Abstract
A tricyclic anti-depressant, amitriptyline, is a highly prescribed drug for cancer patients for mood elevation but there are limited studies about the interaction of amitriptyline with glutathione S-transferases pi (GST-π) and glutathione S-transferases alpha (GST-α). GST isozymes have been implicated in chemotherapeutic drug resistance. We demonstrated that the concentration dependent inhibition of GST-π and GST-α by amitriptyline followed inverse hyperbolic inhibition curves with IC50 values of 5.54 and 8.32 mM, respectively.
When the varied substrate was GSH, amitriptyline inhibited both isozymes competitively and similar Ki values were found for GST-π (Ki = 1.61 ± 0.17 mM) and GST-α (Ki = 1.45 ± 0.20 mM). On the other hand, when the varied substrate was CDNB, the inhibition types were non-competitive for GST-π (Ki = 1.98 ± 0.31 mM) and competitive for GST-α (Ki = 1.57 ± 0.16 mM).
Amitriptyline, in addition to its antidepressant effect, might also have a minor supportive role on the effectiveness of the anticancer drugs by decreasing their elimination through inhibiting GST-π and GST-α.
Keywords::
Abbreviations | ||
CDNB | = | 1-chloro-2,4-dinitrobenzene |
EDTA | = | ethylenediamine tetraacetic acid |
GSH | = | reduced glutathione |
GST | = | glutathione S-transferase |
GPx | = | glutathione peroxidase |
IC50 | = | half maximal inhibitory concentration |
JNK-1 | = | c-Jun N-terminal kinase 1 |
Ki | = | inhibition constant |
Km | = | Michaelis constant |
MRP1 | = | Multidrug resistance protein 1 |
Nrf2 | = | Nuclear transcription factor-erythroid 2 p45-related factor 2 |
Vm | = | maximum velocity |
SSRIs | = | selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors |
TCAs | = | tricyclic antidepressants |
Introduction
Depression is an important health problem with a high lifetime prevalence of 2–15%Citation1. Its increased prevalence with chronic medical and oncological disorders are well documented and antidepressant drugs are widely prescribed into these patientsCitation1,Citation2. Various studies have been performed to elucidate the neurobiological mechanism of depression. “Monoamine hypothesis”, the main hypothesis in the depression etiology, states that depression is caused by the deficiency or underactivity of the brain monoamine neurotransmitters (serotonin, dopamine and norepinephrine) and major classes of antidepressants are mediated by increasing cathecholamine concentrationsCitation3. Tricyclic antidepressants (TCAs), the first used drugs in the depression treatment, act through blockage of neurotransmitter reuptake and increase neurotransmission at synaptic cleftsCitation4. Although newest class of antidepressants such as selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs) have been introduced, TCAs (amitriptyline, clomipramine and such) are still used extensively and its efficacy is equal to SSRIsCitation5 but there are few reports on their pharmacokinetics. TCAs are taken orally, due to their lipophilic structures, are well absorbed from small intestine and they can easily cross the blood-brain barrier. Baranczyk-Kuzma et al. have shown that TCAs are widely distributed in the brain and it was suggested that their intracellular transporter might be glutathione S-transferase-pi (GST-π)6.
