Skip to main content
Log in

Characterization of the Dose-Dependent Time of Peak Effect in Indirect Response Models

  • Published:
Journal of Pharmacokinetics and Biopharmaceutics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The general conceptual model for non-steady state pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic data includes a distribution phase between the plasma and the biophase compartments, which can be expressed by a link model, and inhibition or stimulation of the production or removal of a mediator, which can be expressed by an indirect response model. The inhibition or the stimulation step modeled by an indirect response model generates dose-dependent time of peak effect. This report provides a mathematical expression for this time of peak effect which is then used to determine how this time depends on dose, the endogenous elimination rate of the mediator, and the pharmacokinetic parameters of the drug. The report then uses this time of peak effect to find the response versus time curve. The mathematical relationship for the time of peak effect and the response vs. time curve are then developed for a cascade of two indirect steps. The approach presented here is easily implemented on a spreadsheet and does not require numerically solving nonlinear differential equations. The approach should help to analyze various issues related to fitting indirect response models to non-steady state pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic data, especially, when one is trying to fit data to a cascade of indirect steps.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

REFERENCES

  1. D. Verotta and L. Sheiner. A general conceptual model for non-steady state pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic data. J. Pharmacokin. Biopharm. 23:1–4 (1995).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. W. J. Jusko, H. C. Ko, and W. F. Ebling. Convergence of direct and indirect pharmacodynamic response models. J. Pharmacokin. Biopharm. 23:5–8 (1995).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. L. B. Sheiner, D. R. Stanski, S. Vozeh, R. D. Miller, and J. Ham. Simultaneous modeling of pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics: Application to d-tubocurarine. Clin. Pharmacol. Ther. 23:358–371 (1979).

    Google Scholar 

  4. R. Nagashima, R. A. O'Reilly, and G. Levy. Kinetics of pharmacologic effects in man: The anticoagulant action of warfarin. Clin. Pharmacol. Ther. 10:22–35 (1969).

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. N. L. Dayneka, V. Garg, and W. J. Jusko. Comparison of four basic models of indirect pharmacodynamic responses. J. Pharmacokin. Biopharm. 21:457–478 (1993).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. W. J. Jusko and H. C. Ko. Physiologic indirect response models characterize diverse types of pharmacodynamic effects. Clin. Pharmacol. Ther. 56:406–419 (1994).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. W. Krzyzanski and W. J. Jusko. Mathematical formalism for the properties of four basic models of indirect pharmacodynamic responses. J. Pharmacokin. Biopharm. 25:107–123 (1997).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. G. Dahlquist and A. Bjorck. Numerical Methods, Prentice-Hall, NJ, 1974.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Majumdar, A. Characterization of the Dose-Dependent Time of Peak Effect in Indirect Response Models. J Pharmacokinet Pharmacodyn 26, 183–206 (1998). https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1020509823832

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1020509823832

Navigation