Literature DB >> 29032447

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

Robert G Pearce1,2, R Woodrow Setzer1, Jimena L Davis1,3, John F Wambaugh4.   

Abstract

Toxicokinetics (TK) provides critical information for integrating chemical toxicity and exposure assessments in order to determine potential chemical risk (i.e., the margin between toxic doses and plausible exposures). For thousands of chemicals that are present in our environment, in vivo TK data are lacking. The publicly available R package "httk" (version 1.8, named for "high throughput TK") draws from a database of in vitro data and physico-chemical properties in order to run physiologically-based TK (PBTK) models for 553 compounds. The PBTK model parameters include tissue:plasma partition coefficients (Kp) which the httk software predicts using the model of Schmitt (Toxicol In Vitro 22 (2):457-467, 2008). In this paper we evaluated and modified httk predictions, and quantified confidence using in vivo literature data. We used 964 rat Kp measured by in vivo experiments for 143 compounds. Initially, predicted Kp were significantly larger than measured Kp for many lipophilic compounds (log10 octanol:water partition coefficient > 3). Hence the approach for predicting Kp was revised to account for possible deficiencies in the in vitro protein binding assay, and the method for predicting membrane affinity was revised. These changes yielded improvements ranging from a factor of 10 to nearly a factor of 10,000 for 83 Kp across 23 compounds with only 3 Kp worsening by more than a factor of 10. The vast majority (92%) of Kp were predicted within a factor of 10 of the measured value (overall root mean squared error of 0.59 on log10-transformed scale). After applying the adjustments, regressions were performed to calibrate and evaluate the predictions for 12 tissues. Predictions for some tissues (e.g., spleen, bone, gut, lung) were observed to be better than predictions for other tissues (e.g., skin, brain, fat), indicating that confidence in the application of in silico tools to predict chemical partitioning varies depending upon the tissues involved. Our calibrated model was then evaluated using a second data set of human in vivo measurements of volume of distribution (Vss) for 498 compounds reviewed by Obach et al. (Drug Metab Dispos 36(7):1385-1405, 2008). We found that calibration of the model improved performance: a regression of the measured values as a function of the predictions has a slope of 1.03, intercept of - 0.04, and R2 of 0.43. Through careful evaluation of predictive methods for chemical partitioning into tissues, we have improved and calibrated these methods and quantified confidence for TK predictions in humans and rats.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Distribution; High throughput toxicokinetics; PBPK; PBTK; Partition coefficients; Physiologically based toxicokinetics; Statistical analysis; Volume of distribution; httk

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2017        PMID: 29032447      PMCID: PMC6186149          DOI: 10.1007/s10928-017-9548-7

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


  64 in total

1.  Prediction of adipose tissue: plasma partition coefficients for structurally unrelated drugs.

Authors:  P Poulin; K Schoenlein; F P Theil
Journal:  J Pharm Sci       Date:  2001-04       Impact factor: 3.534

2.  Physiologically based pharmacokinetic model use in risk assessment--Why being published is not enough.

Authors:  Eva D McLanahan; Hisham A El-Masri; Lisa M Sweeney; Leonid Y Kopylev; Harvey J Clewell; John F Wambaugh; P M Schlosser
Journal:  Toxicol Sci       Date:  2011-11-01       Impact factor: 4.849

3.  Development of a whole body physiologically based model to characterise the pharmacokinetics of benzodiazepines. 1: Estimation of rat tissue-plasma partition ratios.

Authors:  Ivelina Gueorguieva; Ivan A Nestorov; Susan Murby; Sophie Gisbert; Brent Collins; Kelly Dickens; Judith Duffy; Ziad Hussain; Malcolm Rowland
Journal:  J Pharmacokinet Pharmacodyn       Date:  2004-08       Impact factor: 2.745

4.  Potential error in the measurement of tissue to blood distribution coefficients in physiological pharmacokinetic modeling. Residual tissue blood. I. Theoretical considerations.

Authors:  S P Khor; M Mayersohn
Journal:  Drug Metab Dispos       Date:  1991 Mar-Apr       Impact factor: 3.922

5.  ACToR--Aggregated Computational Toxicology Resource.

Authors:  Richard Judson; Ann Richard; David Dix; Keith Houck; Fathi Elloumi; Matthew Martin; Tommy Cathey; Thomas R Transue; Richard Spencer; Maritja Wolf
Journal:  Toxicol Appl Pharmacol       Date:  2008-07-11       Impact factor: 4.219

6.  Prediction of human blood-to-plasma drug concentration ratio.

Authors:  Takahide Uchimura; Motohiro Kato; Tomohisa Saito; Haruki Kinoshita
Journal:  Biopharm Drug Dispos       Date:  2010-07       Impact factor: 1.627

7.  Bayesian estimation of pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic parameters in a mode-of-action-based cancer risk assessment for chloroform.

Authors:  Kai H Liao; Yu-Mei Tan; Rory B Conolly; Susan J Borghoff; Michael L Gargas; Melvin E Andersen; Harvey J Clewell
Journal:  Risk Anal       Date:  2007-12       Impact factor: 4.000

8.  The use of pseudo-equilibrium constant affords improved QSAR models of human plasma protein binding.

Authors:  Xiang-Wei Zhu; Alexander Sedykh; Hao Zhu; Shu-Shen Liu; Alexander Tropsha
Journal:  Pharm Res       Date:  2013-04-09       Impact factor: 4.200

9.  Linking high resolution mass spectrometry data with exposure and toxicity forecasts to advance high-throughput environmental monitoring.

