Complete replacement of internal chloride with fluoride has subtle effects on hERG activation, whereas bromide has distinct effects on specific biophysical properties of the channel, which is relevant for optimizing in vitro drug screening assays for QT prolongation.
Internal halide choice may subtly alter hERG assay readouts; leaves open optimal buffers for QT-prolongation screening.
The human Ether-à-go-go related gene (hERG) potassium channel has been widely used to counter screen potential pharmaceuticals as a biomarker to predict clinical QT prolongation. Thus, higher throughput assays of hERG are valuable for early in vitro screening of drug candidates to minimize failure in later-stage drug development due to this potentially adverse cardiac risk. We have developed a novel method utilizing potassium fluoride to improve throughput of hERG counter screening with an automated patch clamp system, PatchXpress 7000A. In that method, ∼50% substitution of internal Cl(-) with F(-) greatly increases success rate without substantially altering the biophysical properties of the hERG channel or compromising data quality. However, effect of F(-) or other halide ions on hERG channel properties has not been studied in detail. In this study, we examined effects of complete replacement of Cl(-) in internal solution with halide ions, F(-), or Br(-). We found that (1) F(-) slightly shifts the voltage dependence of hERG channel activation to more positive voltages, while Br(-) shifts it to more negative voltages; (2) Br(-) shifts to more positive voltages both the inactivation-voltage relationship and the peak position of channel full activation of hERG; (3) F(-) slows hERG activation, while both F(-) and Br(-) make the channel close faster; (4) neither F(-) nor Br(-) have any effect on hERG inactivation kinetics. In conclusion, compared to Cl(-), F(-) has subtle effect on hERG activation, while Br(-) has distinct effects on certain, but not all biophysical properties of hERG channel.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Zeng et al. (2013) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: