbound impurities.
Measurement of Impurity Concentration by Curve Fitting--
Our
modeling strategy was to determine I by finding the values that
minimize the differences between K'f
predicted by Equation 2 and K'f
measured using Equation 1. Thus, the impurity concentration at each
centrifugation cycle for each pair of Centricon tubes (containing
sucrose and chloride buffer, respectively) was determined by
iteratively varying the values of I to minimize the sum of the squares
between the observed values of K'f in
Equation 1 and the values predicted by Equation 2 for each cycle (after
replacing BF with Bf -I and BT with
Bt -I). KF was then calculated for
each Centricon pair using the standard mass action equation.
Note that Equation 2 alone does not allow us to distinguish impurity
from unbound bilirubin, as both are efficiently filtered through the
membrane. We can calculate I if we know BF, or can calculate BF if we know I, but not both. To determine both
values, we take advantage of the fact that removal of impurity by
successive filtrations is much more efficient than removal of
bilirubin, reflecting the more avid binding of bilirubin to albumin. As
the amount of impurity in the solution decreases with each successive cycle, the value of K'f approaches
KF. Because I and BF behave
differently, they can be separated by our curve-fitting routine.
The amount of impurity remaining for any given cycle, n, is
also affected by sampling and formation of new impurity during that
cycle. The impurity concentration for a given centrifugation cycle,
In, is the sum of initial impurity I0 plus any
impurity that has formed during sample processing minus all impurity
that has been removed by filtration or sampling. This may be expressed as Equation 3,
|
(Eq. 3)
|
where k is the rate of impurity formation per
centrifugation cycle, and F is the fraction of the total impurity that
is removed by filtration per cycle. Note that both I0 and
newly generated impurity are decreased for each subsequent
centrifugation cycle by the fraction, F, of impurity removed each
cycle. If the impurity does not bind to albumin, F is simply the
fraction of the solution removed by filtration and sampling (0.48). If
the impurity does bind to albumin, then F is 0.48 multiplied by the
fraction of the impurity that is unbound as shown in Equation 4,
|
(Eq. 4)
|
where KI is the binding affinity of the
impurity for albumin. If both I0 and k are zero,
Equation 3 simplifies to zero, and we have the traditional case in
which no impurity is present.
Our approach uses the change in Bf with successive
centrifugation cycles to determine the impurity concentration, I. If
impurities are present, Bf will typically decrease with
each cycle after the first because of progressive, selective removal of
poorly bound impurities by filtration, eventually approaching a steady value. For convenience, Bf values were converted to their
equivalent K'f values using Equation 1 prior to fitting. For each Centricon tube, the sum of the squares of
the differences between observed and model-predicted
K'f values for cycles 2 through 5 was
iteratively minimized using a derivative-free (simplex) method. The
value of I for each cycle was calculated from Equation 3 and used to
determine the true binding affinity, KF as
described below. A Microsoft Excel program to perform the curve fitting is available from the first author.
Calculation of the True Binding Constant from Experimental
Data--
The true binding affinity KF for each
centrifugation is found by subtracting the impurity concentration for
that cycle In from Bf and Bt
everywhere they appear in Equation 1. Modifying Equation 1 and defining
R as the ratio of total to unbound impurity, we get Equation 5.
|
(Eq. 5)
|
Model Discrimination--
We sought the simplest impurity model
that could adequately account for the data. All models considered the
amount of initial impurity, I0; the rate of new impurity
formation per cycle, k; and the affinity of binding of
impurity to albumin, KI, although one or more of
these values could be set to zero prior to fitting. Where k
was not zero, we further considered whether k was acting on
the total concentration of bilirubin, the unbound concentration of
bilirubin, or was a constant independent of either concentration. The
best model was selected using three criteria. First, curve fitting of
the data must converge on physiologically reasonable (e.g.
non-negative) values for the fitted parameters for each pair of
Centricon tubes. Second, all parameters must be adequately identified
by the data (S.E. of the fitted values 100% of the mean). Models
that fulfilled the above criteria were further compared according to
goodness of fit (determined by the lowest sum of the squares for a
given number of unknown parameters). Models with fewer unknown
parameters were favored over more complex models if they could
adequately account for the data.
Statistical Analysis--
Differences in values between
individual parameters were determined using the appropriate paired or
unpaired two-tailed t test with p < 0.05 being judged as significant. Unless otherwise specified, parameter
values are listed as mean ± S.E.
 |
RESULTS |
Validation of Ultrafiltration Method--
In eight control studies
without albumin, 8-18% of the [14C]bilirubin adsorbed
to the walls and frit of the Centricon device during the first
centrifugation. With subsequent cycles, no additional adsorption
was detected and the concentration of [14C]bilirubin in
the filtrate averaged 98 ± 2% of that in the retentate. Thus, no
correction for binding to the Centricon was needed for cycles 2 through
5. Subsequent analysis used data from these cycles only.
Binding of bilirubin to the Centricon tubes during the first
centrifugation was also seen in the presence of albumin, although it
was much less pronounced. Radioactivity in the filtrate was 52 ± 30% greater (mean ± S.D., n = 112) after the
second cycle than after the first. Assay of ultrafiltrates showed no
detectable protein even after 10-fold concentration by lyophilization,
indicating that the Centricon membranes were essentially impermeable to
albumin. Our assay would have been sensitive to leakage of as little as 0.005 µg/ml albumin in the filtrate. This corresponds to leakage of
less than 0.00005% of the albumin from a 1% solution, a value that is
at least 1000 times lower than the corresponding fraction of
radioactivity filtered (mean 0.22%, range 0.06-1.42%). Total albumin
concentration in the solution was not affected by filtration followed
by redilution to the original volume. However, total HSA and
[14C]bilirubin concentrations in the retained solutions
declined by about 10% overall during cycles 2 through 5 because of
removal of samples for assay followed by redilution to the original
volume. Because we measured the values of [HSA] and
[Bt] for each cycle, these small changes had no effect on results.