Glutathione-S-transferases [GSTs, E.C.2.5.1.18] constitute a Phase II enzyme family involving in the detoxification of xeno- and endobiotics by conjugating them with glutathione (the final product is a glutathione-S-conjugate) and modulates the response to carcinogen exposure. They serve maintaining normal redox homeostasisCitation7,Citation8. Apart from these functions, GSTs also involve as nonenzymatic carrier proteins (ligandins) for several chemical compounds such as bilirubin, heme and are implicated in the synthesis of steroids and eicosanoids, degradation of eicosanoids and aromatic amino acidsCitation7,Citation8. GST isozymes were classified based on their substrate preferences, different catalytic efficiency and they are found in cytosol, microsome and mitochondriaCitation8. Altered (most often increased) expression of some cytosolic GST isozymes were implicated in the cancer etiology. Glutathione S-transferase alpha (GST-α) and glutathione S-transferase-pi (GST-π) were suggested as a potential diagnostic and/or prognostic marker for various cancer typesCitation9,Citation10. One of the GST cytosolic isozymes, GST-π, is a marker protein in many solid tumors and its overexpression in drug-resistant tumors has been reported whether the drug is a substrate for GST-π or notCitation11,Citation12. Although the overexpression of GST-π in tumor tissues frequently linked to enhancement of drug detoxification but in most instances the selected drugs are not substrate for GST-π. This contradiction made the researchers think that this protein might have other cellular functions beside its role in catalytic detoxificationCitation11–13. GSTs are involved in signaling cascades as a regulator via protein-protein interaction. In Caco-2 cells, a subtype of GST-α, GSTA1-1, suppressed activation of c-Jun-N terminal kinase 1 (JNK-1) suggesting a protective role for GSTA1-1 in JNK-1 associated apoptosisCitation14. It was also shown that GST-π inhibits JNK-1, a protein implicated in apoptosis and cellular survivalCitation15.
Oxidative and nitrosative stress are linked to various diseases and triggers the detoxification system (GSTs, glutathione peroxidase (GPx) etc.) to counteracts reactive oxygen species. There is growing evidence that tumor growth is associated with abnormal redox balance. Thiol buffer system, especially glutathione, have been therapeutically targeted in cancer treatment and a lot of redox modulating drugs are under developmentCitation16. In a study performed in breast cancer patients, redox protein expressions (GST isozymes, glutathione reductase, GPx) were investigated and to predict radiotherapeutic response some of those proteins were found promisingCitation17. Nuclear transcription factor-erythroid 2 p45-related factor 2 (Nrf2), an essential transcription factor for the induction of Phase II enzymes, regulates antioxidant enzymes and proteins. Induction of GST expression can be mediated through Nrf2 expressionCitation18. Nrf2 contributes to the induction of alpha-class GST isozymes in liver of acute cadmium or manganese intoxicated ratsCitation19.
It was shown that in MCF7 breast cancer cells GST-π conjugation activity and multidrug resistance protein 1 (MRP1)-mediated conjugate efflux operate together to confer resistance to 1-chloro-2,4-dinitrobenzene (CDNB) cytotoxicityCitation20. Interaction of antidepressants with GST-π and GST-α may reduce their availability and therapeutic activity. On the other hand, they may decrease the efficiency of the enzymatic barrier formed by GST-π and GST-α, thus increase the exposure time to toxic reactive electrophiles which may contribute to the adverse effects of antidepressant drugs.
Amitriptyline is in the group of drugs called TCAs and is used to treat symptoms of depressionCitation4,Citation21. Amitriptyline, like clomipramine, acts primarily as a serotonin-norepinephrine re-uptake inhibitor; its inhibitory action on the serotonin, norepinephrine and dopamine might be classified as strong, moderate and weak, respectivelyCitation4,Citation22. Some of the cytochrome P450 isozymes are inhibited by TCAs in vitro with Ki values from micro to millimolar ranges but some of them are not affected at allCitation23. The distribution of GST-π in brain and the binding of TCAs have been shown but there are limited kinetic studies for the clarification of the inhibitory behavior of amitriptyline on GST-π and GST-αCitation6,Citation24.
The highly prescribed tricyclic antidepressant drug amitriptyline like several chemotherapeutics is taken orally, and the small intestine is the intersection organ for the absorption of both drugs. Thus, in this study, rat small intestine is used as the enzyme source. It was shown that increased/altered expression of GST-π and GST-α is associated with the resistance of the chemotherapy. The aim of this study is to elucidate the impact of the inhibitory behavior of amitriptyline which is widely used in the clinical depression treatment in the cancer patients on GST-π and GST-α. The inhibition of GSTs by amitriptyline results in the decreased cellular protective enzymatic barrier and increased exposure time to toxic electrophilic substances but amitriptyline may also alter the effectivity of chemotherapy. Based on our findings, it was also aimed to discuss the possible controversial role of amitriptyline in cancer therapy.
