| Literature DB >> 23404365 |
Karina Claassen1, Stefan Willmann, Thomas Eissing, Tobias Preusser, Michael Block.
Abstract
The renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system (RAAS) plays a key role in the pathogenesis of cardiovascular disorders including hypertension and is one of the most important targets for drugs. A whole body physiologically based pharmacokinetic (wb PBPK) model integrating this hormone circulation system and its inhibition can be used to explore the influence of drugs that interfere with this system, and thus to improve the understanding of interactions between drugs and the target system. In this study, we describe the development of a mechanistic RAAS model and exemplify drug action by a simulation of enalapril administration. Enalapril and its metabolite enalaprilat are potent inhibitors of the angiotensin-converting-enzyme (ACE). To this end, a coupled dynamic parent-metabolite PBPK model was developed and linked with the RAAS model that consists of seven coupled PBPK models for aldosterone, ACE, angiotensin 1, angiotensin 2, angiotensin 2 receptor type 1, renin, and prorenin. The results indicate that the model represents the interactions in the RAAS in response to the pharmacokinetics (PK) and pharmacodynamics (PD) of enalapril and enalaprilat in an accurate manner. The full set of RAAS-hormone profiles and interactions are consistently described at pre- and post-administration steady state as well as during their dynamic transition and show a good agreement with literature data. The model allows a simultaneous representation of the parent-metabolite conversion to the active form as well as the effect of the drug on the hormone levels, offering a detailed mechanistic insight into the hormone cascade and its inhibition. This model constitutes a first major step to establish a PBPK-PD-model including the PK and the mode of action (MoA) of a drug acting on a dynamic RAAS that can be further used to link to clinical endpoints such as blood pressure.Entities:
Keywords: cardiovascular; enalapril; enalaprilat; physiologically based pharmacokinetic model; renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system
Year: 2013 PMID: 23404365 PMCID: PMC3567458 DOI: 10.3389/fphys.2013.00004
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Front Physiol ISSN: 1664-042X Impact factor: 4.566
Figure 1Schematic representation of the renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system (RAAS). Renin converts the hepatically secreted angiotensinogen (AGT) to angiotensin 1 (Ang1). Ang1 is then converted to angiotensin 2 (Ang2) by the membrane bound angiotensin-converting-enzyme (ACE). Ang2 then binds to the angiotensin 2 receptor type 1 (AT1). The most important effects of AT1 binding are depicted either: the aldosterone secretion by the adrenals and the inhibition of renin activation from prorenin. Different processes are depicted by different line styles (see upper right box).
Parameters and variables used for the different actors in the RAAS.
| Parameter/variable name | Value | Unit | Reference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Molecular weight | 53.15 | kDa | UniProt Consortium ( |
| Plasma concentration | 0.60 | μmol· L−1 | In agreement with Kobori et al. ( |
| 11.29 | min | Optimization | |
| 7.81 | L· min−1 | Optimization | |
| Molecular weight | 48 | kDa | Sealey et al. ( |
| Plasma concentration | 3.62E−07 | μmol· L−1 | Consistent with Juillerat et al. ( |
| 3.60 | min−1 | Optimization | |
| 5.04E−02 | μmol· L−1 | Optimization | |
| 1.44 | min | Optimization | |
| Molecular weight | 180 | kDa | Thevananther and Brecher ( |
| 35.16 | L· μmol−1· min−1 | Results from IV Ena model | |
| 2.15E−02 | min−1 | Results from IV Ena model | |
| 4.48E−04 | min−1 | Optimization | |
| 4.12E−03 | μmol· L−1 | Optimization | |
| Molecular weight | 1.30 | kDa | Wang et al. ( |
| Plasma concentration | 7.91E−06 | μmol· L−1 | Consistent with Juillerat et al. ( |
| 0.72 | min | Optimization | |
| Molecular weight | 1.05 | kDa | Noda et al. ( |
| Plasma concentration | 4.84E−06 | μmol· L−1 | Consistent with Juillerat et al. ( |
| Log | −1.7 | – | Wang et al. ( |
| 1.87E−08 | μmol· L−1 | Optimization | |
| 1.54 | min | Consistent with Boyd et al., | |
| Molecular weight | 41 | kDa | UniProt Consortium ( |
| 7.69 | μmol· L−1 | Optimization | |
| 23.50 | L· μmol−1· min−1 | Optimization | |
| 3.07E−02 | min−1 | Optimization | |
| Molecular weight | 0.36 | kDa | Wang et al. ( |
| Plasma concentration | 2.07E−04 | μmol· L−1 | Consistent with Juillerat et al. ( |
| Log | 1.08 | – | Wishart et al. ( |
| Protein binding | 50 | % | Pardridge ( |
| 1.51E−06 | μmol· min−1 | Optimization | |
| 7.81 | L· min−1 | Optimization | |
| 12.87 | min | Optimization | |
| Molecular weight | 57 | kDa | Sealey et al. ( |
| Plasma concentration | 1.21E−06 | μmol· L−1 | Based on Tu et al. ( |
| Renal plasma concentration intracellular | 1.1E−04 | μmol· L−1 | Optimization |
| 1.62 | μmol· min−1· L−1 | Optimization | |
| 4.68E−02 | μmol· L−1 | Optimization | |
| 4.68E−02 | L· min−1 | Optimization | |
| 0.24 | L | PK-Sim® | |
| 5.07 | min | Optimization | |
| 710 | μmol· L−1 | Tabata et al. ( | |
*Plasma concentration in venous blood at pre-administration steady state.
