Binding potential

In pharmacokinetics and receptor-ligand kinetics the binding potential (BP) is a combined measure of the density of "available" neuroreceptors and the affinity of a drug to that neuroreceptor.

Additional recommended knowledge

What is the Correct Way to Check Repeatability in Balances?

Don't let static charges disrupt your weighing accuracy

Correct Test Weight Handling Guide: 12 Practical Tips

Description

Consider a ligand receptor binding system. Ligand with a concentration L associates with a receptor of concentration or availability R to form a ligand-receptor complex with concentration RL. The binding potential is then the ratio ligand-receptor complex to free ligand at equilibrium and in the limit of L tending to 0, and is given symbol BP:

This quantity, originally defined by Mintun^[1], describes the capacity of a receptor to bind ligand. It is a limit (L << Ki) of the general receptor association equation:

and is thus also equivalent to:

These equations apply equally when measuring the total receptor density or the residual receptor density available after binding to second ligand - availability.

BP in Positron Emission Tomography

BP is a pivotal measure in the use of positron emission tomography (PET) to measure the density of "available" receptors, e.g. to assess the occupancy by drugs or to characterize neuropsychiatric diseases (yet, one should keep in mind that binding potential is a combined measure that depends on receptor density as well as on affinity). An overview of the related methodology is e.g. given in Laruelle et al (2002)^[2]. Estimating BP with PET usually requires that a reference tissue is available. A reference tissue has negligible receptor density and its distribution volume should be the same as the distribution volume in the target region if all receptors were blocked. Although the BP can be measured in a relatively unbiased way by measuring the whole time course of labelled ligand association and blood radioactivity, this is practically not always necessary. Two other common measures have been derived, which involve assumptions, but result in measures that should correlate with BP: BP₁ and BP₂.

• BP₂: The "specific to nonspecific equilibrium partition coefficient", in the literature also denoted as V₃''. This is the ratio of specifically bound to nondisplaceable tracer in brain tissue at true equilibrium. It can be calculated without arterial blood sampling. In the two-tissue compartment model: BP₂ = k₃ / k₄ and BP₂ = f₂BP where f₂ is the free fraction of the tracer in the first tissue compartment, i.e. a measure that depends on the nonspecific binding of the ligand in brain tissue

• BP₁: The ratio of specifically bound tracer to tracer in plasma at true equilibrium, in the literature also denoted BP'. Measuring BP₁ includes measurements of radioactivity in plasma, including metabolite correction. From the two-tissue compartment model and by assuming there is only passive diffusion across the blood brain barrier, one obtains: BP₁ = f₁BP where f₁ is the free fraction of the tracer in arterial plasma, i.e. a measure that depends on plasma binding. Measuring and dividing by f₁ finally allows to obtain BP.

Definitions and Symbols

While BP₁ and BP₂ are nonambiguous symbols, BP is not. There are many publications in which BP denotes BP₂. Generally, if there were no arterial samples ("noninvasive imaging"), BP denotes BP₂.

B_max: Total density of receptors = R + RL. In PET imaging, the amount of radioligand is usually very small (L << Ki, see above), thus

k₃ and k₄: Transfer rate constants from the two tissue compartment model.

See also

• Volume of distribution

References

1. ^ Mark A. Mintun, Marcus E. Raichle, Michael R. Kilbourn, G. Frederick Wooten, Michael J. Welch (March 1984). "A quantitative model for the in vivo assessment of drug binding sites with positron emission tomography". Annals of Neurology 15 (3): 217-227.
2. ^ Marc Laruelle, Mark Slifstein, Yiyun Huang (July 2002). "Positron emission tomography: imaging and quantification of neurotransporter availability". Methods 27 (3): 287–299. doi:10.1016/S1046-2023(02)00085-3.