Characterisation of AMB-FUBINACA metabolism and CB1-mediated activity of its acid metabolite
grid.29980.3a0000 0004 1936 7830Department of Pharmacology and Toxicology, University of Otago, Dunedin, 9016 New Zealand
grid.29980.3a0000 0004 1936 7830Department of Chemistry, University of Otago, Dunedin, 9016 New Zealand
grid.1013.30000 0004 1936 834XLambert Initiative for Cannabinoid Therapeutics, Brain and Mind Centre, The University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW 2050 Australia
grid.1013.30000 0004 1936 834XSchool of Chemistry, The University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW 2006 Australia
Abstract
Purpose
AMB-FUBINACA is a synthetic cannabinoid receptor agonist (SCRA) which is primarily metabolised by hepatic enzymes producing AMB-FUBINACA carboxylic acid. The metabolising enzymes associated with this biotransformation remain unknown. This study aimed to determine if AMB-FUBINACA metabolism could be reduced in the presence of carboxylesterase (CES) inhibitors and recreational drugs commonly consumed with it. The affinity and activity of the AMB-FUBINACA acid metabolite at the cannabinoid type-1 receptor (CB1) was investigated to determine the activity of the metabolite.
Methods
The effect of CES1 and CES2 inhibitors, and delta-9-tetrahydrocannabinol (Δ9-THC) on AMB-FUBINACA metabolism were determined using both human liver microsomes (HLM) and recombinant carboxylesterases. Radioligand binding and cAMP assays comparing AMB-FUBINACA and AMB-FUBINACA acid were carried out in HEK293 cells expressing human CB1.
Results
AMB-FUBINACA was rapidly metabolised by HLM in the presence and absence of NADPH. Additionally, CES1 and CES2 inhibitors both significantly reduced AMB-FUBINACA metabolism. Furthermore, digitonin (100 µM) significantly inhibited CES1-mediated metabolism of AMB-FUBINACA by ~ 56%, while the effects elicited by Δ9-THC were not statistically significant. AMB-FUBINACA acid produced only 26% radioligand displacement consistent with low affinity binding. In cAMP assays, the potency of AMB-FUBINACA was ~ 3000-fold greater at CB1 as compared to the acid metabolite.
Conclusions
CES1A1 was identified as the main hepatic enzyme responsible for the metabolism of AMB-FUBINACA to its less potent carboxylic acid metabolite. This biotransformation was significantly inhibited by digitonin. Since other xenobiotics may also inhibit similar SCRA metabolic pathways, understanding these interactions may elucidate why some users experience high levels of harm following SCRA use.
Introduction
As of September 2021, 1079 new psychoactive substances were reported by the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime, approximately 29% of which were classified as synthetic cannabinoid receptor agonists (SCRAs). Methyl (2S)-2-((1-((4-fluorophenyl)methyl)indazole-3-carbonyl)amino)-3-methylbutanoate (AMB-FUBINACA; Fig. 1a) is an SCRA that was associated with at least 64 deaths in Auckland, New Zealand, between 2017 and 2019 [1]. While little is known about its mechanism of toxicity, its psychoactive effects are mediated through the cannabinoid receptor type-1 (CB1). AMB-FUBINACA exhibits high binding affinity (pKi 8.72 ± 0.12) for CB1, and high potency and efficacy in multiple downstream signalling pathways, including inhibition of cAMP signalling, pERK activation, receptor internalisation and β-arrestin-1 and -2 translocation [2]. In contrast to SCRAs, the primary psychoactive constituent of Cannabis sativa, delta-9-tetrahydrocannabinol (Δ9-THC), acts as a partial agonist at CB1, with approximately 80-fold lower potency than AMB-FUBINACA in common assay systems [2, 3]. In humans, Δ9-THC-mediated partial agonism of CB1 results in euphoria, cognitive impairments, feelings of dizziness and visual changes [4], and typically results in few if adverse effects. SCRAs, however, are more toxic, and can produce effects such as psychosis, respiratory depression, cardiac arrest, seizures, suicidal ideation and, in extreme circumstances, death [1, 5–7]. Non-CB1-mediated effects have been demonstrated, including cellular toxicity and necrosis; toxic metabolite generation causing mitochondrial damage and loss of cellular membrane integrity; and thermal degradant production, such as cyanide generation following the combustion of carboxamide SCRAs [8–10]. Therefore, toxicity induced by AMB-FUBINACA may be a result of its high affinity and efficacy towards CB1, but could also occur through other independent molecular targets. Furthermore, while metabolites of many SCRAs retain partial agonist activities at CB1 [11–13], activity of the AMB-FUBINACA carboxylic acid metabolite (Fig. 1b), the primary metabolite of AMB-FUBINACA [14], has not previously been reported.
