Literature DB >> 21863380

Allometric scaling of pegylated liposomal anticancer drugs.

Whitney P Caron1, Harvey Clewell, Robert Dedrick, Ramesh K Ramanathan, Whitney L Davis, Ning Yu, Margaret Tonda, Jan H Schellens, Jos H Beijnen, William C Zamboni.   

Abstract

Pegylated liposomal formulations contain lipid conjugated to polyethylene glycol. The disposition of encapsulated drug is dictated by the composition of the liposome, thus altering the pharmacokinetic (PK) profile of the drug. Allometric scaling is based on a power-log relationship between body weight (W) and drug clearance (CL) among mammals and has been used to compare the disposition of nonliposomal drugs across species. The objectives of this study were to use allometric scaling to: (1) compare the disposition of pegylated liposomal drugs across speciesand determine the best scaling model and (2) predict PK parameters of pegylated liposomal drugs in humans. The PK of pegylated liposomal CKD-602 (S-CKD602), doxorubicin (Doxil®), and cisplatin (SPI-077) were compared. PK studies ofS-CKD602, Doxil®, and SPI-077 were performed at the maximum tolerated dose (MTD) in male and female mice, rats, dogs and patients with refractory solid tumors. The allometric equation used to evaluate the relationship between W and CL in each species was CL = a(W)(m) (a = empirical coefficient; m = allometric exponent). Substitution of physiological variables other than body weight, such as factors representative of the mononuclear phagocyte system (MPS) were evaluated. Dedrick Plots and Maximum Life-Span Potential (MLP) were used to determine scaling feasibility. Standard allometry demonstrated a relationship between clearance of S-CKD602, Doxil®, and SPI-077 and body, spleen, liver, and kidney weights, total monocyte count, and spleen and liver blood flow. However, using scaling to predict CL of these agents in humans often resulted in differences >30%. Despite a strong correlation between body weight and MPS-associated variables with CL among preclinical species, the use of the equations did not predict CL. Thus, new methods of allometric scaling and measures of MPS function need to be developed.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2011        PMID: 21863380     DOI: 10.1007/s10928-011-9213-5

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Pharmacokinet Pharmacodyn        ISSN: 1567-567X            Impact factor:   2.745


  37 in total

Review 1.  Optimizing liposomes for delivery of chemotherapeutic agents to solid tumors.

Authors:  D C Drummond; O Meyer; K Hong; D B Kirpotin; D Papahadjopoulos
Journal:  Pharmacol Rev       Date:  1999-12       Impact factor: 25.468

Review 2.  Interspecies allometric scaling.

Authors:  Robert P Hunter
Journal:  Handb Exp Pharmacol       Date:  2010

Review 3.  Interspecies scaling: predicting clearance of drugs in humans. Three different approaches.

Authors:  I Mahmood; J D Balian
Journal:  Xenobiotica       Date:  1996-09       Impact factor: 1.908

4.  Animal scale-up.

Authors:  R L Dedrick
Journal:  J Pharmacokinet Biopharm       Date:  1973-10

Review 5.  Interspecies pharmacokinetic scaling and the evolutionary-comparative paradigm.

Authors:  H Boxenbaum
Journal:  Drug Metab Rev       Date:  1984       Impact factor: 4.518

6.  Interspecies scaling, allometry, physiological time, and the ground plan of pharmacokinetics.

Authors:  H Boxenbaum
Journal:  J Pharmacokinet Biopharm       Date:  1982-04

Review 7.  Tumor vascular permeability and the EPR effect in macromolecular therapeutics: a review.

Authors:  H Maeda; J Wu; T Sawa; Y Matsumura; K Hori
Journal:  J Control Release       Date:  2000-03-01       Impact factor: 9.776

8.  Species differences in methanol and formic acid pharmacokinetics in mice, rabbits and primates.

Authors:  J Nicole Sweeting; Michelle Siu; Gordon P McCallum; Lutfiya Miller; Peter G Wells
Journal:  Toxicol Appl Pharmacol       Date:  2010-05-25       Impact factor: 4.219

9.  Factors affecting the pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of PEGylated liposomal irinotecan (IHL-305) in patients with advanced solid tumors.

Authors:  Huali Wu; Jeffrey R Infante; Vicki L Keedy; Suzanne F Jones; Emily Chan; Johanna C Bendell; Wooin Lee; Whitney P Kirschbrown; Beth A Zamboni; Satoshi Ikeda; Hiroshi Kodaira; Mace L Rothenberg; Howard A Burris; William C Zamboni
Journal:  Int J Nanomedicine       Date:  2015-02-10

10.  Measurement of extracellular fluid carboplatin kinetics in melanoma metastases with microdialysis.

Authors:  B Blöchl-Daum; M Müller; V Meisinger; H G Eichler; A Fassolt; H Pehamberger
Journal:  Br J Cancer       Date:  1996-04       Impact factor: 7.640

View more
  12 in total

Review 1.  Best practices in cancer nanotechnology: perspective from NCI nanotechnology alliance.

