Literature DB >> 22388869

Advancing prediction of tissue distribution and volume of distribution of highly lipophilic compounds from a simplified tissue-composition-based model as a mechanistic animal alternative method.

Patrick Poulin1, Sami Haddad.   

Abstract

It has been reported that values of tissue-plasma ratios (K(p)) and resulting volume of distribution at steady state (V(ss)) are substantially overpredicted for several highly lipophilic drugs. This effect was observed particularly with the published version of the tissue-composition-based model, which used experimentally determined unbound fraction in plasma (fu(p)) as input for drugs. The reasons for the unreasonably high V(ss) predictions were investigated in this study for 14 highly lipophilic compounds with a log n-octanol-water partition coefficient (log P(ow)) of at least 5.8. Here, we argue that the experimentally determined fu(p) is inaccurate for these compounds, which affected the prediction of K(p) and V(ss). Alternatively, the tissue-plasma ratio of neutral lipids (nl) equivalent was used as the main factor governing K(p), and hence V(ss), in addition to log P(ow). The average fold error of deviation between the predicted and observed human V(ss) is 124 for the published model, whereas it significantly decreased to 1.5 for the proposed model. The sensitivity analysis confirmed the importance of nl content and drug lipophilicity. Overall, this study proposes a generic and simplified tissue-composition-based model for highly lipophilic drugs and chemicals, which is a step forward toward improving prediction of V(ss) into physiologically based pharmacokinetic (PBPK) models.
Copyright © 2012 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2012        PMID: 22388869     DOI: 10.1002/jps.23090

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Pharm Sci        ISSN: 0022-3549            Impact factor:   3.534


  23 in total

1.  Development of a decision tree to classify the most accurate tissue-specific tissue to plasma partition coefficient algorithm for a given compound.

Authors:  Yejin Esther Yun; Cecilia A Cotton; Andrea N Edginton
Journal:  J Pharmacokinet Pharmacodyn       Date:  2013-11-21       Impact factor: 2.745

Review 2.  Dose selection based on physiologically based pharmacokinetic (PBPK) approaches.

Authors:  Hannah M Jones; Kapil Mayawala; Patrick Poulin
Journal:  AAPS J       Date:  2012-12-27       Impact factor: 4.009

Review 3.  Improving the risk assessment of lipophilic persistent environmental chemicals in breast milk.

Authors:  Geniece M Lehmann; Marc-André Verner; Bryan Luukinen; Cara Henning; Sue Anne Assimon; Judy S LaKind; Eva D McLanahan; Linda J Phillips; Matthew H Davis; Christina M Powers; Erin P Hines; Sami Haddad; Matthew P Longnecker; Michael T Poulsen; David G Farrer; Satori A Marchitti; Yu-Mei Tan; Jeffrey C Swartout; Sharon K Sagiv; Clement Welsh; Jerry L Campbell; Warren G Foster; Raymond S H Yang; Suzanne E Fenton; Rogelio Tornero-Velez; Bettina M Francis; John B Barnett; Hisham A El-Masri; Jane Ellen Simmons
Journal:  Crit Rev Toxicol       Date:  2014-08       Impact factor: 5.635

4.  Evaluation of the GastroPlus™ Advanced Compartmental and Transit (ACAT) Model in Early Discovery.

Authors:  N Gobeau; R Stringer; S De Buck; T Tuntland; B Faller
Journal:  Pharm Res       Date:  2016-06-08       Impact factor: 4.200

5.  Global Sensitivity Analysis of the Rodgers and Rowland Model for Prediction of Tissue: Plasma Partitioning Coefficients: Assessment of the Key Physiological and Physicochemical Factors That Determine Small-Molecule Tissue Distribution.

Authors:  Estelle Yau; Andrés Olivares-Morales; Michael Gertz; Neil Parrott; Adam S Darwich; Leon Aarons; Kayode Ogungbenro
Journal:  AAPS J       Date:  2020-02-03       Impact factor: 4.009

6.  Assessing Toxicokinetic Uncertainty and Variability in Risk Prioritization.

Authors:  John F Wambaugh; Barbara A Wetmore; Caroline L Ring; Chantel I Nicolas; Robert G Pearce; Gregory S Honda; Roger Dinallo; Derek Angus; Jon Gilbert; Teresa Sierra; Akshay Badrinarayanan; Bradley Snodgrass; Adam Brockman; Chris Strock; R Woodrow Setzer; Russell S Thomas
Journal:  Toxicol Sci       Date:  2019-12-01       Impact factor: 4.849

7.  Comparing Mechanistic and Preclinical Predictions of Volume of Distribution on a Large Set of Drugs.

Authors:  Rosa Chan; Tom De Bruyn; Matthew Wright; Fabio Broccatelli
Journal:  Pharm Res       Date:  2018-03-08       Impact factor: 4.200

8.  Evaluation and calibration of high-throughput predictions of chemical distribution to tissues.

Authors:  Robert G Pearce; R Woodrow Setzer; Jimena L Davis; John F Wambaugh
Journal:  J Pharmacokinet Pharmacodyn       Date:  2017-10-14       Impact factor: 2.745

9.  A physiologically based pharmacokinetic model of vitamin D.

Authors:  Megan E Sawyer; Hien T Tran; Marina V Evans
Journal:  J Appl Toxicol       Date:  2017-06-06       Impact factor: 3.446

10.  Challenges and opportunities in the advancement of nanomedicines.

Authors:  Alexander Wei; Jonathan G Mehtala; Anil K Patri
Journal:  J Control Release       Date:  2012-10-12       Impact factor: 9.776

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.