CYP3A4 is the most abundant cytochrome P450 (CYP450) isoform in the liver [15] and is involved in the metabolism of approximately 70% of all therapeutic drugs [16]. Some SCRAs such as AB-CHMINACA [17], AKB-48 [18], EAM-2201 [19] and STS-135 [20] are primarily metabolised by CYP3A4. Thus, inhibition of CYP3A4 may increase both the CB1-mediated and non-CB1-mediated activities of these compounds. This can easily occur following exposure to other drugs such as furanocoumarins, itraconazole, ketoconazole, clarithromycin, erythromycin, nefazodone, and ritonavir, as well as through grapefruit juice consumption [21–23]. This highlights the importance of understanding the metabolism of SCRAs for prediction of drug–drug interactions. Interestingly, of the fatal AMB-FUBINACA cases in New Zealand, p-fluorophenylpiperazine (pFPP), Δ9-THC, ethanol (alcohol), psychiatric medications, and cotinine (a nicotine metabolite derived from tobacco) were present in 43, 41, 42, 48 and 88% of the cases, respectively [1]. Thus, it is possible that the toxic events elicited by AMB-FUBINACA in New Zealand were related to a pharmacokinetic or pharmacodynamic interaction between AMB-FUBINACA and these other compounds.
Pharmacokinetic interactions could be linked to the fact that hepatic metabolism of AMB-FUBINACA is extremely rapid, primarily producing AMB-FUBINACA (carboxylic) acid, as this demethylated metabolite is the most important in the biotransformation pathway [24]. Not only is this biotransformation rapid, but also AMB-FUBINACA acid represents more than 99% of all metabolites produced in experiments using human liver microsomes (HLM) [14]. To date, the metabolic enzyme(s) responsible for the rapid hepatic conversion of AMB-FUBINACA to AMB-FUBINACA acid remain unknown, although carboxylesterase 1 (CES1) was one of several candidates proposed by Presley et al. [25]. AMB-FUBINACA is largely stable in human plasma with ~ 86% of the original concentration remaining intact following a five-hour in vitro incubation. Notably, 94% remained in the presence of esterase inhibitors [26]. The absence of CESs in human blood may explain why in vitro plasma studies demonstrate AMB-FUBINACA to be very stable, despite the metabolism being classified as rapid [20, 26, 27]. No AMB-FUBINACA was detected in the whole blood or urine of non-fatal poisonings with AMB-FUBINACA [28], and only 26% of AMB-FUBINACA fatalities in New Zealand had AMB-FUBINACA present in their blood [1]. This may suggest that plasma protein binding displacement interactions, alongside systemic circulation resulting in transport of AMB-FUBINACA to the liver, play an important role in metabolism of this SCRA. Therefore, the current study aimed to identify the main metabolising enzymes associated with AMB-FUBINACA metabolism. Experiments were performed in the presence and absence of the CYP450 cofactor NADPH to determine the involvement of CYP450 enzymes in the biotransformation of AMB-FUBINACA to AMB-FUBINACA acid. Recombinant enzymes were also utilised to specifically identify the primary metabolising enzyme as well as its ability to be inhibited with known inhibitors. Lastly, the activity of AMB-FUBINACA acid at CB1 was compared to the parent compound as an indicator of how metabolism could potentially impact CB1-mediated effects in humans.
Materials and methods
Drugs, standards, and reagents
AMB-FUBINACA, methyl (2S)-2-((1-((4-fluorophenyl)methyl)indazole-3-carbonyl)amino)-3-methylbutanoate (C21H22FN3O3, MW: 383.423 g/mol) and AMB-FUBINACA acid, methyl (2S)-2-((1-((4-fluorophenyl)methyl]indazole-3-carbonyl)amino)-3-methylbutanoic acid (C20H20FN3O3, MW: 369.396 g/mol) were synthesised and analytically characterised at the Lambert Initiative for Cannabinoid Therapeutics, Brain and Mind Centre, and The School of Chemistry, The University of Sydney, and both were stored at 10 mM in dimethyl sulfoxide (DMSO) at -80 °C. Digitonin (C56H92O29, M: 1229.3 g/mol) and telmisartan (C33H30N4O2, M: 514.6 g/mol) were purchased from Cayman Chemical (Ann Arbor, MI, USA) and stored at 10 mM in DMSO and 1 mM in high performance liquid chromatography (HPLC) grade methanol, respectively. Δ9-Tetrahydrocannabinol, (6aR,10aR)-6,6,9-trimethyl-3-propyl-6a,7,8,10a-tetrahydro-6H-benzo[c]chromen-1-ol was purchased from THC Pharm GmbH (Frankfurt, Germany) and stored at 31.6 mM in absolute ethanol at -0 °C.