Authors:  Julia E Rager; Mark J Strynar; Shuang Liang; Rebecca L McMahen; Ann M Richard; Christopher M Grulke; John F Wambaugh; Kristin K Isaacs; Richard Judson; Antony J Williams; Jon R Sobus
Journal:  Environ Int       Date:  2016-01-23       Impact factor: 9.621

10.  MEGen: A Physiologically Based Pharmacokinetic Model Generator.

Authors:  George Loizou; Alex Hogg
Journal:  Front Pharmacol       Date:  2011-11-10       Impact factor: 5.810

View more
  9 in total

1.  The Next Generation Blueprint of Computational Toxicology at the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.

Authors:  Russell S Thomas; Tina Bahadori; Timothy J Buckley; John Cowden; Chad Deisenroth; Kathie L Dionisio; Jeffrey B Frithsen; Christopher M Grulke; Maureen R Gwinn; Joshua A Harrill; Mark Higuchi; Keith A Houck; Michael F Hughes; E Sidney Hunter; Kristin K Isaacs; Richard S Judson; Thomas B Knudsen; Jason C Lambert; Monica Linnenbrink; Todd M Martin; Seth R Newton; Stephanie Padilla; Grace Patlewicz; Katie Paul-Friedman; Katherine A Phillips; Ann M Richard; Reeder Sams; Timothy J Shafer; R Woodrow Setzer; Imran Shah; Jane E Simmons; Steven O Simmons; Amar Singh; Jon R Sobus; Mark Strynar; Adam Swank; Rogelio Tornero-Valez; Elin M Ulrich; Daniel L Villeneuve; John F Wambaugh; Barbara A Wetmore; Antony J Williams
Journal:  Toxicol Sci       Date:  2019-06-01       Impact factor: 4.849

2.  Evaluating In Vitro-In Vivo Extrapolation of Toxicokinetics.

Authors:  John F Wambaugh; Michael F Hughes; Caroline L Ring; Denise K MacMillan; Jermaine Ford; Timothy R Fennell; Sherry R Black; Rodney W Snyder; Nisha S Sipes; Barbara A Wetmore; Joost Westerhout; R Woodrow Setzer; Robert G Pearce; Jane Ellen Simmons; Russell S Thomas
Journal:  Toxicol Sci       Date:  2018-05-01       Impact factor: 4.849

3.  Rapid experimental measurements of physicochemical properties to inform models and testing.

Authors:  Chantel I Nicolas; Kamel Mansouri; Katherine A Phillips; Christopher M Grulke; Ann M Richard; Antony J Williams; James Rabinowitz; Kristin K Isaacs; Alice Yau; John F Wambaugh
Journal:  Sci Total Environ       Date:  2018-05-02       Impact factor: 7.963

4.  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

5.  Towards best use and regulatory acceptance of generic physiologically based kinetic (PBK) models for in vitro-to-in vivo extrapolation (IVIVE) in chemical risk assessment.

Authors:  Abdulkarim Najjar; Ans Punt; John Wambaugh; Alicia Paini; Corie Ellison; Styliani Fragki; Enrica Bianchi; Fagen Zhang; Joost Westerhout; Dennis Mueller; Hequn Li; Quan Shi; Timothy W Gant; Phil Botham; Rémi Bars; Aldert Piersma; Ben van Ravenzwaay; Nynke I Kramer
Journal:  Arch Toxicol       Date:  2022-09-05       Impact factor: 6.168

Review 6.  IVIVE: Facilitating the Use of In Vitro Toxicity Data in Risk Assessment and Decision Making.

Authors:  Xiaoqing Chang; Yu-Mei Tan; David G Allen; Shannon Bell; Paul C Brown; Lauren Browning; Patricia Ceger; Jeffery Gearhart; Pertti J Hakkinen; Shruti V Kabadi; Nicole C Kleinstreuer; Annie Lumen; Joanna Matheson; Alicia Paini; Heather A Pangburn; Elijah J Petersen; Emily N Reinke; Alexandre J S Ribeiro; Nisha Sipes; Lisa M Sweeney; John F Wambaugh; Ronald Wange; Barbara A Wetmore; Moiz Mumtaz
Journal:  Toxics       Date:  2022-05-01

7.  Using the concordance of in vitro and in vivo data to evaluate extrapolation assumptions.

Authors:  Gregory S Honda; Robert G Pearce; Ly L Pham; R W Setzer; Barbara A Wetmore; Nisha S Sipes; Jon Gilbert; Briana Franz; Russell S Thomas; John F Wambaugh
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2019-05-28       Impact factor: 3.240

8.  Prioritization of chemicals in food for risk assessment by integrating exposure estimates and new approach methodologies: A next generation risk assessment case study.

Authors:  Mirjam Luijten; R Corinne Sprong; Emiel Rorije; Leo T M van der Ven
Journal:  Front Toxicol       Date:  2022-09-19

9.  A Computational Workflow for Probabilistic Quantitative in Vitro to in Vivo Extrapolation.

Authors:  Kevin McNally; Alex Hogg; George Loizou
Journal:  Front Pharmacol       Date:  2018-05-18       Impact factor: 5.810

  9 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.