Corticosteroid-binding globulin regulates cortisol pharmacokinetics
ABSTRACT Corticosteroid-binding globulin (CBG) is the principal carrier for cortisol in the circulation. Variations in CBG-binding capacity are predicted to alter total serum cortisol disposition, but free serum cortisol is believed to be unaffected. Unbound cortisol pharmacokinetics (PK) have not been studied in the context of CBG changes. We aimed to assess the regulation of cortisol PK by CBG.
Women on oestrogens [oral contraceptive pill, (OCP)], patients homozygous for a nonfunctioning CBG variant (CBG null) and healthy controls (HV) were studied before and after IV and oral administration of hydrocortisone 20 mg.
PK parameters were studied for total serum cortisol (SerF), free serum cortisol (FreeF) and cortisone (FreeE), and salivary cortisol (SalF) and cortisone (SalE): area under the curve (AUC), clearance (CL), half-life and volume of distribution (V(d)).
Following IV hydrocortisone, AUC and half-life of SerF were significantly higher in the OCP group and lower in the CBG null. SerF CL and V(d) were significantly lower in the OCP group and increased in the CBG null, compared to HV. PK parameters for FreeF and the salivary biomarkers were not different between the CBG null and HV, although OCP patients still had higher AUC compared to HV and prolonged half-life. These findings were confirmed following oral hydrocortisone, but concentration-time profiles were highly heterogeneous and SalF interpretation was problematic because of oral contamination.
We have demonstrated that CBG has a distinct effect on cortisol PK. When CBG binding is disrupted, FreeF retains normal PK characteristics, although CBG null patients lack a CBG-bound pool of readily releasable cortisol. Women on oestrogens may have altered free serum cortisol kinetics and thus may be potentially overexposed to glucocorticoids.
SourceAvailable from: Varsha Bhatt-Mehta[Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: To determine the population pharmacokinetics of unbound hydrocortisone in critically ill neonates and infants receiving IV hydrocortisone for treatment of vasopressor-resistant hypotension and to identify patient-specific sources of pharmacokinetic variability. Prospective observational cohort study. Level 3 neonatal ICU. Sixty-two critically ill neonates and infants receiving IV hydrocortisone as part of standard of care for the treatment of vasopressor-resistant hypotension: median gestational age 28 weeks (range, 23-41), median weight 1.2 kg (range, 0.5-4.4), and 29 females. None. Unbound baseline cortisol and postdose hydrocortisone concentrations measured from blood samples being drawn for routine laboratory tests. A one-compartment model best described the data. Allometric weight and postmenstrual age were significant covariates on unbound hydrocortisone clearance and volume of distribution. Final population estimates for clearance, volume of distribution, and baseline cortisol concentration were 20.2 L/hr, 244 L, and 1.37 ng/mL, respectively. Using the median weight and postmenstrual age of our subjects (i.e., 1.2 kg and 28 wk) in the final model, the typical unbound hydrocortisone clearance and volume of distribution were 1.0 L/hr and 4.2 L, respectively. The typical half-life for unbound hydrocortisone was 2.9 hours. A sharp and continuous increase in unbound hydrocortisone clearance was observed at 35 weeks postmenstrual age. We report the first pharmacokinetic data for unbound hydrocortisone, the pharmacologically active moiety, in critically ill neonates and infants with vasopressor-resistant hypotension. Unbound hydrocortisone clearance increased with body weight and was faster in children with an older postmenstrual age. Unbound hydrocortisone clearance increased sharply at 35 weeks postmenstrual age and continued to mature thereafter. This study lays the groundwork for evaluating unbound hydrocortisone exposure-response relationships and drawing definitive conclusions about the dosing of IV hydrocortisone in critically ill neonates and infants with vasopressor-resistant hypotension.Pediatric Critical Care Medicine 05/2014; 15(6). DOI:10.1097/PCC.0000000000000152 · 2.33 Impact Factor
[Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: Background Steroid profiling for diagnosis of endocrine disorders featuring disordered production of steroid hormones is now possible from advances in liquid chromatography with tandem mass spectrometry (LC–MS/MS). Adrenal venous (AV) measurements of aldosterone and cortisol are a standard practice in the clinical work-up of primary aldosteronism, but do not yet take advantage of steroid profiling. Methods A novel LC–MS/MS based method was developed for simultaneous measurement of 15 adrenal steroids: aldosterone, corticosterone, 11-deoxycorticosterone, progesterone, pregnenolone, cortisone, cortisol, 11-deoxycortisol, 17-hydroxyprogesterone, androstenedione, dehydroepiandrosterone, dehydroepiandrosterone-sulfate, 21-deoxycortisol, 18-oxocortisol and 18-hydroxycortisol. These were compared in peripheral venous (pV) and AV plasma from 70 patients undergoing AV sampling with and without cosyntropin stimulation. Aldosterone and cortisol levels measured by LC–MS/MS were compared with those measured by immunoassay. Results Reproducibility of measurements with coefficients of variation ≤10% as well as analytical sensitivity sufficient to measure low pV levels particularly of aldosterone demonstrate the utility of the assay for profiling adrenal steroids in primary aldosteronism. Method comparisons indicated assay and concentration dependent differences of cortisol and aldosterone concentrations measured by immunoassay and LC–MS/MS. Median AV/pV ratios of 11-deoxycortisol (53.0), 17-hydroxyprogesterone (33.4), pregnenolone (62.4), androstenedione (40.6) and dehydroepiandrosterone (33.3) were 2.9- to, 5.4-fold larger than those for cortisol (11.6), with additionally generally larger increases than for cortisol with than without cosyntropin stimulation. Conclusion Our LC–MS/MS assay, in addition to improvements over existing immunoassay measurements of aldosterone and cortisol, offers profiling of 13 other adrenal steroids, providing a potentially useful method for the clinical work-up of patients with primary aldosteronism. In particular, the larger AV/pV ratios of several steroids compared to cortisol suggest more sensitive alternatives to the latter for assessing positioning of AV sampling catheters.The Journal of Steroid Biochemistry and Molecular Biology 10/2014; DOI:10.1016/j.jsbmb.2014.10.006 · 4.05 Impact Factor
[Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: To fully understand the potentially harmful effects of prenatal stress exposure impacts, it is necessary to quantify long-term and episodic stress exposure during pregnancy. There is a strong body of research relating psychological stress to elevated cortisol levels in biomarkers. Recently, maternal hair has been used to measure cortisol levels, and provides the unique opportunity to assess stress exposure throughout gestation. Understanding how cortisol in the hair is related to more common biomarkers, such as, blood, saliva and urine is currently lacking. Therefore, we developed a biokinetic model to quantify the relationships between hair, blood, saliva and urine cortisol concentrations using published literature values. Hair concentrations were used to retrospectively predict peaks in blood and saliva concentrations over days and months. Simulations showed realistic values in all compartments when results were compared with published literature. We also showed that the significant variability of cortisol in blood leads to a weak relationship between long-term and episodic measurements of stress. To our knowledge, this is the first integrative biokinetic cortisol model for blood, urine, hair and saliva. As such, it makes an important contribution to our understanding of cortisol as a biomarker and will be useful for future epidemiological studies.Journal of Exposure Science and Environmental Epidemiology advance online publication, 4 December 2013; doi:10.1038/jes.2013.86.Journal of Exposure Science and Environmental Epidemiology 12/2013; DOI:10.1038/jes.2013.86 · 3.19 Impact Factor