HPLC grade methanol (CH4O, M: 34.04 g/mol) and acetonitrile (C2H3N, MW: 41.05 g/mol) were purchased from VWR (Radnor, PA, USA). Potassium dihydrogen orthophosphate (KH2PO4, MW: 136.09 g/mol) was purchased from ThermoFisher Scientific (Waltham, MA, USA). Bovine serum albumin (BSA) was purchased from Life Technologies New Zealand Limited (Auckland, NZ) and prepared in 0.9% (w/v) saline, daily and kept on ice. β-NADPH, nicotinamide adenine dinucleotide phosphate tetrasodium salt (C21H26N7Na4O17P3, MW: 833.4 g/mol) was purchased from Roche (Basel, Switzerland) and prepared in Milli-Q® water, daily, and kept on ice. Sodium chloride (NaCl, MW: 58.44 g/mol) was purchased from Labchem International (Heidelberg, Germany). Trifluoroacetic acid (C2HF3O2, MW: 114.02 g/mol) was purchased from Sigma-Aldrich (St. Louis, MO, USA). HLM pooled from 50 donors were purchased from ThermoFisher Scientific. CES1 isoform b (CES1b/CES1A1) human recombinant, expressed and purified from Bacillus thuringiensis israelensis (BTI) insect cells, carboxylesterase-2 (CES2) human recombinant, expressed in baculovirus infected BTI insect cells and p-nitrophenyl acetate (PNPA; C8H7NO4, MW: 181.15 g/mol) were purchased from Sigma-Aldrich.
For radioligand binding [3H]CP55,490 was purchased from PerkinElmer (Waltham, MA, USA), V‐well plates from Hangzhou Gene Era Biotech Co. Ltd. (Zhejiang, China), and harvest plates (GF/C filters, 1.2 µm pores) from PerkinElmer. The vacuum manifold was purchased from Pall Corporation (Port Washington, NY, USA). Ultima Gold XR scintillation fluid was purchased from PerkinElmer and radioactivity was detected in a MicroBeta2® TriLux Liquid Scintillation Counter and was also purchased from PerkinElmer.
For cAMP inhibition assays, cultureware was purchased from Corning (Corning, NY, USA), 96-well CulturPlates were purchased from PerkinElmer, coelenterazine-H was purchased from Nanolight Technologies (Pinetop, AZ, USA), V-well polypropylene dispensing plates were purchased from Innovative Laboratory Products (Phoenix, AZ, USA), and forskolin was purchased from Cayman Chemical. All other cell culture reagents and media were purchased from ThermoFisher Scientific.
Instrumental analysis
All chromatographic runs were carried out using a Prominence high performance liquid chromatography (HPLC) system (Shimadzu, Kyoto, Japan), comprising a CBM-20A HPLC modular system controller, a DGU-20A3R degassing unit, dual LC-20AR solvent delivery modules, a SIL-20ACHT autosampler and a CTO-20AC column oven. An SPD-M20A UV/VIS photodiode array detector (DAD; Shimadzu) was used for detection. Full spectra were recorded in the range of 190–800 nm. Chromatographic separations were achieved using a Phenomenex® (Torrance, CA, USA) Gemini® (5 μm, C18, 110 Å, 4.6 × 150 mm) 714,145–14 column. Equipment control, data acquisition and peak integration were performed with LabSolutions software (Shimadzu). A 26-min binary gradient was developed with 0.05% (v/v) trifluoroacetic acid in water (A) and 0.05% (v/v) trifluoroacetic acid in 9:1 acetonitrile/water (B). The binary gradient was held at 10% B for 0–0.5 min, increased to 60% B from 0.5 to 2.5 min, increased to 80% B from 2.5 to 15.0 min, decreased to 10% B from 15.0 to 17.0 min before a final isocratic hold from 17.0 to 26.0 min, with the flow rate set at 1 mL/min. The Phenomenex® C18 column was maintained at 40 °C and the injection volume was 20 μL. The ultraviolet detection of AMB-FUBINACA and AMB-FUBINACA acid was performed at 299 nm.
