Literature DB >> 11003200

Ethanol pharmacokinetics in white women: nonlinear model fitting versus zero-order elimination analyses.

M S Mumenthaler1, J L Taylor, J A Yesavage.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Studies have shown repeatedly that ethanol pharmacokinetics are not linear, yet most researchers still determine ethanol elimination by linear, zero-order kinetics. The goals of the present work were to: (1) fit four nonlinear pharmacokinetic models to mean breath alcohol concentration (BrAC)-time data of 27 women and determine the best-fit model; (2) fit the determined best-fit model to individual BrAC data and estimate the pharmacokinetic parameters; and (3) compare the method of nonlinear model fitting with the classical zero-order elimination method and determine in which cases the classical approach is justified.
METHODS: Twenty-seven healthy white women ingested four drinks (total of 0.67 g x kg(-1)) of ethanol on two test days. Approximately 24 breath ethanol samples (for pharmacokinetic analyses) and one blood sample (for hormonal markers) were taken per day. Pharmacokinetic model evaluation was based on the coefficient of variation, the weighted residual sum of squares, and the sequence of the weighted residuals. Because hormonal changes across the menstrual cycle did not significantly influence ethanol pharmacokinetics, data from the two test days were pooled.
RESULTS: The best-fit model was a one-compartment open model with first-order absorption and sequential first-order elimination, followed by Michaelis-Menten elimination kinetics. Fitting this model to the individual BrAC data yielded mean ka = 0.062 hr(-1), Vd = 0.457 L x kg(-1), ke = 0.011 hr(-1), Vmax = 0.136 g x L(-1) x hr(-1), and Km = 0.096 g x L(-1). For the classical analyses, mean time to peak BrAC = 1.83 hr, disappearance rate = 0.179 g x L(-1) x hr(-1), and area under the blood ethanol-time curve (AUC) = 2.884 g x L(-1) x hr. Correlational analyses showed that more frequent drinkers eliminated ethanol significantly faster and reached significantly lower AUC than less frequent drinkers.
CONCLUSIONS: After multiple dose ingestion in white women, classical zero-order elimination analyses can be applied only to a limited portion of the descending BrAC-time curve. They seem justified and practical from 0.5 hr after peak BrAC until BrAC reaches 0.2 g x L(-1). To describe ethanol pharmacokinetics across the entire BrAC-time curve, however, sophisticated nonlinear model fitting is required.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2000        PMID: 11003200

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Alcohol Clin Exp Res        ISSN: 0145-6008            Impact factor:   3.455


  19 in total

Review 1.  Role of variability in explaining ethanol pharmacokinetics: research and forensic applications.

Authors:  Ake Norberg; A Wayne Jones; Robert G Hahn; Johan L Gabrielsson
Journal:  Clin Pharmacokinet       Date:  2003       Impact factor: 6.447

2.  A population approach to in vitro-in vivo correlation modelling for compounds with nonlinear kinetics.

Authors:  Clare Gaynor; Adrian Dunne; Cian Costello; John Davis
Journal:  J Pharmacokinet Pharmacodyn       Date:  2011-03-16       Impact factor: 2.745

3.  Short-term effects of alcohol consumption on the hormonal milieu and mood states in nulliparous women.

Authors:  Julie A Mennella; M Yanina Pepino
Journal:  Alcohol       Date:  2006-01       Impact factor: 2.405

4.  Transgenerational effects of binge drinking in a primate model: implications for human health.

Authors:  Catherine A VandeVoort; Kristin N Grimsrud; Uros Midic; Namdori Mtango; Keith E Latham
Journal:  Fertil Steril       Date:  2014-12-06       Impact factor: 7.329

5.  Breast pumping and lactational state exert differential effects on ethanol pharmacokinetics.

Authors:  Julie A Mennella; M Yanina Pepino
Journal:  Alcohol       Date:  2010-01-06       Impact factor: 2.405

6.  Alterations in ethyl alcohol pharmacokinetics during oral consumption of malt liquor beverages in African Americans.

Authors:  Robert E Taylor; Byron R Raysor; John Kwagyan; Vijay A Ramchandani; Nnenna Kalu; Monique Powell-Davis; Clifford L Ferguson; Lucinda Carr; Denise M Scott
Journal:  Alcohol Clin Exp Res       Date:  2008-09-25       Impact factor: 3.455

Review 7.  The clinical significance of variations in ethanol toxicokinetics.

Authors:  Anthony F Pizon; Charles E Becker; Dale Bikin
Journal:  J Med Toxicol       Date:  2007-06

8.  Faster absorption of ethanol and higher peak concentration in women after gastric bypass surgery.

Authors:  H Klockhoff; I Näslund; A W Jones
Journal:  Br J Clin Pharmacol       Date:  2002-12       Impact factor: 4.335

9.  Pharmacokinetics of 1,4-butanediol in rats: bioactivation to gamma-hydroxybutyric acid, interaction with ethanol, and oral bioavailability.

Authors:  Ho-Leung Fung; Pei-Suen Tsou; Jurgen B Bulitta; Doanh C Tran; Nathaniel A Page; David Soda; Sun Mi Fung
Journal:  AAPS J       Date:  2008-02-08       Impact factor: 4.009

10.  Physiologically based pharmacokinetic (PBPK) models for ethanol.

Authors:  Martin H Plawecki; Jae-Joon Han; Peter C Doerschuk; Vijay A Ramchandani; Sean J O'Connor
Journal:  IEEE Trans Biomed Eng       Date:  2008-12       Impact factor: 4.538

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.