Authors:  William C Zamboni; Vladimir Torchilin; Anil K Patri; Jeff Hrkach; Stephen Stern; Robert Lee; Andre Nel; Nicholas J Panaro; Piotr Grodzinski
Journal:  Clin Cancer Res       Date:  2012-06-05       Impact factor: 12.531

Review 2.  When Is It Important to Measure Unbound Drug in Evaluating Nanomedicine Pharmacokinetics?

Authors:  Stephan T Stern; Marilyn N Martinez; David M Stevens
Journal:  Drug Metab Dispos       Date:  2016-09-26       Impact factor: 3.922

3.  Correlating animal and human phase Ia/Ib clinical data with CALAA-01, a targeted, polymer-based nanoparticle containing siRNA.

Authors:  Jonathan E Zuckerman; Ismael Gritli; Anthony Tolcher; Jeremy D Heidel; Dean Lim; Robert Morgan; Bartosz Chmielowski; Antoni Ribas; Mark E Davis; Yun Yen
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2014-07-21       Impact factor: 11.205

4.  Dual physiologically based pharmacokinetic model of liposomal and nonliposomal amphotericin B disposition.

Authors:  Leonid Kagan; Pavel Gershkovich; Kishor M Wasan; Donald E Mager
Journal:  Pharm Res       Date:  2013-06-21       Impact factor: 4.200

5.  Immune modulatory nanoparticle therapeutics for intracerebral glioma.

Authors:  Nasser K Yaghi; Jun Wei; Yuuri Hashimoto; Ling-Yuan Kong; Konrad Gabrusiewicz; Edjah K Nduom; Xiaoyang Ling; Neal Huang; Shouhao Zhou; Brittany C Parker Kerrigan; Jonathan M Levine; Virginia R Fajt; Gwendolyn Levine; Brian F Porter; Eric G Marcusson; Kiyoshi Tachikawa; Padmanabh Chivukula; David C Webb; Joseph E Payne; Amy B Heimberger
Journal:  Neuro Oncol       Date:  2017-03-01       Impact factor: 12.300

Review 6.  Biological Features of Extracellular Vesicles and Challenges.

Authors:  Ye Zeng; Yan Qiu; Wenli Jiang; Junyi Shen; Xinghong Yao; Xueling He; Liang Li; Bingmei Fu; Xiaoheng Liu
Journal:  Front Cell Dev Biol       Date:  2022-06-24

7.  Translational studies of phenotypic probes for the mononuclear phagocyte system and liposomal pharmacology.

Authors:  Whitney P Caron; John C Lay; Alan M Fong; Ninh M La-Beck; Parag Kumar; Suzanne E Newman; Haibo Zhou; Jane H Monaco; Daniel L Clarke-Pearson; Wendy R Brewster; Linda Van Le; Victoria L Bae-Jump; Paola A Gehrig; William C Zamboni
Journal:  J Pharmacol Exp Ther       Date:  2013-09-16       Impact factor: 4.030

8.  A mouse-human phase 1 co-clinical trial of a protease-activated fluorescent probe for imaging cancer.

Authors:  Melodi Javid Whitley; Diana M Cardona; Alexander L Lazarides; Ivan Spasojevic; Jorge M Ferrer; Joan Cahill; Chang-Lung Lee; Matija Snuderl; Dan G Blazer; E Shelley Hwang; Rachel A Greenup; Paul J Mosca; Jeffrey K Mito; Kyle C Cuneo; Nicole A Larrier; Erin K O'Reilly; Richard F Riedel; William C Eward; David B Strasfeld; Dai Fukumura; Rakesh K Jain; W David Lee; Linda G Griffith; Moungi G Bawendi; David G Kirsch; Brian E Brigman
Journal:  Sci Transl Med       Date:  2016-01-06       Impact factor: 17.956

Review 9.  Multifunctional nanoparticles for brain tumor imaging and therapy.

Authors:  Yu Cheng; Ramin A Morshed; Brenda Auffinger; Alex L Tobias; Maciej S Lesniak
Journal:  Adv Drug Deliv Rev       Date:  2013-09-20       Impact factor: 15.470

Review 10.  Cancer nanotechnology: the impact of passive and active targeting in the era of modern cancer biology.

Authors:  Nicolas Bertrand; Jun Wu; Xiaoyang Xu; Nazila Kamaly; Omid C Farokhzad
Journal:  Adv Drug Deliv Rev       Date:  2013-11-22       Impact factor: 15.470

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.