Materials and methods
Materials
Sephadex G25, Polybuffer Exchanger 118 (PBE 118) and Pharmalyte were purchased from Pharmacia (Uppsala, Sweden). Centricon-10 filters were purchased from Amicon (USA). All other chemicals were analytical grade and were purchased from Sigma (St. Louis, MO, USA).
Enzyme preparation
Enzyme was purified from rat small intestines of Sprague-Dawley rats according to the published procedureCitation25.
Enzyme activity assays
GST activity was measured in 0.5 mL of assay mixture containing 0.1 M potassium phosphate buffer pH 6.5, 1 mM ethylenediamine tetraacetic acid (EDTA), 1 mM GSH at 37°C, using the artificial substrate CDNB and GSH. The reaction was always initiated by the addition of 1 mM CDNB and the activity was measured by following the increase of absorbance at 340 nm due to the formation of GS-DNB conjugate for 20 s, using Schimadzu UV-1700 spectrophotometer. One unit of GST activity is defined as the amount of enzyme producing 1 µmol of GS-DNB conjugate/min in specified conditions. For the characterization of GST enzymes; the GST activity with different substrates were performed by the methods used by Habig and JakobyCitation26. The characterization data for GSTs were not presented.
Protein concentration determination
Protein concentration during purification and chromatofocusing were determined by the method of Bradford and bovine serum albumin was used as a standardCitation27.
Inhibitory kinetic experiments with amitriptyline
The inhibition of GST-π and GST-α isolated from rat small intestine by amitriptyline was measured and the data obtained were processed according to the published proceduresCitation24,Citation28,Citation29.
Statistical analysis
The data were evaluated by using Statistica 9.00 for Windows.
Results and discussion
GST-π and GST-α was purified from rat small intestine and characterized according to the published procedureCitation25.
Substrate kinetic studies were performed using the artificial substrate CDNB and GSH and all the results are given in . When CDNB used as fixed and GSH as the varied substrate the Km values obtained for GST-π and GST-α were 0.17 ± 0.02 and 0.16 ± 0.01 mM, respectively. On the other hand, when GSH used as fixed and CDNB as the varied substrate the Km values were 0.20 ± 0.05 mM for GST-π and 0.33 ± 0.03 mM for GST-α. The Vm value for GST-α is less affected by variable substrate than GST-π. The Vm values obtained for GST-α were 4.20 ± 0.12 and 3.85 ± 0.14 U/mg protein for [GSH] and [CDNB] as the varied substrates, respectively. On the other hand, when the varied substrate is CDNB, the Vm value for GST-π was almost one third of the Vm obtained when the varied substrate is GSH. The Vm values at varied [GSH] and at varied [CDNB] were 4.50 ± 0.04 and 1.57 ± 0.51 U/mg protein, respectively. This difference in Vm values might arise either as a result of monomer dimer conversion or by controversial effects of substrates. It seems that high concentration of GSH may cause the conversion of GST-π to a less active conformation because in experiments where [CDNB] is varied, the isozymes first meet with high concentration of GSH. This speculation obviously requires confirmation.
Table 1. The kinetic parameters for GST-π and GST-α purified from rat small intestine.
Amitriptyline inhibited both isozymes in a concentration dependent manner and from the % remaining activity vs. [amitriptyline] plot the IC50 values of 5.54 mM (GST-π) and 8.32 mM (GST-α) were calculated (). Using the Scatchard plot (Log{vi/(Vo-vi)} vs. Log[Amitriptyline]), the same IC50 values for GST-π and GST-α were obtained ( and ). Although no detailed kinetic study was performed, it seems that the inhibition of both isozymes by amitriptyline is reversible and the inhibition does not go zero at the concentration range studied. The IC50 values obtained are in good correlation with the previously reported studiesCitation6,Citation24.