In control experiments at albumin concentrations of 13-17 and 80-90
µM, K'f values did not
differ between Bt/HSA molar ratios of 0.44-0.48 and
0.23-0.26 (data not shown). However, molar ratios >0.55 resulted in
significantly larger values of K'f,
possibly reflecting formation of non-filtered bilirubin aggregates when
BF exceeds its solubility in water. To avoid problems related to saturation of the unbound bilirubin concentration, all
studies were performed using molar ratios of 0.1-0.25.
Gradient Formation--
At the conclusion of each centrifugation
cycle, a steep gradient of increased yellow color was visible at the
bottom of the retentate fluid. To determine the magnitude of these
gradients, 25 µl samples were taken from the extreme top and bottom
of the retentate in 4 control Centricons after the 5th spin cycle,
being careful not to disturb the gradient. All tubes contained 40-50 µM HSA, whereas two contained sucrose buffer and two
contained chloride buffer. Measured concentrations of HSA were 4.0 ± 0.4-fold higher at the bottom than at the top of the retentate
column, whereas the comparable value for [14C]bilirubin
was 2.8 ± 0.3 (mean ± S.E., p < 0.05 HSA
versus [14C]bilirubin). The potential impact
of these gradients on our conclusions is considered later.
Results of Traditional Analysis--
Most prior binding studies
have analyzed their data assuming that no impurity is present. To allow
comparison with these earlier studies, we first analyzed our data using
cycles 2-5 as replicates without any correction for impurities. This
analysis suggests a dramatic decrease in the apparent binding affinity
of HSA for bilirubin at higher albumin concentrations (Fig.
1). The
concentration-dependent change in
K'f was 9.5-fold in sucrose buffer
(from (5.09 ± 0.24) × 107 to (5.36 ± 0.51) × 106 liters/mol) and 8.7-fold in chloride
buffer (from (2.19 ± 0.14) × 107 to (2.52 ± 0.28) × 106 liters/mol). Moreover,
K'f was significantly greater in
sucrose buffer than in chloride buffer (mean ratio 2.03 ± 0.54, p < 0.0002).

View larger version (22K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 1.
Apparent binding affinity of HSA for
bilirubin as a function of albumin concentration assuming no impurity
is present. Each point represents a single Centricon tube, with
data from centrifugations 2-5 treated as replicates. A 49-57%
reduction in apparent binding affinity is present at all HSA
concentrations in the presence of chloride (50 mM). This
traditional analysis does not exclude the possibility that the apparent
reduction is because of poorly bound radiolabeled impurities that
constitute an increasingly large fraction of the filtered radioactivity
at higher albumin concentrations. Albumin concentrations shown are the
mean of values measured in the mixed retentate before and after
filtration. Actual albumin concentrations immediately above the
ultrafiltration membrane were larger by a factor of 4 or more because
of gradient formation (see text). , sucrose; , chloride.
Error bars are ± S.E.
|
|
Analysis of Impurities--
The decrease in
K'f with rising albumin concentration
could also be explained by a poorly bound impurity that constitutes a
relatively minor fraction of the unbound radioactivity at lower albumin
concentrations, but most of the unbound radioactivity at higher albumin
concentrations. If so, the true binding affinity KF might actually be constant. This alternative
interpretation must be excluded before variation in binding affinity
with albumin concentration can be accepted. We therefore estimated the
impurity concentration from the change in Bf with
successive centrifugation cycles.
Change in Apparent Binding Affinity with Successive
Cycles--
The radioactivity in the filtrate (Bf)
gradually decreased from the 2nd to the 5th centrifugation cycles by a
mean of 18%, presumably reflecting progressive removal of impurities
by filtration. Because the HSA concentration remained nearly constant,
this decline resulted in a corresponding increase in the apparent
binding affinity of albumin for bilirubin,
K'f (Fig.
2). The increase in
K'f became less marked with each
succeeding cycle, suggesting that impurity was being lost by
ultrafiltration more rapidly than it was being formed until a balance
between these two processes was approached. The total increase in
K'f over cycles 2-5 averaged 17 ± 5% in the absence of KCl and 19 ± 5% with 50 mM
KCl present (n = 14, mean ± S.E., Fig. 2). In one
study, K'f declined substantially
over all cycles, presumably because of very high rates of impurity
formation and/or development of leaks in the filter membrane. These
data were excluded from subsequent analysis by replacing them with data
from a replicate study done under identical conditions.

View larger version (40K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 2.
Increase in apparent binding affinity with
number of centrifugation cycles. Mean
K'f values (expressed as a fraction
of their individual values for cycle 2) increased from the 2nd to the
5th cycle by 17 ± 5% in sucrose buffer (open bars)
and 19 ± 5% in chloride buffer (shaded bars). The
incremental increase in K'f became
less marked with each succeeding cycle, suggesting that impurity was
lost by ultrafiltration more rapidly than it was being formed until a
balance between these two processes was approached. Error
bars are ± S.E.
|
|
Estimation of Impurities by Modeling--
The amount of impurity
needed to cause the observed change in
K'f for each pair of Centricon tubes
was estimated by modeling the K'f
data for each cycle as described in "Experimental Procedures." All
models considered included the initial impurity level, I0,
as a fitted variable (allowed range, 0-100% of filtered
radioactivity). All models also included possible binding of impurity
to albumin by incorporating the binding affinity of impurity for
albumin, KI, as a fitted parameter (allowed
range, 0-KF).
