Literature DB >> 21992032

Case studies addressing human pharmacokinetic uncertainty using a combination of pharmacokinetic simulation and alternative first in human paradigms.

Anthony Harrison1, Iain Gardner, Tanya Hay, Maurice Dickins, Kevin Beaumont, Alex Phipps, Lynn Purkins, Gill Allan, Rachelle Christian, Jonathan Duckworth, Ian Gurrell, Sarah Kempshall, Mark Savage, Mark Seymour, Marie Simpson, Louise Taylor, Paul Turnpenny.   

Abstract

PF-184298 ((S)-2,3-dichloro-N-isobutyl-N-pyrrolidin-3-ylbenzamide) and PF-4776548 ((3-(4-fluoro-2-methoxy-benzyl)-7-hydroxy-8,9-dihydro-3H,7H-pyrrolo[2,3-c][1,7]naphthyridin-6-one)) are novel compounds which were selected to progress to human studies. Discordant human pharmacokinetic predictions arose from pre-clinical in vivo studies in rat and dog, and from human in vitro studies, resulting in a clearance prediction range of 3 to >20 mL min⁻¹ kg⁻¹ for PF-184298, and 5 to >20 mL min⁻¹ kg⁻¹ for PF-4776548. A package of work to investigate the discordance for PF-184298 is described. Although ultimately complementary to the human pharmacokinetic data in characterising the disposition of PF-184298 in humans, these data did not provide any further confidence in pharmacokinetic prediction. A fit for purpose human pharmacokinetic study was conducted for each compound, with an oral pharmacologically active dose for PF-184298, and an intravenous and oral microdose for PF-4776548. This provided a relatively low cost, clear decision making approach, resulting in the termination of PF-4776548 and further progression of PF-184298. A retrospective analysis of the data showed that, if the tools had been available at the time, the pharmacokinetics of PF-184298 in human could have been predicted from a population based simulation tool in combination with physicochemical properties and in vitro human intrinsic clearance.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2011        PMID: 21992032     DOI: 10.3109/00498254.2011.622418

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Xenobiotica        ISSN: 0049-8254            Impact factor:   1.908


  7 in total

Review 1.  Phase 0/microdosing approaches: time for mainstream application in drug development?

Authors:  Tal Burt; Graeme Young; Wooin Lee; Hiroyuki Kusuhara; Oliver Langer; Malcolm Rowland; Yuichi Sugiyama
Journal:  Nat Rev Drug Discov       Date:  2020-09-08       Impact factor: 84.694

Review 2.  Predictive Value of Microdose Pharmacokinetics.

Authors:  Merel van Nuland; Hilde Rosing; Alwin D R Huitema; Jos H Beijnen
Journal:  Clin Pharmacokinet       Date:  2019-10       Impact factor: 6.447

3.  Human absorption, distribution, metabolism and excretion properties of drug molecules: a plethora of approaches.

Authors:  Claire Beaumont; Graeme C Young; Tom Cavalier; Malcolm A Young
Journal:  Br J Clin Pharmacol       Date:  2014-12       Impact factor: 4.335

4.  Human microdose evaluation of the novel EP1 receptor antagonist GSK269984A.

Authors:  Thor Ostenfeld; Claire Beaumont; Jonathan Bullman; Maria Beaumont; Phillip Jeffrey
Journal:  Br J Clin Pharmacol       Date:  2012-12       Impact factor: 4.335

Review 5.  Microdosing and drug development: past, present and future.

Authors:  Graham Lappin; Robert Noveck; Tal Burt
Journal:  Expert Opin Drug Metab Toxicol       Date:  2013-04-04       Impact factor: 4.481

6.  Drug-drug interaction of microdose and regular-dose omeprazole with a CYP2C19 inhibitor and inducer.

Authors:  Gab-Jin Park; Soo Hyeon Bae; Wan-Su Park; Seunghoon Han; Min-Ho Park; Seok-Ho Shin; Young G Shin; Dong-Seok Yim
Journal:  Drug Des Devel Ther       Date:  2017-03-30       Impact factor: 4.162

Review 7.  Strategic, feasibility, economic, and cultural aspects of phase 0 approaches: Is it time to change the drug development process in order to increase productivity?

Authors:  Tal Burt; Ad F Roffel; Oliver Langer; Kirsten Anderson; Joseph DiMasi
Journal:  Clin Transl Sci       Date:  2022-04-21       Impact factor: 4.438

  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.