Literature DB >> 15660623

Framework for evaluation of physiologically-based pharmacokinetic models for use in safety or risk assessment.

Leona H Clark1, R Woodrow Setzer, Hugh A Barton.   

Abstract

Proposed applications of increasingly sophisticated biologically-based computational models, such as physiologically-based pharmacokinetic models, raise the issue of how to evaluate whether the models are adequate for proposed uses, including safety or risk assessment. A six-step process for model evaluation is described. It relies on multidisciplinary expertise to address the biological, toxicological, mathematical, statistical, and risk assessment aspects of the modeling and its application. The first step is to have a clear definition of the purpose(s) of the model in the particular assessment; this provides critical perspectives on all subsequent steps. The second step is to evaluate the biological characterization described by the model structure based on the intended uses of the model and available information on the compound being modeled or related compounds. The next two steps review the mathematical equations used to describe the biology and their implementation in an appropriate computer program. At this point, the values selected for the model parameters (i.e., model calibration) must be evaluated. Thus, the fifth step is a combination of evaluating the model parameterization and calibration against data and evaluating the uncertainty in the model outputs. The final step is to evaluate specialized analyses that were done using the model, such as modeling of population distributions of parameters leading to population estimates for model outcomes or inclusion of early pharmacodynamic events. The process also helps to define the kinds of documentation that would be needed for a model to facilitate its evaluation and implementation.

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2004        PMID: 15660623     DOI: 10.1111/j.0272-4332.2004.00561.x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Risk Anal        ISSN: 0272-4332            Impact factor:   4.000


  14 in total

Review 1.  Challenges in working towards an internal threshold of toxicological concern (iTTC) for use in the safety assessment of cosmetics: Discussions from the Cosmetics Europe iTTC Working Group workshop.

Authors:  Corie A Ellison; Karen L Blackburn; Paul L Carmichael; Harvey J Clewell; Mark T D Cronin; Bertrand Desprez; Sylvia E Escher; Steve S Ferguson; Sébastien Grégoire; Nicola J Hewitt; Heli M Hollnagel; Martina Klaric; Atish Patel; Sabrina Salhi; Andreas Schepky; Barbara G Schmitt; John F Wambaugh; Andrew Worth
Journal:  Regul Toxicol Pharmacol       Date:  2019-01-15       Impact factor: 3.271

Review 2.  In vitro to in vivo extrapolation for high throughput prioritization and decision making.

Authors:  Shannon M Bell; Xiaoqing Chang; John F Wambaugh; David G Allen; Mike Bartels; Kim L R Brouwer; Warren M Casey; Neepa Choksi; Stephen S Ferguson; Grazyna Fraczkiewicz; Annie M Jarabek; Alice Ke; Annie Lumen; Scott G Lynn; Alicia Paini; Paul S Price; Caroline Ring; Ted W Simon; Nisha S Sipes; Catherine S Sprankle; Judy Strickland; John Troutman; Barbara A Wetmore; Nicole C Kleinstreuer
Journal:  Toxicol In Vitro       Date:  2017-12-05       Impact factor: 3.500

3.  Toxicity testing in the 21st century: a vision and a strategy.

Authors:  Daniel Krewski; Daniel Acosta; Melvin Andersen; Henry Anderson; John C Bailar; Kim Boekelheide; Robert Brent; Gail Charnley; Vivian G Cheung; Sidney Green; Karl T Kelsey; Nancy I Kerkvliet; Abby A Li; Lawrence McCray; Otto Meyer; Reid D Patterson; William Pennie; Robert A Scala; Gina M Solomon; Martin Stephens; James Yager; Lauren Zeise
Journal:  J Toxicol Environ Health B Crit Rev       Date:  2010-02       Impact factor: 6.393

4.  Bayesian evaluation of a physiologically-based pharmacokinetic (PBPK) model of long-term kinetics of metal nanoparticles in rats.

Authors:  Lisa M Sweeney; Laura MacCalman; Lynne T Haber; Eileen D Kuempel; C Lang Tran
Journal:  Regul Toxicol Pharmacol       Date:  2015-07-03       Impact factor: 3.271

5.  Simulating microdosimetry in a virtual hepatic lobule.

Authors:  John Wambaugh; Imran Shah
Journal:  PLoS Comput Biol       Date:  2010-04-22       Impact factor: 4.475

Review 6.  Challenges Associated With Applying Physiologically Based Pharmacokinetic Modeling for Public Health Decision-Making.

Authors:  Yu-Mei Tan; Rachel R Worley; Jeremy A Leonard; Jeffrey W Fisher
Journal:  Toxicol Sci       Date:  2018-04-01       Impact factor: 4.849

Review 7.  PBPK model reporting template for chemical risk assessment applications.

Authors:  Yu-Mei Tan; Melissa Chan; Amechi Chukwudebe; Jeanne Domoradzki; Jeffrey Fisher; C Eric Hack; Paul Hinderliter; Kota Hirasawa; Jeremy Leonard; Annie Lumen; Alicia Paini; Hua Qian; Patricia Ruiz; John Wambaugh; Fagen Zhang; Michelle Embry
Journal:  Regul Toxicol Pharmacol       Date:  2020-06-02       Impact factor: 3.271

8.  A Workflow for Global Sensitivity Analysis of PBPK Models.

Authors:  Kevin McNally; Richard Cotton; George D Loizou
Journal:  Front Pharmacol       Date:  2011-06-23       Impact factor: 5.810

9.  MEGen: A Physiologically Based Pharmacokinetic Model Generator.

Authors:  George Loizou; Alex Hogg
Journal:  Front Pharmacol       Date:  2011-11-10       Impact factor: 5.810

10.  Application of physiologically based pharmacokinetic models in chemical risk assessment.

Authors:  Moiz Mumtaz; Jeffrey Fisher; Benjamin Blount; Patricia Ruiz
Journal:  J Toxicol       Date:  2012-03-19
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.