Models that were considered differed only by whether impurity was
generated during each cycle and if so, whether the rate constant for
impurity formation, k, was proportional to the unbound bilirubin concentration (model A), the total bilirubin concentration (model B), or a constant independent of the bilirubin concentration (zero-order, model C). Thus, the unknown parameters in the fitting process were I0, KI, and
k.
Both models A and B satisfactorily accounted for the data with
reasonable values of the unknown parameters (Table
I). All parameter values were adequately
identified by the data. Thus, the uncertainty (S.E.) in I0
was only 16% of the mean for both models whereas the uncertainty in
KI was 18% for model A and 49% for model B. The corresponding uncertainties for k were 9 and 15% for
models A and B in sucrose buffer, and 6 and 17% in chloride buffer.
The goodness of fit was comparable for models A and B (ratio of the
r2 coefficients of variation was 1.0). Thus, both models A
and B appear to be reasonable interpretations of the data. In contrast, fits using model C did not converge for most experiments despite trying
a wide range of starting parameter values. Model C was thus eliminated
from further consideration.
View this table:
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Table I
Estimates of impurity levels and formation rates using different model
assumptions
Results are mean ± S.E. (n = 14). For each
Centricon pair (containing identical concentrations of bilirubin and
albumin in either sucrose or chloride buffer), K'f
values for cycles 2 through 5 were fitted to models A, B, and C, and
the resulting data averaged to give the values shown. I0 is the
amount of unbound radiolabeled impurity present in the bilirubin
solution prior to the first centrifugation, expressed as a percent of
the total bilirubin concentration. KI is the
apparent binding constant of the albumin for impurity, while
k is the fraction of the unbound (model A) or total (model
B) bilirubin converted to impurity per centrifugation cycle. Model C
assumes zero-order degradation of bilirubin, in which the rate of
impurity formation is a constant independent of the unbound or total
bilirubin concentrations. Because >99.8% of bilirubin was bound at
all albumin concentrations studied, bound and total bilirubin
concentrations are considered identical for modeling purposes.
|
|
From this we conclude that impurity is generated during the
centrifugation process with a rate that is proportional to the bilirubin concentration. However, our data are not sufficient to
determine whether impurity formation is proportional to the unbound or
to the total bilirubin concentration. Fortunately, our conclusions are
identical whether model A or model B is used to analyze the data.
Specific results are presented for each model below.
Initial Impurity--
The fitted value of I0 was
identical for both models A and B (0.11-0.14% of total radioactivity,
Table I). This is expected because the level of preformed impurity
should be independent of whether subsequent impurity is generated from
unbound or total bilirubin. Thus, I0 cannot be used to
discriminate between models A and B.
Rate of Impurity Formation--
Model A: The overall
rate of impurity formation according to model A was 29.6 ± 0.2%
of the unbound bilirubin concentration per cycle and was smaller in
chloride (21.5 ± 2.2%) than sucrose (37.7 ± 3.4%) buffer
(p < 0.005, Table I). Model B: The
mean rate of impurity formation according to model B was 0.0302 ± 0.0048% of the total bilirubin per cycle and was slightly larger in
chloride (0.035 ± 0.006%) than sucrose (0.025 ± 0.004%)
buffer (p < 0.005, Table I).
Binding Affinity of Impurity for Albumin--
The biggest
difference between models A and B was the binding affinity of the
impurity for albumin (KI), which was 3,550 ± 627 liters/mol for model A, and only 482 ± 236 liters/mol for model B. The latter value is low enough that less than 10% of the
impurity should be bound even at the highest albumin concentrations used and is not significantly different from zero (p = 0.06). For model A, however, the fraction of bound impurity over the range of HSA concentrations studied is 5-53% percent.
Indifference of KF Values to Model
Selection--
Although we were unable to differentiate between model
A and model B, resulting values for KF
turned out to be virtually identical for both models (mean ratio
1.03 ± 0.03 for chloride buffer and 0.97 ± 0.07 for sucrose
buffer, n = 14 for each). This indifference to model
selection reflects the fact that I0, which is treated the
same in both models, was the most important source of impurity. Values
for model A were arbitrarily selected for Fig.
3.

View larger version (30K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 3.
Binding affinity of HSA for bilirubin as a
function of albumin concentration after correction for impurities.
The average correction is small (compare with Fig. 1), reflecting the
fact that most impurities are removed by filtration. The relative
decline in affinity is similar with and without chloride (see
inset). Albumin concentrations listed are the mean of values
measured in the mixed retentate before and after filtration. Actual
albumin concentrations immediately above the ultrafiltration membrane
were larger by a factor of 4 or more because of gradient formation (see
text). , sucrose; , chloride.
|
|
Effect of Buffer Composition--
At all albumin concentrations
studied, binding was considerably less avid in the presence of 50 mM KCl than in its absence. This conclusion holds whether
or not the data have been corrected for impurity. Thus, the uncorrected
affinity (K'f) was on average
2.03 ± 0.54-fold greater in the absence of chloride (Fig. 1,
p < 0.0001), whereas the corrected affinity
(KF) was 2.63 ± 0.10-fold greater in the
absence of chloride (Fig. 3, p < 0.0001). The relative
reduction in KF with rising albumin
concentration was, however, unaffected by buffer composition (Fig. 3,
inset). Ion substitution studies (Fig.
4) showed that 50 mM NaCl
decreased K'f to the same extent as
50 mM KCl, whereas 50 mM potassium gluconate
did not. Thus, the reduction in affinity appears to be due to chloride
ion and is not due to sodium ion or overall ionic strength.

View larger version (15K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 4.