.
Population specific information about subjects, optimized parameters, and model specific parameters.
| Biollaz et al. ( | Gu et al. ( | Lee et al. ( | Lu et al. ( | Najib et al. ( | Noormohamed et al. ( | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| No. of individuals | 12 | 20 | 12 | 20 | 24 | 12 |
| Male/female | 12/0 | – | – | 20/0 | 24/0 | 12/0 |
| Age (years) | 22–33 | – | – | – | 23.25 ± 4.55 | 21–25 (mean 22) |
| Weight (kg) | – | – | – | – | 73.38 ± 9.39 | 56–80 (mean 70) |
| Height (cm) | – | – | – | – | 175.96 ± 7.66 | – |
| Healthy | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes |
| Dose (mg) | 10 | 10 | 20 | 2·5 | 20 | 20 |
| Fasted | Yes | No | No | Yes | Yes | Yes |
| 184.87 | 178.18 | 131.88 | 148.05 | 146.50 | 194.36 | |
| Renal clearance Ena (L· min−1·kg−1) | 6.02E−03 | 4.51E−3 | 6.53E−03 | 5.02E−03 | 4.61E−03 | 5.50E−03 |
| Renal clearance Enaat (L· min−1· kg−1) | 2.99E−04 | 8.01E−4 | 4.99E−04 | 6.30E−04 | 6.37E−04 | 6.21E−04 |
| ACE ref conc. ( | 2.59 | 1.86 | 4.32 | 1.30 | 2.14 | 4.15 |
| 1.56 | 1.57 | 1.57 | 1.35 | 1.49 | 1.42 | |
*Two enalapril maleate capsules were administered at the same time, containing 5 mg enalapril each.
.
Reference expression values of ACE per organ as included in PK-Sim 5.
| Name | ACE | AT1 |
|---|---|---|
| Gene ID | 1636 | 185 |
| Hs | 654434 | 477887 |
| Brain | 15 (12.96) | 5 (0.20) |
| Fat | 6 (5.22) | 0 (0) |
| Gonads | 2 (2.01) | 4 (0.16) |
| Heart | 0 (0.16) | 9 (0.35) |
| Kidney | 0 (0.41) | 100 (3.85) |
| Large Intestine | 2 (1.44) | 27 (1.04) |
| Liver | 0 (0) | 76 (2.94) |
| Lung | 100 (86.38) | 6 (0.22) |
| Muscle | 0 (0.12) | 8 (0.30) |
| Pancreas | 0 (0.23) | 0 (0) |
| Plasma | 6 (5.55) | 0 (0) |
| Skin | 0 (0) | 57 (2.19) |
| Spleen | 0 (0) | 89 (3.41) |
| Small Intestine | 1 (0.32) | 27 (1.04) |
| Stomach | 3 (2.86) | 0 (0) |
Physicochemical and PK properties of enalapril and enalaprilat.
| Enalapril | Enalaprilat | Unit | Reference | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Molecular weight | 376.5 | 348.4 | g· mol−1 | Wang et al. ( |
| Log | 0.07 | −0.74 | Log units | Ranadive et al. ( |
| pKa | 3.74 (4.75 | 2.03 | – | Remko ( |
| 4.03 | ||||
| Plasma protein binding | 45 (50 | 50–60 (50 | % | Sirianni and Pang ( |
| Hepatic clearance | 354 | – | ml· min−1 | Noormohamed et al. ( |
| Renal clearance | 18 | 8–9.5 | L· h−1 | Dhareshwar ( |
*Values used in the model.
Figure 2(A) Plasma concentration-time profiles of Enaat after IV Enaat administration. The solid blue line is the simulation result compared to the data of Hockings et al. (1986) which are indicated as points (adolescents) and triangles (elderly). (B) The simulated versus observed plot for the same simulation with the Hockings data are shown, indicated as points (adolescents) and triangles (elderly). The solid black regression line denotes the line of identity (observed outcome is equal to simulated outcome).
Figure 3(A) Exemplary plasma concentration-time curves of Ena and Enaat from the coupled Ena-Enaat model after oral Ena application compared to experimental data (Gu et al., 2004). The red solid line is the simulated Ena plasma concentration, while the blue solid line is the simulation result of Enaat. The respective data of Ena are indicated as circles, of Enaat as triangles. (B) Simulated versus observed plot for Enalapril from the coupled model, compared to the data by Biollaz et al. (1982), Noormohamed et al. (1990), Lee et al. (2003), Najib et al. (2003), Gu et al. (2004), Lu et al. (2009), with SD. The solid black regression line denotes the line of identity (observed outcome is equal to simulated outcome). (C) Predicted versus observed plot for Enalaprilat from the coupled Ena-Enaat model, compared to the data by Biollaz et al. (1982), Noormohamed et al. (1990), Lee et al. (2003), Najib et al. (2003), Gu et al. (2004), Lu et al. (2009). The solid black regression line denotes the line of identity (observed outcome is equal to simulated outcome).
Figure 4(A) Plasma concentration-time curves of hormones included into the RAAS. Hormones are in a steady state until administration of oral Ena at t = 1500 min indicated by the red arrow. The respective data are indicated by different symbols (Nussberger et al., 2002). (B) Simulated versus observed plasma concentrations of different actors of the RAAS before and after inhibition of ACE by Ena. The different hormones are depicted by different symbols (Nussberger et al., 2002) with their SD. The solid black regression line denotes the line of identity (observed outcome is equal to simulated outcome).