Figure 1. Concentration-dependent inhibition of GST-π ([Amitriptyline]: 0, 0.5, 1, 2, 2.5, 5, 7.5 and 10 mM) and GST-α ([Amitriptyline]: 0, 0.5, 1, 2, 2.5, 3, 5, 7.5 and 10 mM) by amitriptyline. (A) % Remaining activity vs. [Amitriptyline]; (B) Scatchard plot Log {vi / (Vo-vi)} vs. Log [Amitriptyline]; GST-π (• ) and GST-α. (◯).
![Figure 1. Concentration-dependent inhibition of GST-π ([Amitriptyline]: 0, 0.5, 1, 2, 2.5, 5, 7.5 and 10 mM) and GST-α ([Amitriptyline]: 0, 0.5, 1, 2, 2.5, 3, 5, 7.5 and 10 mM) by amitriptyline. (A) % Remaining activity vs. [Amitriptyline]; (B) Scatchard plot Log {vi / (Vo-vi)} vs. Log [Amitriptyline]; GST-π (• ) and GST-α. (◯).](/cms/asset/e0610d0b-1a80-4acd-af0c-fe1f9ff42c5e/ienz_a_639017_f0001_b.gif)
Both isozymes, at fixed 1 mM [CDNB] and at varied [GSH], exhibited competitive inhibition pattern with amitriptyline and the 1/v vs. [Amitriptyline] plots (Dixon plot) gave straight lines intersecting on the left of the 1/v axis ( and ). The competitive inhibition is further verified by the slopes vs. 1/[GSH] plot which gave straight lines passing through the origin (data not shown). The competitive type inhibition behavior implies that amitriptyline binds to the G-sites on both isozymes: GST-α and GST-π. From the statistical analysis and from the and , the Ki values of 1.61 ± 0.17 mM and 1.45 ± 0.20 for GST-π and GST-α were obtained, respectively ( and and .) These values are in good correlation with the Ki values reported for human placental GST-πCitation24.
Figure 2. Inhibition of GST-π (A) and GST-α (B) by amitriptyline. Dixon plot. 1/v vs. [Amitriptyline]. [CDNB] = 1 mM, [GSH] variable. [Amitriptyline]: 0, 0.5, 1, 2 mM. [GSH]: (▪), 25; (□), 50; (▴), 100; (△), 200; (• ), 400 and (◯), 1000 µM.
![Figure 2. Inhibition of GST-π (A) and GST-α (B) by amitriptyline. Dixon plot. 1/v vs. [Amitriptyline]. [CDNB] = 1 mM, [GSH] variable. [Amitriptyline]: 0, 0.5, 1, 2 mM. [GSH]: (▪), 25; (□), 50; (▴), 100; (△), 200; (• ), 400 and (◯), 1000 µM.](/cms/asset/959994ec-2688-4555-a434-f7becf932180/ienz_a_639017_f0002_b.gif)
On the other hand, at fixed 1 mM [GSH] and the varied [CDNB], GST-π exhibited a noncompetitive type of inhibition pattern, whereas GST-α exhibited competitive type inhibition pattern with amitriptyline ( and ). The Ki values obtained for GST-π and GST-α were 1.98 ± 0.31 and 1.57 ± 0.16 mM, respectively ( and and ). The noncompetitive and competitive inhibition pattern of GST-π and GST-α are further supported by the replots of slopes vs. 1/[CDNB] obtained from and (data not shown).
Figure 3. Inhibition of GST-π (A) and GST-α (B) by amitriptyline. Dixon plot: 1/v vs. [Amitriptyline]. [GSH] = 1 mM, [CDNB] variable. [Amitriptyline]: 0, 0.5, 1, 2 mM. [CDNB]: (▪), 25; (□), 50; (▴), 100; (△), 200; (• ), 400 and (◯), 1000 µM.
