GLUTATHIONE CARBAMOYLATION WITH S-METHYL N,N-DIETHYLTHIOLCARBAMATE SULFOXIDE AND SULFONE - MITOCHONDRIAL LOW K-M ALDEHYDE DEHYDROGENASE INHIBITION AND IMPLICATIONS FOR ITS ALCOHOL-DETERRENT ACTION
Ns. Ningaraj et al., GLUTATHIONE CARBAMOYLATION WITH S-METHYL N,N-DIETHYLTHIOLCARBAMATE SULFOXIDE AND SULFONE - MITOCHONDRIAL LOW K-M ALDEHYDE DEHYDROGENASE INHIBITION AND IMPLICATIONS FOR ITS ALCOHOL-DETERRENT ACTION, Biochemical pharmacology, 55(6), 1998, pp. 749-756
S-Methyl N,N-diethylthiolcarbamate sulfoxide (DETC-MeSO) and sulfone (
DETC-MeSO2) both inhibit rat liver low K-m aldehyde dehydrogenase (ALD
H(2)) in vitro and in vivo (Nagendra et al., Biochem Pharmacol 47: 146
5-1467, 1994). DETC-MeSO has been shown to be a metabolite of disulfir
am, but DETC-MeSO2 has not. Studies were carried out to further invest
igate the inhibition of ALDH(2) by DETC-MeSO and DETC-MeSO2. In an in
vitro system containing hydrogen peroxide and horseradish peroxidase,
the rate of DETC-MeSO oxidation corresponded to the rate of DETC-MeSO2
formation. Carbamoylation of GSH by both DETC-MeSO and DETC-MeSO2 was
observed in a rat liver S-9 fraction. Carbamoylation of GSH was not o
bserved in the presence of N-methylmaleimide. In in vitro studies, DET
C-MeSO and DETC-MeSO2 were equipotent ALDH(2) inhibitors when solubili
zed mitochondria were used, but DETC-MeSO was approximately four times
more potent than DETC-MeSO2 in intact mitochondria. In studies with r
ats, the dose (i.p. or oral) required to inhibit 50% ALDH(2) (ED50) wa
s 3.5 mg/kg for DETC-MeSO and approximately 35 mg/kg for DETC-MeSO2, a
pproximately a 10-fold difference. Furthermore, maximum ALDH(2) inhibi
tion occurred 1 hr after DETC-MeSO administration, whereas maximal ALD
H(2) inhibition occurred 8 hr after DETC-MeSO2 dosing. DETC-MeSO is, t
herefore, not only a more potent ALDH(2) inhibitor than DETC-MeSO2 in
vivo, but also in vitro when intact mitochondria are utilized. The in
vitro results thus support the in vivo findings. Since oxidation of DE
TC-MeSO can occur both enzymatically and non-enzymatically, it is poss
ible that DETC-MeSO2 is formed in vivo. DETC-MeSO2, however, is not as
effective as DETC-MeSO in inhibiting ALDH(2), probably because it has
difficulty penetrating the mitochondrial membrane. Thus, even if DETC
-MeSO2 is formed in vivo from DETC-MeSO, it is the metabolite DETC-MeS
O that is most likely responsible for the inhibition of ALDH(2) after
disulfiram administration. (C) 1998 Elsevier Science Inc.