Results
CB1 binding and activity
AMB-FUBINACA has previously been reported to be a high affinity agonist of CB1 with a Kd of 1.9 nM [2]. In contrast, very low binding affinity was observed for AMB-FUBINCA acid, such that 10 µM only displaced 25.7 ± 7.3% (n = 3) of the radioligand. To compare CB1 receptor-mediated activity of AMB-FUBINACA and its major metabolite AMB-FUBINACA acid, cAMP signalling was characterised. As CB1 receptor signalling is canonically mediated through Gαi/o proteins, agonism results in adenylate cyclase inhibition, subsequently reducing cAMP levels. As expected, AMB-FUBINACA inhibited forskolin-induced cAMP with sub-nanomolar potency (pEC50 9.83 ± SEM 0.04, n = 3) (Fig. 7). AMB-FUBINACA acid also showed agonism but with > 3000-fold lower potency (pEC50 6.35 ± SEM 0.03, n = 3). However, both compounds produced similar maximal effects with EMAX values of 57.0 ± 1.6% and 58.6 ± 1.7% (both n = 3), for AMB-FUBINACA and AMB-FUBINACA acid, respectively.
Discussion
The metabolism of AMB-FUBINACA and subsequent formation of AMB-FUBINACA acid occurred largely in the absence of the cofactor NADPH, suggesting this biotransformation process was not CYP450-mediated. While this study and other work [24] demonstrate the rapid metabolism of AMB-FUBINACA and formation of the demethylated metabolite AMB-FUBINACA acid, many other studies used incubation periods of 60 min or greater [14, 29, 39].
Extended incubation periods may underestimate the concentrations of AMB-FUBINACA acid due to the production of other metabolites, as depicted by the metabolic pathway proposed by Xu et al. [39]. This additional metabolism may have resulted in an underestimation of the dominance of AMB-FUBINACA acid, though it should also be noted that the acid metabolite has been observed to remain stable for at least 120 min in a HLM metabolism assay [25]. However, the fact that the experimental t1/2 of AMB-FUBINACA in HLMs in this study (14.03 s) was significantly less than that of Brandon et al. [26] (5.9 ± 0.48 min) highlights the importance of sampling at short incubation periods to characterise initial metabolism. Additionally, the relevance of subsequent metabolism of AMB-FUBINACA is unclear, as only the acid metabolite has been identified in the majority of studies in humans. Additionally, the protein concentration of HLM in this work was fourfold less than that used in similar studies [14, 25, 29, 39]. Initial experiments at a protein concentration of 1 mg/mL caused marked metabolism of AMB-FUBINACA, but concentrations were below the limit of detection after a 5 min incubation period. Reproducible and quantifiable metabolite production was achieved when the protein concentration of HLM was reduced to 0.25 mg/mL and the incubation period ranged from 20 to 120 s. Thus, it is recommended that in further work very short incubation periods and lower protein concentrations are used to accurately determine the effect of other drugs and chemicals on the metabolism of AMB-FUBINACA.
Preincubation of HLM with the proposed selective CES1 inhibitor digitonin and the selective CES2 inhibitor telmisartan [33] resulted in a significant reduction in AMB-FUBINACA metabolism. If these inhibitors were truly selective, this would have indicated that AMB-FUBINACA metabolism was mediated by both CES1 and CES2. Subsequent experiments confirmed that digitonin significantly reduced PNPA hydrolysis via CES1 to ~ 45% of the control. Telmisartan, on the other hand, did not show a high degree of specificity towards CES2, as at 50 μM, activity of CES1 was reduced to ~ 71% of control and activity of CES2 was reduced to ~ 58% of control (Fig. 5). This implies that telmisartan does inhibit CES2, but it is not selective for CES2. However, a more complete picture could be obtained by performing a complete range of concentration–response experiments. Importantly, metabolism of AMB-FUBINACA by recombinant CES1A1 and CES2 confirmed the involvement of CES1. Metabolism occurred significantly faster by HLM (t1/2 = 11.6 s) as compared to CES1 (t1/2 = 120 s) which may be related to the differences in total enzyme content in the experimental preparation. Liver microsomes contain various isoforms of both hepatic CYP450 and non-CYP450 enzymes. However, recombinant enzymes only contain a specific isoform of an enzyme [40]. While the metabolism of AMB-FUBINACA has been confirmed with CES1A1, additional CES1 isoforms present within HLM may also contribute to this biotransformation process. However, the identification of CES1 as one of primary enzymes in AMB-FUBINACA metabolism is an important finding as it enables the prediction of potential drug–drug interactions and may give insight into the toxicity elicited by AMB-FUBINACA in individuals who are also taking prescription and/or recreational drugs.