![Figure 3. Inhibition of GST-π (A) and GST-α (B) by amitriptyline. Dixon plot: 1/v vs. [Amitriptyline]. [GSH] = 1 mM, [CDNB] variable. [Amitriptyline]: 0, 0.5, 1, 2 mM. [CDNB]: (▪), 25; (□), 50; (▴), 100; (△), 200; (• ), 400 and (◯), 1000 µM.](/cms/asset/28730a4f-8705-4278-a7b2-c6c63d795786/ienz_a_639017_f0003_b.gif)
It was shown that all GST isozymes have at least two binding sites; one of them is the G-site, for the binding of GSH, the natural substrate and the other is the H-site(s), for binding of electrophilic xenobiotics, the artificial substrates. The competitive inhibition pattern observed with both isozymes at constant [CDNB] and at varied [GSH] implicates that amitriptyline binds to the G-site on both isozymes and creates competitive inhibitionCitationCitation28. On the other hand, when [GSH] is fixed and [CDNB] is the varied substrate, GST-α showed competitive and GST-π noncompetitive inhibition pattern, indicating that amitriptyline binds to H-site on GST-α, whereas on GST-π it binds to a site in H-site other than CDNB binding site. Indeed, recently it was shown that at the H-site there are at least three discrete binding sites for electrophilic xenobiotics within the xenobiotic substrate binding region and only one of them is for the binding of CDNBCitation30. In the presence of high [CDNB], the other xenobiotic binding sites or ligandin binding site on GST-π are still available for the binding of amitriptyline () but in case of GST-α it seems that amitriptyline directly binds to CDNB binding site (). This argument is strengthened by the slope vs. 1/[CDNB] plots; in GST-α the straight line obtained passes through the origin, whereas in GST-π it intersects with the slope axis indicating noncompetitive type of inhibition (data not shown). The difference in inhibition pattern of two isozymes could be explained by the structural differences; although GST-α has C-terminal extension in which the presence of GSH folds to give the helix α9 and partly occludes the H-site but it seems that this occlusion does not affect CDNB bindingCitation31.
It was shown by Baranczyk-Kuzma et al. that at fixed [CDNB]-varied [GSH] and at fixed [GSH]-varied [CDNB] the inhibition pattern with amitriptyline was noncompetitive for all GST-π’s isolated from different parts of the brainCitation6. Dalmizrak et al. reported that at fixed CDNB-varied GSH and at fixed GSH-varied CDNB concentrations the inhibition patterns of human placental GST-π by amitriptyline were linear mixed-type and noncompetitive, respectivelyCitation24. In our study, both isozymes were inhibited competitively when the varied substrate is GSH ( and ), whereas the varied substrate CDNB, GST-π was inhibited noncompetitively but GST-α was inhibited competitively ( and ). The kinetic differences between human GST-π and rat GST-π, GST-α may arise from being different isozymes or/and could be explained by different isoforms of the GSTsCitation6,Citation24.
It is well known that oxidative and nitrosative stress constitute the basis of various psychological stress-induced disorders such as depression and antidepressants are used to treat these conditionsCitation32,Citation33. GSTs, like other antioxidant enzymes are important in the detoxification of xenobiotics. The increase in antioxidant enzyme levels by antidepressants was interpreted by the neuroprotective pharmacological effects of these drugsCitation33. Indeed, the induction of their mRNAs by very low concentrations (10−6–10−7 M) of antidepressants was reportedCitation34. The serum concentration of amitriptyline was found to be 168 nM much higher than their inducer concentrationsCitation35.
We conclude that, amitriptyline in addition to its antidepressant effect, might also have a minor supportive role on the effectiveness of the anticancer drugs by decreasing their elimination through the inhibition of GST-π and GST-α but this also means extended exposure of the patient to toxic electrophiles. The elucidation of all these controversial findings require further studies.
