Literature DB >> 9353693

The impact of arteriovenous concentration differences on pharmacodynamic parameter estimates.

B Tuk1, M Danhof, J W Mandema.   

Abstract

In many pharmacodynamic investigations venous drug concentrations are measured and linked to effect-site concentrations by means of a traditional first-order effect-compartment model to estimate pharmacodynamic (PD) parameters. This analysis ignores the underlying physiology that arterial blood supplies both the venous sampling site and effect site. Recently, an extended effect-compartment model has been proposed that reflects physiology by postulating a first-order rate constant of equilibrium between arterial and effect-site concentrations (ke0) as well as first-order rate constant between arterial and venous concentrations (kv0). In the current paper, we evaluate the bias in PD parameter estimates if venous drug concentrations are measured and linked to effect-site concentrations by a traditional effect compartment as a function ke0, kv0, and the drug's elimination half-life (T1/2); we present an analytical solution to the differential equations characterizing the extended effect-compartment model; and we evaluate the performance of the extended effect-compartment model to estimate pharmacodynamic parameters on the basis of venous drug concentrations. Time profiles of venous drug concentrations and drug effect were simulated for a wide range of different values of the half-life of ke0 (T1/2,e0), the half-life of kv0 (T1/2,v0), and T1/2. The simulations showed that a significant bias (up to 90%) in PD parameter estimates occurred for certain values of T1/2,e0, T1/2,v0, and T1/2 if venous drug concentrations are linked to effect-site concentrations by a traditional effect-compartment model. This model misspecification is not apparent from the results of the fitting procedure. The extended effect-compartment model provided unbiased but imprecise PD parameter estimates. The extended effect-compartment model was also able to analyze instances in which the venous concentrations equilibrate slower with the arterial concentrations than the effect-site concentrations, and proteresis is observed in the concentration--effect relationship. It is concluded that if the apparent T1/2 of the drug in the time period in which the decline in pharmacological effect is most pronounced is greater than 5 times T1/2,e0 and T1/2,e0 is greater than T1/2,v0 there is no need to model the underlying arteriovenous equilibrium delay. Under these conditions a traditional first-order link between venous and effect-site concentrations will yield accurate and reliable (less than 10% bias) estimates of the PD parameters such as Emax, EC50 and N. If T1/2 is less than 5 times T1/2,e0 or if T1/2,v0 is greater than T1/2,e0, the underlying arteriovenous equilibration delay needs to be taken into account in the model to obtain unbiased estimates of the PD parameters. This applies for almost all values of T1/2.v0. Arteriovenous equilibration delay can be best taken into account by measuring arterial blood concentrations. If this is not possible, the extended effect-compartment link model can be used. However, a large number of effect measurements needs to be obtained to estimate the model parameters accurately.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1997        PMID: 9353693     DOI: 10.1023/a:1025767710234

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Pharmacokinet Biopharm        ISSN: 0090-466X


  26 in total

Review 1.  Clinical pharmacology and the choice between theory and empiricism.

Authors:  L B Sheiner
Journal:  Clin Pharmacol Ther       Date:  1989-12       Impact factor: 6.875

2.  Kinetics of interaction between drugs and biological systems.

Authors:  G Segre
Journal:  Farmaco Sci       Date:  1968-10

3.  Simultaneous modeling of pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics: an improved algorithm.

Authors:  D Verotta; L B Sheiner
Journal:  Comput Appl Biosci       Date:  1987-11

4.  Compartment model to describe peripheral arterial-venous drug concentration gradients with drug elimination from the venous sampling compartment.

Authors:  J R Jacobs; P A Nath
Journal:  J Pharm Sci       Date:  1995-03       Impact factor: 3.534

5.  Distinguishing a benzodiazepine agonist (triazolam) from a nonagonist anxiolytic (buspirone) by electroencephalography: kinetic-dynamic studies.