Effect of buffer composition on binding
affinity of albumin for bilirubin.
K'f was measured at pH 7.4, 23-25 °C, at HSA of 15-17 µM and Bt/HSA
ratios averaging 0.25, using four different buffer compositions. Each
value is the mean ± S.E. of eight
K'f values, derived from four
ultrafiltration cycles in each of two Centricon-10 devices. The
left bar shows the mean
K'f in standard sucrose buffer (20 mM HEPES-Tris buffer containing 250 mM
sucrose). The other bars show the effects of isosmotically
substituting 50 mM of the indicated salt for 100 mM sucrose. Buffers that lacked chloride had significantly
greater K'f values than those with
chloride (p < 0.00001), whereas changes in cation or
ionic strength had no apparent effect.
|
|
Effect of Albumin Concentration--
The value of
KF decreased more than 6-fold as the HSA
concentration increased from 18 to 320 µM (Fig. 3). Thus,
KF decreased from (5.37 ± 0.26) to
(0.65 ± 0.03) × 107 liters/mol in sucrose
buffer and from (1.70 ± 0.06) to (0.28 ± 0.01) × 107 liters/mol in chloride buffer. These changes were
highly significant (p < 0.0001). Most of the decline
occurred at albumin concentrations below 100 µM (0.67 g/dl), concentrations that are below the range encountered in health
and disease (typically 750-200 µM, Ref. 26). However, if
we multiply the albumin concentrations by a factor of 4-10 to adjust
for albumin gradients generated during centrifugation, the shift in
KF occurs within the physiologic range.
 |
DISCUSSION |
Most prior studies of the binding of bilirubin to albumin have
assumed that poorly bound impurities constitute a sufficiently small
fraction of the unbound bilirubin concentration that they may be
ignored. Whereas this may be true at very low albumin concentrations, selective binding of bilirubin but not impurities at higher albumin concentrations magnifies the impact of any impurities present. For this
reason, and to decrease consumption of expensive HSA and bilirubin,
most investigators have avoided measuring KF at physiologic albumin concentrations.
In this study, we started with a highly purified preparation of
[14C]bilirubin and then estimated the initial impurity
level, which averaged 0.13 ± 0.02% of total bilirubin. We also
estimated the rate of new impurity formation, which averaged 0.030 ± 0.005% of total bilirubin (or 26.6 ± 3.8% of unbound
bilirubin) per centrifugation cycle. By knowing these values, we were
able to estimate the true binding affinity KF
over a wide range of albumin concentrations up to about two-thirds of
physiologic values. The required correction was relatively small,
reflecting relatively low levels of impurities in our crystallized and
serially pre-extracted bilirubin preparation that were further reduced
by serial ultrafiltration. Higher albumin concentrations were not
studied because ultrafiltration rates became too slow under the
conditions of our assay.
Our results indicate that the binding affinity of albumin for bilirubin
falls with rising albumin concentration by a factor of 6 or more. An
earlier study from our laboratory using [3H]bilirubin
reached a similar conclusion, but yielded much lower values for
K'f (5). This discrepancy probably
reflects higher levels of unbound impurities in our earlier study
because of exchange of tritium with the solvent. Because impurities
were not measured, it is not possible to determine
KF.
Ahlfors (6) recently reported a 2.4-fold reduction in the affinity of
human serum for bilirubin when measured at a 1:2.5 serum dilution when
compared with at a 1:44 dilution. This study, which uses a
sophisticated peroxidase assay, confirmed his earlier observations
using a simpler method (27). Interestingly, the steep increase in
Bf with rising albumin concentrations reported in his
earlier paper closely mirrors the change in
K'f seen in our present work, but was
attributed to factors related to the assay method and to inhibitors of
binding, rather than an intrinsic change in binding affinity (27). The
greater reduction of KF found in our study may
reflect use of purified albumin instead of whole serum, differences in
buffer composition, and correction for poorly bound impurities. In
particular, serum contains fatty acids that are known to modulate the
binding affinity of albumin for bilirubin (28). Direct comparison of
these studies is further limited by the fact that the buffer
compositions at the two dilutions studied by Ahlfors (27) were not
comparable due to dilution of serum electrolytes, and newborn serum
contains significant amounts of -fetoprotein (29), which also binds
avidly to bilirubin (30).
The concentration dependence of KF is not
without precedent. The binding affinity of albumin has been reported to
vary with albumin concentration for numerous other metabolites and
drugs, including cortisol (8, 11), sulfobromophthalein (12), thiopental (13), phenytoin (14), tryptophan (14, 15), sulfadiazine (9), salicylate
(9), phenylbutazone (9), and a benzoic acid derivative (16). The
mechanism of this effect is unknown, but may reflect formation of
reversible aggregates of albumin at higher concentrations. The osmotic
activity of albumin molecules is lower at physiologic concentrations
than in dilute solution (7, 8). The mean radius of dissolved albumin
molecules increases by 8% when the concentration is raised from 0.4%
to 4% (9). Zini et al. (10) found evidence for reversible aggregates
using electrophoresis, and suggested that only one-half of the albumin was monomeric at physiologic concentrations. Aggregation could greatly
alter the binding affinity of albumin. After binding to bilirubin,
albumin undergoes a conformational relaxation that increases the
binding energy and affinity (31). Anything that inhibits this change
would reduce KF. For example, binding of fatty
acids to separate binding sites on albumin reduces its affinity for
bilirubin, presumably because albumin cannot optimize its conformation
for both ligands simultaneously (28). A similar loss of conformational
freedom might result from protein-protein interactions at higher
albumin concentrations.