Declaration of interest
This study was supported by H.U.B.A.B. Grant (06D061011001).
References
- Moussavi S, Chatterji S, Verdes E, Tandon A, Patel V, Ustun B. Depression, chronic diseases, and decrements in health: Results from the World Health Surveys. Lancet 2007;370:851–858.
- Trancas B, Cardoso G, Luengo A, Vieira C, Reis D. Depression in cancer patients: Diagnostic and therapeutic considerations. Acta Med Port 2010;23:1101–1112.
- Schildkraut JJ. The catecholamine hypothesis of affective disorders: A review of supporting evidence. Am J Psychiatry 1965;122:509–522.
- Tatsumi M, Groshan K, Blakely RD, Richelson E. Pharmacological profile of antidepressants and related compounds at human monoamine transporters. Eur J Pharmacol 1997;340:249–258.
- Montgomery SA, Kasper S. Comparison of compliance between serotonin reuptake inhibitors and tricyclic antidepressants: A meta-analysis. Int Clin Psychopharmacol 1995;9 Suppl 4:33–40.
- Baranczyk-Kuzma A, Kuzma M, Gutowicz M, Kazmierczak B, Sawicki J. Glutathione S-transferase pi as a target for tricyclic antidepressants in human brain. Acta Biochim Pol 2004;51:207–212.
- Marrs KA. The functions and regulation of glutathione S-transferases in plants. Annu Rev Plant Physiol Plant Mol Biol 1996;47:127–158.
- Hayes JD, Flanagan JU, Jowsey IR. Glutathione transferases. Annu Rev Pharmacol Toxicol 2005;45:51–88.
- Sedat A, Serpil O, Nurdan G, Aylin G, Arif S, Muzeyyen O et al. Immunohistochemical localization of glutathione S-transferases isoenzymes (gsta, Gstp, Gstm4, And Gstt1) and tumour marker p53 in matched tissue from normal larynx and laryngeal carcinoma: Correlations with prognostic factors. J Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 2010;39:542–550.
- Searchfield L, Price SA, Betton G, Jasani B, Riccardi D, Griffiths DF. Glutathione S-transferases as molecular markers of tumour progression and prognosis in renal cell carcinoma. Histopathology 2011;58:180–190.
- Tew KD. Redox in redux: Emergent roles for glutathione S-transferase P (GSTP) in regulation of cell signaling and S-glutathionylation. Biochem Pharmacol 2007;73:1257–1269.
- Townsend DM, Manevich Y, He L, Hutchens S, Pazoles CJ, Tew KD. Novel role for glutathione S-transferase pi. Regulator of protein S-Glutathionylation following oxidative and nitrosative stress. J Biol Chem 2009;284:436–445.
- Tew KD, Townsend DM. Regulatory functions of glutathione S-transferase P1-1 unrelated to detoxification. Drug Metab Rev 2011;43:179–193.
- Romero L, Andrews K, Ng L, O’Rourke K, Maslen A, Kirby G. Human GSTA1-1 reduces c-Jun N-terminal kinase signalling and apoptosis in Caco-2 cells. Biochem J 2006;400:135–141.
- Adler V, Yin Z, Fuchs SY, Benezra M, Rosario L, Tew KD et al. Regulation of JNK signaling by GSTp. EMBO J 1999;18:1321–1334.
- Tew KD, Townsend DM. Redox platforms in cancer drug discovery and development. Curr Opin Chem Biol 2011;15:156–161.
- Woolston CM, Al-Attar A, Storr SJ, Ellis IO, Morgan DA, Martin SG. Redox protein expression predicts radiotherapeutic response in early-stage invasive breast cancer patients. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2011;79:1532–1540.
- Motohashi H, Yamamoto M. Nrf2-Keap1 defines a physiologically important stress response mechanism. Trends Mol Med 2004;10:549–557.
