Pimecrolimus and tacrolimus differ in their inhibition of lymphocyte activation during the sensitization phase of contact hypersensitivity

Anti-Inflammatory Activity of a Cyclic Tetrapeptide in Mouse and Human Experimental Models

A cyclic tetrapeptide Pro-Pro-Pheβ³ho-Phe (4B8M) was tested for immunosuppressive activity and potential therapeutic utility in several in vitro and in vivo mouse and human models. The tetrapeptide was less toxic for mouse splenocytes in comparison to cyclosporine A (CsA) and a parent cyclolinopeptide (CLA). The tetrapeptide demonstrated potent anti-inflammatory properties in antigen-specific skin inflammatory reactions to oxazolone and toluene diisocyanate as well to nonspecific irritants such as salicylic acid. It also inhibited inflammatory processes in an air pouch induced by carrageenan. In addition, 4B8M proved effective in amelioration of animal models corresponding to human diseases, such as nonspecific colon inflammation induced by dextran sulfate and allergic pleurisy induced by ovalbumin (OVA) in sensitized mice. The tetrapeptide lowered expression of EP1 and EP3 but not EP2 and EP4 prostaglandin E2 (PGE2) receptors on lipopolysaccharide-stimulated Jurkat T cells and ICAM-1 expression on human peripheral blood mononuclear cells (PBMC). Its anti-inflammatory property in the carrageenan reaction was blocked by EP3 and EP4 antagonists. In addition, 4B8M induced an intracellular level of PGE2 in a human KERTr keratinocyte cell line. In conclusion, 4B8M is a low toxic and effective inhibitor of inflammatory disorders with potential therapeutic use, affecting the metabolism of prostanoid family molecules.

Binding of pimecrolimus and tacrolimus to skin and plasma proteins: implications for systemic exposure after topical application

Pimecrolimus and tacrolimus are calcineurin inhibitors used for the topical treatment of atopic dermatitis. Although structurally similar, they display specific differences including higher lipophilicity and lower skin permeation of pimecrolimus. The aim of the present study was to understand the reason for the differences in skin permeation; in addition, plasma protein binding of the two drugs was analyzed side by side as a basis for comparison of systemic exposure to free drug. Permeation of pimecrolimus and tacrolimus through a silicon membrane was found to be similar; therefore, we assumed that differences in skin permeation could be caused by differences in affinity to skin components. To test this hypothesis, we investigated binding of pimecrolimus and tacrolimus to a preparation of soluble human skin proteins. One binding protein of approximately 15 kDa, probably corresponding to macrophilin12, displayed a similar binding capacity for pimecrolimus and tacrolimus. However, less specific, nonsaturating binding to other proteins was approximately 3-fold higher for pimecrolimus. Because of the high local drug concentration after topical administration, the unspecific, high-capacity binding is probably dominating the permeation through skin. In plasma both drugs bound predominantly to lipoproteins, which may affect disposition differently from albumin binding. The unbound fraction of pimecrolimus in human plasma was approximately 9-fold lower compared with that of tacrolimus (0.4 +/- 0.1 versus 3.7 +/- 0.8%). In conclusion, these results provide an explanation for the observed lower systemic exposure to pimecrolimus than to tacrolimus after topical application and suggest that differences in systemic exposure to free drug might be even more pronounced.