Preliminary mathematical modeling of our data suggest that the decrease
in K'F with albumin concentration may
be explained by the tendency of albumin to self-aggregate at higher concentrations (7, 8, 10, 32-35), which appears to cause a reduction
of binding affinity for various other ligands (8, 9, 16, 36, 37).
Studies to test this hypothesis are underway but are beyond the scope
of the present work.
Effect of Buffer Composition--
Binding was considerably less
avid in the presence of KCl than in the presence of sucrose. Ion
substitution studies showed that this effect was because of chloride
anion and not due to the cation, or, as previously suggested (3), to a
change in ionic strength. Limited literature data suggest that chloride can bind the region 2 binding site of albumin, which is not responsible for bilirubin binding (38). However, chloride is known to modulate the
conformation of albumin (39) and could thus allosterically modulate the
binding affinity for bilirubin, as has previously been shown for
warfarin (40). Alternatively, chloride, which is present in plasma at
concentrations six orders of magnitude larger than unbound bilirubin,
might competitively displace the bilirubin anion from its primary
binding site on lysine 242 of albumin (41). Studies of a range of
chloride concentrations and a variety of other anions are needed to
determine the specificity and mechanism of the chloride effect on binding.
Effects of Model Selection--
Our primary conclusions do not
depend on the model used to analyze the data. Indeed, the increase in
KF caused by correction for impurities was small
(compare Fig. 1 with Fig. 3), and the effect of concentration on
albumin binding was similar for both models A and B. Similarly, the
effect of chloride on binding was similar both before and after
correcting for impurities. Thus, our conclusions appear to be robust
and model-independent.
The increase in KF compared with
K'f was highly significant,
indicating that correction of the binding constant for impurities was
necessary to get an accurate binding constant (p < 0.0002 by Student's paired t test). The required correction was relatively small because we used multiple steps to remove polar impurities from the [14C]bilirubin prior to use.
This left relatively little impurity to correct for by modeling.
Modeling was nevertheless essential, however, because without it, there
would have been no way to know how closely
K'f approximated
KF.
We included k and KI in our models
for two reasons. First, bilirubin is known to undergo photooxidation
(18-20) and photoisomerization (42), and some impurities must
therefore have formed despite all precautions. Second, the binding
affinity of the impurities for albumin is not necessarily zero.
Photoisomers of bilirubin bind to albumin, although with lower affinity
than native bilirubin (17, 43). Likewise, bilirubin photooxidation
products include molecules such as biliverdin that may bind to albumin
(17, 20, 44). If binding occurs, the fraction of the impurities removed with each centrifugation cycle will be less than the fraction of the
total volume filtered. Whereas we were able to identify the values of
k and KI, we were unable to determine
whether the newly formed impurities were derived mainly from unbound or
total bilirubin. Fortunately, similar values for
KF were returned for each Centricon pair
regardless of which model was used to analyze the data.
Serial ultrafiltration offers two major advantages for measuring
KF. First, a much higher fraction of the poorly
bound impurity is filtered each cycle than of authentic bilirubin. This
leads to removal of nearly all preformed impurity after a sufficient number of filtration cycles, and is one of the reasons why
K'f and KF are
so similar in our study. We have previously used a similar sequential
strategy to measure the binding affinity of [14C]palmitate, another avidly bound ligand of albumin
(45). Second, the impurity level may be estimated from the change in
the fraction of filtered radioactivity with each cycle, allowing
correction of the affinity for the effects of impurities.
On the other hand, ultrafiltration has been criticized as a method for
measuring unbound bilirubin because leakage of even a small amount of
albumin (with its bound bilirubin) across the membrane can invalidate
the results (46). Fortunately, ultrafiltration membranes have improved
dramatically since this concern was raised. Using a sensitive protein
assay on concentrated samples of the filtrate, we found that leakage
was at least 100 times below the level needed to produce a 10% error
in our results.
Limitations of the Current Approach--
A limitation of this
study is that ultrafiltration generates concentration gradients within
the retentate because of the selective passage of solvent and unbound
bilirubin, but not albumin, from the thin layer of solution located
just above filter membrane. Direct measurements indicated that the
albumin concentration just above the membrane was ~4-fold greater
than in the bulk solution. Gradients may have been still larger if
significant dissipation occurred prior to and during sampling.
At the relatively low centrifugal forces used here, sedimentation of
albumin and bilirubin is negligible, and movement of both solutes
toward the membrane is mainly by solvent drag. The gradient becomes
gradually steeper during the centrifugation, but the concentrations of
albumin and bilirubin in the bulk solution above the gradient remains
unchanged. The albumin concentrations reported above are the means of
the pre- and post-centrifugation values in the mixed retentate, and do
not take into consideration gradient formation.
Despite this uncertainty, the major conclusions of this paper appear
secure for several reasons. First, the albumin concentrations above the
membrane, whereas not identical to the measured values in Figs. 1 and
3, should be proportional to them. Thus, the main effect of gradients
is to shift the steep portion of the curves in Figs. 1 and 3 rightward,
toward higher albumin concentrations. Ahlfors binding data in serum (6,
27), obtained with the peroxidase method, suggests that this shift is
not marked and that the steep decline in KF
occurs below physiological albumin concentrations. Second,
BF should not be affected by gradient formation at a
constant ratio of bilirubin to albumin unless KF is, in fact, concentration-dependent. The law of mass
action states that for HSA concentrations sufficient to bind nearly all
of the bilirubin, BF at each level of the retentate is
entirely determined by KF and the ratio of
bilirubin to albumin (4). Because BF changes with albumin
concentration, despite the fact that this ratio is constant, it follows
that KF must vary with the albumin concentration.
