Literature DB >> 27816627

Pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic modeling of etoposide tumor growth inhibitory effect in Walker-256 tumor-bearing rat model using free intratumoral drug concentrations.

Maiara Cássia Pigatto1, Renatha Menti Roman2, Letizia Carrara3, Andréia Buffon4, Paolo Magni3, Teresa Dalla Costa5.   

Abstract

The purpose of this study was to establish a population pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic (PK/PD) model linking etoposide free tumor and total plasma concentrations to the inhibition of solid tumor growth in rats. Walker-256 tumor cells were inoculated subcutaneously in the right flank of Wistar rats, which were randomly divided in control and two treated groups that received etoposide 5 or 10mg/kg i.v. bolus every day for 8 and 4days, respectively, and tumor volume was monitored daily for 30days. The plasma and intratumoral concentrations-time profiles were obtained from a previous study and were modeled by a four-compartment population pharmacokinetic (popPK) model. PK/PD analysis was conducted using MONOLIX v.4.3.3 on average data and by mean of a nonlinear mixed-effect model. PK/PD data were analyzed using a modification of Simeoni Tumor Growth Inhibition (TGI) model by introduction of an Emax function to take into account the concentration dependency of k2variable parameter (variable potency). The Simeoni TGI-Emax model was capable to fit schedule-dependent antitumor effects using the tumor growth curves from the control and two different administered schedules. The PK/PD model was capable of describing the tumor growth inhibition using total plasma or free tumor concentrations, resulting in higher k2max (maximal potency) for free concentrations (25.8mL·μg-1·day-1 - intratumoral vs. 12.6mL·μg-1·day-1 total plasma). These findings indicate that the plasma concentration may not be a good surrogate for pharmacologically active free tumor concentrations, emphasizing the importance of knowing drug tumor penetration to choose the best antitumor therapy.
Copyright © 2016 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Cancer chemotherapy; Etoposide; Mathematical model; Pharmacokinetics/pharmacodynamics; Tissue penetration; Walker-256 tumor

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2016        PMID: 27816627     DOI: 10.1016/j.ejps.2016.10.038

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Eur J Pharm Sci        ISSN: 0928-0987            Impact factor:   4.384


  5 in total

Review 1.  Drug Exposure to Establish Pharmacokinetic-Response Relationships in Oncology.

Authors:  Belén P Solans; María Jesús Garrido; Iñaki F Trocóniz
Journal:  Clin Pharmacokinet       Date:  2020-02       Impact factor: 6.447

2.  Pharmacokinetic and Pharmacodynamics of Self-Assembled Cubic Liquid Crystalline Nanoparticle Gel After Transdermal Administration.

Authors:  Na Zhu; Xiao-Xiang Wu; Yong Tian; Jin-Xiu Zhu; Jian-Chun Li
Journal:  Med Sci Monit       Date:  2018-04-18

3.  The earlier, the better: the effects of different administration timepoints of sorafenib in suppressing the carcinogenesis of VEGF in rats.

Authors:  Nan Li; Bin Chen; Run Lin; Ni Liu; Hai-Tao Dai; Ke-Yu Tang; Jian-Yong Yang; Yong-Hui Huang
Journal:  Cancer Chemother Pharmacol       Date:  2017-12-01       Impact factor: 3.333

4.  The suppressing effects of VEGF-mediated angiogenesis at different administration sequences of apatinib and transarterial embolization in vivo.

Authors:  Nan Li; Yong-Hui Huang
Journal:  Transl Cancer Res       Date:  2020-02       Impact factor: 1.241

5.  Different ODE models of tumor growth can deliver similar results.

Authors:  James A Koziol; Theresa J Falls; Jan E Schnitzer
Journal:  BMC Cancer       Date:  2020-03-17       Impact factor: 4.638

  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.