Authors:  D J Greenblatt; J S Harmatz; T A Gouthro; J Locke; R I Shader
Journal:  Clin Pharmacol Ther       Date:  1994-07       Impact factor: 6.875

6.  Marijuana effect and delta-9-tetrahydrocannabinol plasma level.

Authors:  C W Chiang; G Barnett
Journal:  Clin Pharmacol Ther       Date:  1984-08       Impact factor: 6.875

7.  Comparative tissue concentration profiles of fentanyl and alfentanil in humans predicted from tissue/blood partition data obtained in rats.

Authors:  S Björkman; D R Stanski; D Verotta; H Harashima
Journal:  Anesthesiology       Date:  1990-05       Impact factor: 7.892

8.  Arterial-venous plasma concentration differences of six drugs in the dog and rabbit after intravenous administration.

Authors:  W L Chiou; G Lam; M L Chen; M G Lee
Journal:  Res Commun Chem Pathol Pharmacol       Date:  1981-04

Review 9.  The phenomenon and rationale of marked dependence of drug concentration on blood sampling site. Implications in pharmacokinetics, pharmacodynamics, toxicology and therapeutics (Part I).

Authors:  W L Chiou
Journal:  Clin Pharmacokinet       Date:  1989-09       Impact factor: 6.447

10.  Pharmacodynamic modeling of thiopental anesthesia.

Authors:  D R Stanski; R J Hudson; T D Homer; L J Saidman; E Meathe
Journal:  J Pharmacokinet Biopharm       Date:  1984-04
View more
  9 in total

1.  Influence of arterial vs. venous sampling site on nicotine tolerance model selection and parameter estimation.

Authors:  Franziska Schaedeli; Maria Pitsiu; Neal L Benowitz; Steven G Gourlay; Davide Verotta
Journal:  J Pharmacokinet Pharmacodyn       Date:  2002-02       Impact factor: 2.745

Review 2.  Pharmacokinetic-pharmacodynamic modelling: history and perspectives.

Authors:  Chantal Csajka; Davide Verotta
Journal:  J Pharmacokinet Pharmacodyn       Date:  2006-01-11       Impact factor: 2.745

Review 3.  Pharmacokinetic-pharmacodynamic modelling in anaesthesia.

Authors:  Pedro L Gambús; Iñaki F Trocóniz
Journal:  Br J Clin Pharmacol       Date:  2015-01       Impact factor: 4.335

Review 4.  [Target-controlled infusion. Clinical relevance and special features when using pharmacokinetic models].

Authors:  H Ihmsen; S Schraag; S Kreuer; J Bruhn; S Albrecht
Journal:  Anaesthesist       Date:  2009-07       Impact factor: 1.041

5.  Sampling Site Has a Critical Impact on Physiologically Based Pharmacokinetic Modeling.

Authors:  Weize Huang; Nina Isoherranen
Journal:  J Pharmacol Exp Ther       Date:  2019-10-11       Impact factor: 4.030

6.  Necessity and risks of arterial blood sampling in healthy volunteer studies.

Authors:  Bruno Georg Oertel; Johannes Vermehren; Michael Zimmermann; Thomas Tao Huynh; Alexandra Doehring; Nerea Ferreiros; Stephan Senzel; Thomas Schmitz-Rixen; Matthias Erbe; Gerd Geisslinger; Sebastian Harder; Martin S Angst; Jörn Lötsch
Journal:  Clin Pharmacokinet       Date:  2012-10-01       Impact factor: 6.447

7.  Mechanism-based pharmacodynamic modeling of the interaction of midazolam, bretazenil, and zolpidem with ethanol.

Authors:  Bert Tuk; Toon van Gool; Meindert Danhof
Journal:  J Pharmacokinet Pharmacodyn       Date:  2002-06       Impact factor: 2.745

8.  Are Physiologically Based Pharmacokinetic Models Reporting the Right C(max)? Central Venous Versus Peripheral Sampling Site.

Authors:  Helen Musther; Katherine L Gill; Manoranjenni Chetty; Amin Rostami-Hodjegan; Malcolm Rowland; Masoud Jamei
Journal:  AAPS J       Date:  2015-06-23       Impact factor: 4.009

9.  Physiologically based pharmacokinetic modeling of arterial - antecubital vein concentration difference.

Authors:  David G Levitt
Journal:  BMC Clin Pharmacol       Date:  2004-02-19
  9 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.