A geometrical approach to the PKPD modelling of inhaled bronchodilators
- 387 Downloads
The present work introduces a new method to model the pharmacokinetics (PK) and pharmacodynamics (PD) of an inhaled dose of bronchodilator, alternative to classic compartmental representations or computational fluid dynamics. A five compartment PK model comprising alimentary tract absorption (gut), bronchial tree mucosa, bronchial muscles, plasma, and elimination/excretion pathways has been developed. Many anatomical and physiological features of the bronchial tree depend on bronchial generation or on mean distance from the larynx. Among these are diameters, resistances, and receptor density, which determine together the local response to the inhaled drug; integrating these local responses over the whole bronchial tree allows an approximation of total bronchodilator response and airflow resistance. While the PK part of the model reflects classical compartmental assumptions, the PD part adds a simplified geometrical and functional description of the bronchial tree to a typical empirical model of local effect on bronchial muscle, leading to the direct computation of the approximate forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV1). In the present work the construction of the model is detailed, with reference to literature data. Simulation of a hypothetical asthmatic subject is employed to illustrate the behaviour of the model in representing the evolution over time of the distribution and pharmacological effect of an inhaled dose of a bronchodilator. The relevance of particle size and drug formulation diffusivity on therapeutic efficacy is discussed.
KeywordsInhalation therapy Bronchodilators Mathematical models Ventilation FEV1
The authors thank an anonymous Reviewer whose insightful and detailed comments were instrumental in improving the model and substantially changing the manuscript. This research has been supported by Novartis Pharma AG, Basel, Switzerland.
- 3.Applied Research Associates, Inc. Multiple-path particle dosimetry model (MPPD v. 2.11). Source: http://www.ara.com/products/mppd.htm
- 6.Crapo RO, Morris AH, Gardner RM (1981) Reference spirometric values using techniques and equipment that meet ATS recommendations. Am Rev Respirat Dis 123:659–664Google Scholar
- 9.Fleming JS, Hashish AH, Conway JH, Nassim MA, Holgate ST, Halson P, Moore E, Bailey AG, Martonen TB (1996) Assessment of deposition of inhaled aerosol in the respiratory tract of man using three-dimensional multimodality imaging and mathematical modeling. J Aerosol Med 9:317–327PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 10.Grimby G, Soderholm B (1963) Spirometric studies in normal subjects. III. Static lung volumes and maximum voluntary ventilation in adults with a note on physical fitness. Acta Med Scand 173:199–206Google Scholar
- 14.Knudson RJ, Lebowitz MD, Holberg CJ, Burrows B (1983) Changes in the normal maximal expiratory flow-volume curve with growth and aging. Am Rev Respirat Dis 127:725–734Google Scholar
- 15.Levitzky MG (2007) Pulmonary physiology. McGraw-Hill Medical Publishing, New York Google Scholar
- 18.Meltzer EO, Kuna P, Nolte H, Nayak S, Laforce C (2011) Mometasone furoate/formoterol reduces asthma deteriorations and improves lung function. Eur Respir JGoogle Scholar
- 19.Morris JF (1983) Citation classic: spirometric standards for healthy nonsmoking adults. Current contents/life sciences 21Google Scholar
- 25.Stinson JM, Mcpherson GL, Hicks K, Scott V, Sykes R, Cobbs W (1979) Spirometric standards for healthy black adults. Am Rev Respirat Dis 119:237Google Scholar
- 30.Weibel ER (1963) Morphometry of the human lung. Springer, HeidelbergGoogle Scholar