AMB-FUBINACA metabolism by recombinant CES1A1 was inhibited by ~ 56% when incubated with 100 μM digitonin. However, Δ9-THC (10 μM) did not significantly affect metabolism despite concentrations nearly 20-fold greater than the reported Ki value being tested [34]. Previously the effect of Δ9-THC upon CES1 was examined in human liver S9 fractions, measuring oseltamivir phosphate hydrolysis [34]. S9 fractions contain both microsomal and cytosolic enzymes and thus CES1 concentrations in S9 fractions are significantly lower than recombinant preparations [41]. Since the final protein concentrations in this study exceed those used by Qian et al. [34] by fivefold (20 vs. 100 μg/mL), it is possible that there is residual metabolic activity associated with the higher protein. However, Ki is a measurement of affinity that is independent of protein concentration [42]. Thus, it is also possible that CES1 has multiple catalytic sites which are substrate-specific. Consistent with this idea, CES1 has been reported to contain three ligand-binding sites, an active site, a “side door” and a Z-site [43]. However, there are no obvious explanations as to why Δ9-THC inhibited CES1 in studies conducted by Qian et al. [34] but failed to significantly inhibit CES1 when incubated with AMB-FUBINACA.
AMB-FUBINACA acid displayed only moderate displacement of [3H]-CP55,940 at 10 µM, consistent with a pKi > 5, or approximately 500–1000 fold less than reported for AMB-FUBINACA (pKi = 8.72) [2]. Consistent with this, AMB-FUBINACA acid was substantially less potent at CB1 as compared to the parent compound, indicating the importance of an uncharged head group in promoting a ligand-receptor conformation with high efficacy [44]. Importantly, the effect of AMB-FUBINACA on cAMP was in line with previously reported results using the same cell line [2] and thus showing a consistent response. A less efficacious metabolite suggests that inhibition of AMB-FUBINACA metabolism in vivo is likely to result in prolonged CB1 activation by preventing metabolism of the more potent parent compound. Prolonged activation of CB1 has previously been linked to receptor desensitisation, internalisation, degradation, and neuronal cell death [45–47] and these effects may also contribute to the toxicity of AMB-FUBINACA.
The rapid metabolism of AMB-FUBINACA by HLM and recombinant CES1 would indicate that factors that reduce this detoxification would enhance CB1 pharmacological action and toxicity [48]. Other factors may include sex differences in enzyme expression, as females express ~ 17% higher levels of hepatic CES1 as compared to males [49] and genetic differences resulting in CES1 polymorphisms [50]. Interestingly, this appears to align with the higher prevalence of SCRA toxicity experienced by males. Specifically, 88% of the deaths in New Zealand attributed to AMB-FUBINACA were male [1]. Thus, it is possible that lower CES1 expression may result in a prolonged exposure to AMB-FUBINACA and thus greater toxic events. However, males also use new psychoactive substances and SCRAs such as AMB-FUBINACA at a higher frequency than females [51, 52]. Further investigations should probe the potential sex-dependent differences in AMB-FUNBINACA metabolism.
Conclusions
AMB-FUBINACA metabolism resulted in the rapid formation of AMB-FUBINACA acid; this did not require the CYP450 cofactor, NADPH. CES1A1 was identified as one of the primary metabolising enzymes of AMB-FUBINACA, whereas CES2 failed to metabolise it. Furthermore, metabolism of AMB-FUBINACA by HLM was inhibited by digitonin and telmisartan to varying degrees, likely via inhibition of CES1. Although Δ9-THC had been reported as a CES1 inhibitor, this study found that it did not modulate the metabolism of AMB-FUBINACA by CES1. The potency shift of AMB-FUBINACA acid relative to the parent compound at CB1 would suggest that physiological effects produced by the acid metabolite would be minimal, and toxicity is likely mediated by AMB-FUBINACA. Inhibition of AMB-FUBINACA metabolism would increase CB1- and non-CB1-mediated effects in humans by preventing the production of a less potent metabolite.
Acknowledgements
This study was funded by the Health Research Council of New Zealand Ref ID # 19/242.
Funding
Open Access funding enabled and organized by CAUL and its Member Institutions.
Declarations
Conflict of interest
The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.
Ethical approval
This article does not contain any studies with human participants or animals performed by any of the authors.