- Casalino E, Calzaretti G, Landriscina M, Sblano C, Fabiano A, Landriscina C. The Nrf2 transcription factor contributes to the induction of alpha-class GST isoenzymes in liver of acute cadmium or manganese intoxicated rats: Comparison with the toxic effect on NAD(P)H:quinone reductase. Toxicology 2007;237:24–34.
- Diah SK, Smitherman PK, Townsend AJ, Morrow CS. Detoxification of 1-chloro-2,4-dinitrobenzene in MCF7 breast cancer cells expressing glutathione S-transferase P1-1 and/or multidrug resistance protein 1. Toxicol Appl Pharmacol 1999;157:85–93.
- Barbui C, Hotopf M. Amitriptyline v. the rest: Still the leading antidepressant after 40 years of randomised controlled trials. Br J Psychiatry 2001;178:129–144.
- Millan MJ, Gobert A, Lejeune F, Newman-Tancredi A, Rivet JM, Auclair A et al. S33005, a novel ligand at both serotonin and norepinephrine transporters: I. Receptor binding, electrophysiological, and neurochemical profile in comparison with venlafaxine, reboxetine, citalopram, and clomipramine. J Pharmacol Exp Ther 2001;298:565–580.
- Shin JG, Park JY, Kim MJ, Shon JH, Yoon YR, Cha IJ et al. Inhibitory effects of tricyclic antidepressants (TCAs) on human cytochrome P450 enzymes in vitro: Mechanism of drug interaction between TCAs and phenytoin. Drug Metab Dispos 2002;30:1102–1107.
- Dalmizrak O, Kulaksiz-Erkmen G, Ozer N. Purification of human placental glutathione S-transferase-π and its inhibition characteristics by amitriptyline and clomipramine. Mol Cell Biochem 2011;355:223–231.
- Tuna G, Kulaksiz Erkmen G, Dalmizrak O, Dogan A, Ogus IH, Ozer N. Inhibition characteristics of hypericin on rat small intestine glutathione-S-transferases. Chem Biol Interact 2010;188:59–65.
- Habig WH, Jakoby WB. Assays for differentiation of glutathione S-transferases. Methods Enzymol 1981;77:398–405.
- Bradford MM. A rapid and sensitive method for the quantitation of microgram quantities of protein utilizing the principle of protein-dye binding. Anal Biochem 1976;72:248–254.
- Segel IH. Enzyme Kinetics, New York: A Wiley-Interscience Publications, USA, 1975.
- Tahir MK, Ozer N, Mannervik B. Isoenzymes of glutathione transferase in rat small intestine. Biochem J 1988;253:759–764.
- Ralat LA, Colman RF. Glutathione S-transferase Pi has at least three distinguishable xenobiotic substrate sites close to its glutathione-binding site. J Biol Chem 2004;279:50204–50213.
- Ketterer B. A bird’s eye view of the glutathione transferase field. Chem Biol Interact 2001;138:27–42.
- Berk M, Ng F, Dean O, Dodd S, Bush AI. Glutathione: A novel treatment target in psychiatry. Trends Pharmacol Sci 2008;29:346–351.
- Zafir A, Ara A, Banu N. In vivo antioxidant status: A putative target of antidepressant action. Prog Neuropsychopharmacol Biol Psychiatry 2009;33:220–228.
- Schmidt AJ, Heiser P, Hemmeter UM, Krieg JC, Vedder H. Effects of antidepressants on mRNA levels of antioxidant enzymes in human monocytic U-937 cells. Prog Neuropsychopharmacol Biol Psychiatry 2008;32:1567–1573.
- Reis M, Aamo T, Spigset O, Ahlner J. Serum concentrations of antidepressant drugs in a naturalistic setting: Compilation based on a large therapeutic drug monitoring database. Ther Drug Monit 2009;31:42–56.