Thus, the major uncertainty is not whether binding of bilirubin is
concentration dependent, but the precise range of albumin concentrations over which the change occurs. If it coincides with the
physiologic range, an increase in the binding affinity of albumin for
bilirubin might help compensate for the lower concentration of albumin
associated with certain disease states.
Interpretation of our data is also limited by the fact that none of the
buffers tested contained physiological ion concentrations. These
buffers were chosen to allow comparison with earlier vesicle transport
studies using the same preparations of [14C]bilirubin and
albumin (47, 48) and not to simulate neonatal plasma. Thus, neither our
values of KF, nor those obtained by other
methods (3) may represent the true affinity of bilirubin for HSA in the
plasma of jaundiced neonates, and further studies are needed to
determine the KF values in neonatal plasma.
Physiological and Clinical Implications--
Our value for
KF using 60 µM HSA in sucrose
buffer (Fig. 3) is less than half the most widely accepted literature
value of ~6 × 107 liters/mol, which was measured
under comparable conditions (~60 µM albumin and low
chloride concentrations) using the peroxidase method (3, 41, 49).
Although application of the peroxidase method to newborn serum is
associated with a number of limitations (6, 50-53), a substantially
improved version of this method was recently reported by Ahlfors that
gives KF values for a 1:2.5 dilution of plasma
(about 120 µM HSA, 40 mM chloride) of
1.7 × 107 versus 0.7 × 107 liters/mol for our study under comparable conditions
(Fig. 3). The difference may reflect the presence of fatty acids in
serum, which increase the affinity of albumin for bilirubin ~3-fold
(28).
Accurate knowledge of KF at physiologic albumin
concentrations is important for understanding the mechanisms of hepatic
bilirubin clearance and bilirubin encephalopathy. Efficient hepatic
clearance of avidly bound molecules can be difficult to reconcile with
the very small concentrations of the unbound form thought to be present outside the plasma membrane (54). If unbound concentrations are larger
at physiological albumin concentrations than currently believed, this
problem disappears.
Conversely, the current results also create some problems. Many
bilirubin transport studies have assumed that KF
remains constant when other variables change. Failure of this
assumption may require reinterpretation of these studies. For example,
the enhanced uptake of bilirubin that is observed when KCl and
valinomycin are added to vesicle suspensions (5, 48) may result not
just from enhanced electrical potential across the membrane, but also
from reduced albumin binding because of chloride. Similarly, addition
of chloride, but not other anions, has been shown to stimulate uptake
of bilirubin and other organic anions from albumin solutions by
perfused liver and cultured hepatocytes (55). Although this effect may
reflect a chloride requirement of the membrane transporter as suggested by the authors, it could also reflect higher unbound bilirubin concentrations in the medium in the presence of chloride. In
conclusion, the dependence of KF on conditions
underscores, as previously emphasized (5), the need to measure unbound
concentrations using the same albumin and ligand preparations and the
same solution compositions as are used for transport measurements.
 |
FOOTNOTES |
*
This study was supported by a Medical Investigator Award
from the United States Department of Veterans Affairs (to J. D. O.); the Gastroenterology Foundation, Academic Medical Center, University of
Amsterdam, The Netherlands (to J. D. O.); National Institutes of
Health Grant DK-32898 (to R. A. W.); a Career Development Award from
Bracco SpA, Milan, Italy (to L. P.); and Grants ICSO60.1/RF98.67 from
the Italian Ministry of Health, the Italian Ministry of University and
Scientific Research (MURST, Cofin '98) and from Fondo Studi Fegato-ONLUS, Trieste, Italy (to C. T.).
§
To whom correspondence should be addressed: Liver Center,
University of California San Francisco Medical Center, 513 Parnassus Ave., S-357, Box 0538, San Francisco, CA 94143-0538. Fax: 415-476-0659; E-mail: dickw@itsa.ucsf.edu.
**
Present address: Research Service (151L), Seattle Veterans Affairs
Medical Center, 1660 South Columbian Way, Seattle, WA
98108-1597.
Published, JBC Papers in Press, June 7, 2001, DOI 10.1074/jbc.M104628200
 |
ABBREVIATIONS |
The abbreviations used are:
KF, actual formation (association) constant for
binding of bilirubin to HSA;
BF, actual unbound bilirubin
concentration;
BT, actual total bilirubin concentration;
Bf, apparent unbound bilirubin concentration;
Bt, apparent total bilirubin concentration;
HSA, human
serum albumin concentration;
I, concentration of unbound
impurities in solution (derived variable);
I0, initial impurity concentration in the stock bilirubin
(fitted variable);
k, rate of formation of new impurity per
cycle (fitted variable);
K'f,
apparent formation (association) constant for binding of bilirubin to
HSA;
KI, formation (association) constant of I
for HSA (fitted variable);
R, ratio of total to unbound impurity in
solution.
 |
REFERENCES |
| 1.
|
Gourley, G. R.
(1997)
Adv. Pediatr.
44,
173-229
|
| 2.
|
Wennberg, R. P.
(2000)
Cell. Mol. Neurobiol.
20,
97-109
|
| 3.
|
Brodersen, R.
(1979)
CRC. Crit. Rev. Clin. Lab. Sci.
11,
305-399
|
| 4.
|
Weisiger, R. A.
(1993)
in
Hepatic Transport and Bile Secretion: Physiology and Pathophysiology
(Tavoloni, N.
, and Berk, P. D., eds)
, pp. 171-196, Raven Press, NY
|
| 5.
|
Pascolo, L.,
Del Vecchio, S.,
Koehler, R. K.,
Bayon, J. E.,
Webster, C. C.,
Mukerjee, P.,
Ostrow, J. D.,
and Tiribelli, C.
(1996)
Biochem. J.
316,
999-1004
|
| 6.
|
Ahlfors, C. E.
