Drug Metabolism and Pharmacokinetics
Online ISSN : 1880-0920
Print ISSN : 1347-4367
ISSN-L : 1347-4367

This article has now been updated. Please use the final version.

The exposure of luteolin is much lower than apigenin when oral administration of Flos Chrysanthemi extract to rats
Zhongjian ChenMeijuan TuSiyuan SunSisi KongYuqing WangJiangfeng YeLiping LiSu ZengHuidi Jiang
Author information
JOURNAL FREE ACCESS Advance online publication

Article ID: DMPK-11-RG-081

Details
Abstract
  Luteolin (3', 4', 5, 7-tetrahydroxyflavone) and apigenin (4', 5, 7-trihydroxyflavone) are two common flavones and major bioactive components in Flos Chrysanthemi extract (FCE). Although FCE contains approximate luteolin (6.5%, w/w) and apigenin (5.4%, w/w), luteolin showed a much lower exposure than apigenin when FCE was orally administered to rats. The aim of the present study is to elucidate the mechanisms that caused the pharmacokinetics difference between luteolin and apigenin in rats. The results of in situ rat intestinal single-pass perfusion model showed that the permeability of luteolin (ka, 7.96 min−1 and Peff, 4.87 cm/min) was about 50% of that of apigenin (ka, 18.5 min−1 and Peff, 10.8 cm/min), which agreed with that oral bioavailability of luteolin (30.4%) from FCE was significantly lower than that of apigenin (51.1%). On the other hand, luteolin was much more unstable than apigenin during the incubation with primary rat hepatocytes, and methylated metabolites of luteolin were detected after incubation. In addition, further metabolism of methylated luteolin also contributed the faster elimination of luteolin. In conclusion, luteolin and apigenin were very similar in structure, however, one-hydroxyl difference made them of different characteristics in absorption and metabolism, which resulted in much lower exposure of luteolin than apigenin when FCE was orally administered to rats.
Content from these authors

This article cannot obtain the latest cited-by information.

© 2011 by The Japanese Society for the Study of Xenobiotics
feedback
Top