Comparative pharmacokinetics of triethylphosphine gold (auranofin) and gold sodium thiomalate (GST).
The pharmacokinetics of gold sodium thiomalate (GST) and triethylphosphine gold (auranofin; AF) are different. Gold sodium thiomalate (GST) is completely bioavailable while only 15-25% of auranofin (AF) is absorbed. Protein binding of AF occurs to a larger extent to macroglobulins than does GST and total body retention of GST is much greater than AF at six months (30% versus approximately 1%). While terminal serum half-lives are approximately equal, total body half-lives are 250 days for GST and 69 days for AF. In addition, excretory pathways contrast markedly, with 85% of AF appearing in the feces while only 30% of GST is excreted by this route; 15% of AF gold appears in the urine and approximately 70% of GST gold is excreted via this route. With all the above differences one would expect that organ and cellular distribution of these compounds would differ. While gold from both drugs is concentrated in kidney, the percent of the dose found in the kidneys is less for AF than GST, at least in animals (0.4% vs 4.8%). Minute quantities are found in other organs but more study is needed to more clearly define organ distribution of these gold compounds, particularly in man.[1]References
- Comparative pharmacokinetics of triethylphosphine gold (auranofin) and gold sodium thiomalate (GST). Furst, D.E., Dromgoole, S.H. Clin. Rheumatol. (1984) [Pubmed]
Annotations and hyperlinks in this abstract are from individual authors of WikiGenes or automatically generated by the WikiGenes Data Mining Engine. The abstract is from MEDLINE®/PubMed®, a database of the U.S. National Library of Medicine.About WikiGenesOpen Access LicencePrivacy PolicyTerms of Useapsburg
