Rob Ter Heine1, Sean P Kane2, Alwin D R Huitema3, Matthew D Krasowski4, Erik M van Maarseveen5. 1. Radboud institute for Health Sciences & Department of Pharmacy, Radboudumc, Nijmegen, The Netherlands. 2. Department of Pharmacy Practice, Rosalind Franklin University of Medicine and Science, North Chicago, IL, USA. 3. Department of Pharmacy & Pharmacology, Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands & Department of Clinical Pharmacy, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht University, Utrecht, The Netherlands. 4. Department of Pathology, University of Iowa Hospitals and Clinics, Iowa City, Iowa, USA. 5. Department of Clinical Pharmacy, Division of Laboratory Medicine and Pharmacy, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht University, Utrecht, The Netherlands.
Abstract
AIMS: To individualize treatment, phenytoin doses are adjusted based on free concentrations, either measured or calculated from total concentrations. As a mechanistic protein binding model may more accurately reflect the protein binding of phenytoin than the empirical Winter-Tozer equation that is routinely used for calculation of free concentrations, we aimed to develop and validate a mechanistic phenytoin protein binding model. METHODS: Data were extracted from routine clinical practice. A mechanistic drug protein binding model was developed using nonlinear mixed effects modelling in a development dataset. The predictive performance of the mechanistic model was then compared with the performance of the Winter-Tozer equation in 5 external datasets. RESULTS: We found that in the clinically relevant concentration range, phenytoin protein binding is not only affected by serum albumin concentrations and presence of severe renal dysfunction, but is also concentration dependent. Furthermore, the developed mechanistic model outperformed the Winter-Tozer equation in 4 out of 5 datasets in predicting free concentrations in various populations. CONCLUSIONS: Clinicians should be aware that the free fraction changes when phenytoin exposure changes. A mechanistic binding model may facilitate prediction of free phenytoin concentrations from total concentrations, for example for dose individualization in the clinic.
AIMS: To individualize treatment, phenytoin doses are adjusted based on free concentrations, either measured or calculated from total concentrations. As a mechanistic protein binding model may more accurately reflect the protein binding of phenytoin than the empirical Winter-Tozer equation that is routinely used for calculation of free concentrations, we aimed to develop and validate a mechanistic phenytoin protein binding model. METHODS: Data were extracted from routine clinical practice. A mechanistic drug protein binding model was developed using nonlinear mixed effects modelling in a development dataset. The predictive performance of the mechanistic model was then compared with the performance of the Winter-Tozer equation in 5 external datasets. RESULTS: We found that in the clinically relevant concentration range, phenytoin protein binding is not only affected by serum albumin concentrations and presence of severe renal dysfunction, but is also concentration dependent. Furthermore, the developed mechanistic model outperformed the Winter-Tozer equation in 4 out of 5 datasets in predicting free concentrations in various populations. CONCLUSIONS: Clinicians should be aware that the free fraction changes when phenytoin exposure changes. A mechanistic binding model may facilitate prediction of free phenytoin concentrations from total concentrations, for example for dose individualization in the clinic.
Authors: Rob Ter Heine; Sean P Kane; Alwin D R Huitema; Matthew D Krasowski; Erik M van Maarseveen Journal: Br J Clin Pharmacol Date: 2019-08-07 Impact factor: 4.335
Authors: Maarten J ten Berg; Albert Huisman; Patricia M L A van den Bemt; Alfred F A M Schobben; Antoine C G Egberts; Wouter W van Solinge Journal: Clin Chem Lab Med Date: 2007 Impact factor: 3.694
Authors: Stefanie Hennig; Ross Norris; Quyen Tu; Karin van Breda; Kate Riney; Kelly Foster; Bruce Lister; Bruce Charles Journal: J Clin Pharmacol Date: 2014-12-04 Impact factor: 3.126
Authors: Philip N Patsalos; David J Berry; Blaise F D Bourgeois; James C Cloyd; Tracy A Glauser; Svein I Johannessen; Ilo E Leppik; Torbjörn Tomson; Emilio Perucca Journal: Epilepsia Date: 2008-07 Impact factor: 5.864
Authors: Rob Ter Heine; Sean P Kane; Alwin D R Huitema; Matthew D Krasowski; Erik M van Maarseveen Journal: Br J Clin Pharmacol Date: 2019-08-07 Impact factor: 4.335
Authors: Jason H Karnes; Allan E Rettie; Andrew A Somogyi; Rachel Huddart; Alison E Fohner; Christine M Formea; Ming Ta Michael Lee; Adrian Llerena; Michelle Whirl-Carrillo; Teri E Klein; Elizabeth J Phillips; Scott Mintzer; Andrea Gaedigk; Kelly E Caudle; John T Callaghan Journal: Clin Pharmacol Ther Date: 2020-09-06 Impact factor: 6.875