Pharmacologic Modeling

  • Ronald GieschkeEmail author
  • Daniel Serafin


Pharmacologic modeling deals with pharmacokinetics (PK) and pharmacodynamics (PD). PK describes “what the body does to a drug,” i.e., how it is absorbed, distributed and eliminated, and PD “what a drug does to the body,” i.e., how it interacts with receptors and their signaling pathways up to the whole body level. The time course of drug concentrations and drug effects is modeling outcomes. PK uses compartmental models either in an empirical way to get a satisfactory fit to experimental data, or in a physiologic manner to create predictive models across species (physiologically-based PK, or PBPK). PD models turn drug concentrations at the pharmacologic site of action, or biophase, into biological effects using direct and/or indirect response mechanisms. Taken together, PK-PD models provide a powerful tool to link dosage regimens to clinical effects and vice versa.


Drug Concentration PBPK Model Drug Amount Oseltamivir Carboxylate Mammillary Model 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


  1. 1.
    Rowland M, Tozer T (2011) Clinical pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics. Concepts and applications, 4th edn. Wolters Kluwer, PhiladelphiaGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Gibaldi M, Perrier D (1982) Pharmacokinetics, 2nd edn. Marcel Dekker, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Darwich AS, Neuhoff S, Jamei M, Rostami-Hodjegan A (2010) Interplay of metabolism and transport in determining oral drug absorption and gut wall metabolism: a simulation assessment using the “Advanced Dissolution, Absorption, Metabolism (ADAM)” model. Curr Drug Metab 11:716–729PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Agoram B, Woltosz WS, Bolger MB (2001) Predicting the impact of physiological and biochemical processes on oral drug bioavailability. Adv Drug Deliv Rev 50:S41–S67PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Rowland M, Carl Peck C, Geoffrey Tucker G (2011) Physiologically-based pharmacokinetics in drug development and regulatory science. Annu Rev Pharmacol Toxicol 51:45–73PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Poulin P, Jones RDO, Jones H, Gibson C, Rowland M, Chien J, Ring BJ, Adkison KK, Ku S, He H, Vuppugalla R, Marathe P, Fischer V, Dutta S, Sinha VK, Bjoernsson T, Lave T, Yates JW (2011) PHRMA CPCDC initiative on predictive models of human pharmacokinetics. Part 5: Prediction of plasma concentration–time profiles in human by using the physiologically-based pharmacokinetic modeling approach. J Pharm Sci 100:4127–4157CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
  8. 8.
  9. 9.
    He G, Massarella J, Ward P (1999) Clinical pharmacokinetics of the prodrug oseltamivir and its active metabolite Ro 64-0802. Clin Pharmacokinet 37:471–484PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Rayner CR, Chanu P, Gieschke R, Boak LM, Jonsson EN (2008) Population pharmacokinetics of oseltamivir when coadministered with probenecid. J Clin Pharmacol 48:935–947PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Brennan BJ, Davies B, Cirrincione-Dall G, Morcos PN, Beryozkina A, Chappey C, Aceves Baldó P, Lennon-Chrimes S, Rayner CR (2012) Safety, tolerability and pharmacokinetics of intravenous oseltamivir: single- and multiple-dose phase I studies in healthy volunteers. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 56:4729–4737PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Kenakin TP (eds) (2009) A pharmacology primer. Theory, applications, and methods, 3rd edn. Elsevier, AmsterdamGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Stephenson RP (1956) A modification of receptor theory. Brit J Pharmacol 11:379–393PubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Holford NHG, Sheiner LB (1982) Kinetics of pharmacological response. Pharmacol Ther 16:143–166PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Gieschke R, Fotteler B, Buss N, Steimer JL (1999) Relationships between exposure to saquinavir monotherapy and antiviral response in HIV-positive patients. Clin Pharmacokinet 37:75–86PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Schwarz G (1978) Estimating the dimensions of a model. Ann Stat 6:461–464CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Akaike H (1974) A new look at the statistical model identification. IEEE Trans Autom Control 19:716–723CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Francheteau P, Steimer JL, Merdjan A, Guerret M, Dubray C (1993) A mathematical model for the dynamics of cardiovascular drug action: application to intravenous dihydropyridines in healthy volunteers. J Biopharm Pharmacokinet 23:493–514Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Jacqmin P, Snoeck E, van Schaick EA, Gieschke R, Pillai G, Steimer JL, Girard P (2007) Modelling response time profiles in the absence of drug concentrations: definition and performance evaluation of the K-PD model. J Pharmacokinet Pharmacodyn 34:57–85PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Pillai G, Gieschke R, Goggin T, Jacqmin P, Schimmer RC, Steimer JL (2004) A semimechanistic and mechanistic population PK–PD model for biomarker response to ibandronate, a new bisphosphonate for the treatment of osteoporosis. Brit J Clin Pharmacol 58:618–631CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Reginster JY, Gieschke R (2006) Clinical utility of a pharmacostatistical model for ibandronate in postmenopausal osteoporosis. Curr Drug Metab 7:827–836PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Pillai G, Gieschke R, Goggin T, Steimer JL (2010) Population pharmacokinetics of ibandronate in Caucasian and Japanese post-menopausal women. 10th PAGE meeting, BaselGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Reid IR, Ames RW, Evans MC, Gamble GD, Sharpe SJ (1995) Long-term effects of calcium supplementation on bone loss and fractures in postmenopausal women: a randomized controlled trial. Am J Med 98:331–335PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Pharma Research and Early DevelopmentF. Hoffmann-La Roche LtdBaselSwitzerland
  2. 2.Pharma Research and Early DevelopmentF. Hoffmann-La Roche LtdBaselSwitzerland

Personalised recommendations