(2000)
Anal. Biochem.
279,
130-135
|
| 7.
|
Scatchard, G.,
Batchelder, A. C.,
Brown, A.,
and Zosa, M.
(1946)
J. Am. Chem. Soc.
68,
2610-2612
|
| 8.
|
Mueller, U. W.,
and Potter, J. M.
(1981)
Biochem. Pharmacol.
30,
727-733
|
| 9.
|
Boobis, S. W.,
and Chignell, C. F.
(1979)
Biochem. Pharmacol.
28,
751-756
|
| 10.
|
Zini, R.,
Barre, J.,
Bree, F.,
and Tillement, J.-P.
(1981)
J. Chromatog.
216,
191-198
|
| 11.
|
Brunkhorst, W. K.,
and Hess, E. L.
(1965)
Arch. Biochem. Biophys.
111,
54-60
|
| 12.
|
Thompson, J. M.
(1973)
Br. J. Pharmacol.
47,
133-137
|
| 13.
|
Shen, D.,
and Gibaldi, M.
(1974)
J. Pharm. Sci.
63,
1698-1703
|
| 14.
|
Bowmer, C. J.,
and Lindup, W. E.
(1978)
Biochem. Pharmacol.
27,
937-942
|
| 15.
|
Fenerty, C. A.,
and Lindup, W. E.
(1989)
J. Neurochem.
53,
416-422
|
| 16.
|
Clegg, L. S.,
and Lindup, W. E.
(1984)
J. Pharm. Pharmacol.
36,
776-779
|
| 17.
|
Ostrow, J. D.,
Schmid, R.,
and Samuelson, D.
(1963)
J. Clin. Invest.
42,
1286-1299
|
| 18.
|
Blanckaert, N.,
and Heirwegh, K. P. M.
(1986)
in
Bile Pigments and Jaundice; Molecular, Metabolic and Medical Aspects
(Ostrow, J. D., ed)
, pp. 31-79, Marcel Dekker, NY
|
| 19.
|
Ostrow, J. D.,
and Branham, R. V.
(1970)
Gastroenterology
58,
15-25
|
| 20.
|
Ostrow, J. D.
(1972)
Semin. Hematol.
9,
113-125
|
| 21.
|
Ostrow, J. D.,
Hammaker, L.,
and Schmid, R.
(1961)
J. Clin. Invest.
40,
1442-1452
|
| 22.
|
McDonagh, A. F.,
and Assisi, F.
(1972)
Biochem. J.
129,
797-800
|
| 23.
|
Michaelsson, M.
(1961)
Scand. J. Clin. Lab. Invest.
13,
1-80
|
| 24.
|
Smith, P. K.,
Krohn, R. I.,
Hermanson, G. T.,
Mallia, A. K.,
Gartner, F. H.,
Provenzano, M. D.,
Fujimoto, E. K.,
Goeke, N. M.,
Olson, B. J.,
and Klenk, D. C.
(1985)
Anal. Biochem.
150,
76-85
|
| 25.
|
Spector, A. A.,
Fletcher, J. E.,
and Ashbrook, J. D.
(1971)
Biochemistry
10,
3229-3232
|
| 26.
|
Peters, T., Jr.
(1985)
Adv. Prot. Chem.
37,
161-245
|
| 27.
|
Ahlfors, C. E.
(1981)
Clin. Chem.
27,
692-696
|
| 28.
|
Reed, R. G.
(1977)
J. Biol. Chem.
252,
7483-7487
|
| 29.
|
Mizejewski, G. J.,
Bellisario, R.,
Beblowski, D. W.,
and Carter, T. P.
(1982)
Clin. Chem.
28,
1207-1210
|
| 30.
|
Versee, V.,
and Barel, A. O.
(1979)
Biochem. J.
179,
705-707
|
| 31.
|
Koren, R.,
Nissani, E.,
and Perlmutter-Hayman, B.
(1982)
Biochim. Biophys. Acta
703,
42-48
|
| 32.
|
Costantino, H. R.,
Langer, R.,
and Klibanov, A. M.
(1995)
Bio/Technology
13,
493-497
|
| 33.
|
Dwyer, J. D.,
and Bloomfield, V. A.
(1993)
Biophys. J.
65,
1810-1816
|
| 34.
|
Simpson, R. B.,
Ashbrook, J. D.,
Santos, E. C.,
and Spector, A. A.
(1974)
J. Lipid Res.
15,
415-422
|
| 35.
|
Cameron, I. L.,
and Fullerton, G. D.
(1990)
Biochem. Cell Biol.
68,
894-898
|
| 36.
|
Pedersen, J. B.,
Pedersen, S. M.,
and Lindup, W. E.
(1990)
Biochem. Pharmacol.
39,
1138-1141
|
| 37.
|
Ray, A.,
Reynolds, J. A.,
Polet, H.,
and Steinhardt, J.
(1966)
Biochemistry
5,
2606-2616
|
| 38.
|
Kragh-Hansen, U.
(1990)
Dan. Med. Bull.
37,
57-84
|
| 39.
|
Wilting, J.,
Hart, B. J.,
and de Gier, J. J.
(1980)
Biochim. Biophys. Acta
626,
291-298
|
| 40.
|
Wilting, J.,
van der Giesen, W. F.,
Janssen, L. H.,
Weideman, M. M.,
Otagiri, M.,
and Perrin, J. H.
(1980)
J. Biol. Chem.
255,
3032-3037
|
| 41.
|
Brodersen, R.
(1982)
in
Bilirubin Vol. 1, Chemistry
(Heirwegh, K. P. M.
, and Brown, S. B., eds)
, pp. 75-123, CRC Press, Boca Raton, FL
|
| 42.
|
McDonagh, A. F.,
Palma, L. A.,
and Lightner, D. A.
(1980)
Science
208,
145-151
|
| 43.
|
Lamola, A. A.,
Flores, J.,
and Blumberg, W. E.
(1983)
Eur. J. Biochem.
132,
165-169
|
| 44.
|
Knobloch, E.,
Mandys, F.,
Hodr, R.,
Hujer, R.,
and Mader, R.
(1991)
J. Chromatogr.
566,
89-99
|
| 45.
|
Burczynski, F. J.,
Pond, S. M.,
Davis, C. K.,
Johnson, L. P.,
and Weisiger, R. A.
(1993)
Am. J. Physiol.
265,
G555-G563
|
| 46.
|
Nozaki, S.,
Tanaka, T.,
Yamashita, S.,
Sohmiya, K.,
Yoshizumi, T.,
Okamoto, F.,
Kitaura, Y.,
Kotake, C.,
Nishida, H.,
Nakata, A.,
Nakagawa, T.,
Matsumoto, K.,
Kameda-Takemura, K.,
Tadokoro, S.,
Kurata, Y.,
Tomiyama, Y.,
Kawamura, K.,
and Matsuzawa, Y.
(1999)
Mol. Cell Biochem.
192,
129-135
|
| 47.
|
Luxon, B. A.,
Milliano, M. T.,
and Weisiger, R. A.
(2000)
Biochim. Biophys. Acta
1487,
309-318
|
| 48.
|
Tiribelli, C.,
Lunazzi, G. C.,
and Sottocasa, G. L.
(1990)
Biochim. Biophys. Acta
1031,
261-275
|
| 49.
|
Kullak-Ublick, G. A.,
Hagenbuch, B.,
Stieger, B.,
Schteingart, C. D.,
Hofmann, A. F.,
Wolkoff, A. W.,
and Meier, P. J.
(1995)
Gastroenterology
109,
1274-1282
|
| 50.
|
Ahlfors, C. E.,
and Di Biasio-Erwin, D.
(1986)
J. Pediatr.
108,
295-298
|
| 51.
|
Jori, G.,
Reddi, E.,
and Rubaltelli, F. F.
(1988)
Int. J. Pept. Protein Res.
31,
17-21
|
| 52.
|
Ebbesen, F.,
and Nyboe, J.
(1983)
Acta Paediatr. Scand.
72,
665-670
|
| 53.
|
Ostrow, J. D.,
Mukerjee, P.,
and Tiribelli, C.
(1994)
J. Lipid Res.
35,
1715-1737
|
| 54.
|
Pond, S. M.,
Gordon, R. A.,
Wu, Z.-Y.,
Weisiger, R. A.,
and Bass, L.
(1994)
Am. J. Physiol. Gastrointest. Liver Physiol.
267,
G656-G662
|
| 55.
|
Wisse, E.,
De Zanger, R. B.,
Charrels, K.,
Van Der Smissen, P.,
and McCuskey, R. S.
(1985)
Hepatology
5,
683-692
|
Copyright © 2001 by The American Society for Biochemistry and Molecular Biology, Inc.

CiteULike Complore Connotea Del.icio.us Digg Reddit Technorati What's this?
This article has been cited by other articles:

|
 |

|
 |
 
C. E. Ahlfors, R. P. Wennberg, J. D. Ostrow, and C. Tiribelli
Unbound (Free) Bilirubin: Improving the Paradigm for Evaluating Neonatal Jaundice
Clin. Chem.,
July 1, 2009;
55(7):
1288 - 1299.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
A. F. McDonagh, H. J. Vreman, R. J. Wong, and D. K. Stevenson
Photoisomers: Obfuscating Factors in Clinical Peroxidase Measurements of Unbound Bilirubin?
Pediatrics,
January 1, 2009;
123(1):
67 - 76.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
S.-Y. Hung, H.-C. Liou, K.-H. Kang, R.-M. Wu, C.-C. Wen, and W.-M. Fu
Overexpression of Heme Oxygenase-1 Protects Dopaminergic Neurons against 1-Methyl-4-Phenylpyridinium-Induced Neurotoxicity
Mol. Pharmacol.,
December 1, 2008;
74(6):
1564 - 1575.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
R. P. Wennberg, C. E. Ahlfors, V. K. Bhutani, L. H. Johnson, and S. M. Shapiro
Toward Understanding Kernicterus: A Challenge to Improve the Management of Jaundiced Newborns
Pediatrics,
February 1, 2006;
117(2):
474 - 485.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
D. A. J. Bow, J. L. Perry, J. D. Simon, and J. B. Pritchard
The Impact of Plasma Protein Binding on the Renal Transport of Organic Anions
J. Pharmacol. Exp. Ther.,
January 1, 2006;
316(1):
349 - 355.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
A. McDonagh
Bilirubin the Beneficent
Pediatrics,
December 1, 2004;
114(6):
1741 - 1742.
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
F. Gennuso, C. Fernetti, C. Tirolo, N. Testa, F. L'Episcopo, S. Caniglia, M. C. Morale, J. D. Ostrow, L. Pascolo, C. Tiribelli, et al.
Bilirubin protects astrocytes from its own toxicity by inducing up-regulation and translocation of multidrug resistance-associated protein 1 (Mrp1)
PNAS,
February 24, 2004;
101(8):
2470 - 2475.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
J D Ostrow and C Tiribelli
Bilirubin, a curse and a boon
Gut,
December 1, 2003;
52(12):
1668 - 1670.
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|
Copyright © 2001 by the American Society for Biochemistry and Molecular Biology.
|
Advertisement
Advertisement
|