Prediction of Human Pharmacokinetics Based on Preclinical In Vitro and In Vivo Data
During the drug discovery process, candidate compounds are screened for their main drug metabolism and pharmacokinetic (DMPK) properties (absorption, distribution, metabolic stability, excretion) to assess their potential to become new drug products. Prentis observed that, of 247 new chemical entities which were withdrawn from drug development before 1985, 198 (80%) failed because of inappropriate pharmacokinetics (Prentis et al. 1988). Kennedy confirmed this conclusion in 1997 by reporting that, apart from a lack of efficacy, poor pharmacokinetic properties were still the main reason for terminating the development of drug candidates (Kennedy 1997). Nowadays, the drop out rate because of pharmacokinetic reasons has probably decreased because DMPK issues are being considered in the discovery process. Therefore, approaches to predict human pharmacokinetic profiles are highly desirable to help select the best candidates for development and/or to reject those with a low probability of success. This can drastically reduce the time and expense of drug development (Norris et al. 2000). Since drug discovery has to screen a large number of compounds, the methods used must be capable of predicting the human pharmacokinetics from a limited set of input data.
KeywordsPBPK Model Allometric Scaling Liver Blood Flow Observe Plasma Concentration Human Pharmacokinetic
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
- Arundel PA (1997) A multi-compai rental model generally applicable, to physiologically-based pharmacokinetics. In: The third IFAC symposium. Modeling and control in biomedical systems. The institute of measurement and control, LondonGoogle Scholar
- Boxenbaum B, D’ Souza RW (1990) Interspecies pharmacokinetic scaling, biological design and neoteny. In: Testa B (ed) Advances in drug research. Academic Press, London, pp 139–196Google Scholar
- Boxenbaum H, Dilea C (1995) First-time-in-human dose selection: Allometric thoughts and perspectives. J Clin Pharmacol 35: 957–966Google Scholar
- Carlile DJ, Zomorodi K, Houston JB (1997) Scaling factors to relate drug metabolic clearance in hepatic microsomes, isolated hepatocytes, and the intact liver: Studies with induced livers involving diazepam. Drug Metab Dispos 25: 903–911Google Scholar
- Iwatsubo T, Suzuki H, Shimada N, Chiba K, Ishizaki T, Green CE, Tyson CA, Yokoi T, Kamataki T, Sugiyama Y (1997) Prediction of in vivo hepatic metabolic clearance of YM796 from in vitro data by use of human liver microsomes and recombinant P-450 isozymes. J Pharmacol Exp Ther 282: 909–919PubMedGoogle Scholar
- Izumi T, Enomoto S, Hosiyama K, Sasahara K, Shibukawa A, Nakagawa T, Sugiyama Y (1996) Prediction of the human pharmacokinetics of troglitazone, a new and extensively metabolized antidiabetic agent, after oral administration, with an animal scale-up approach. J Pharmacol Exp Ther 277: 1630–1641PubMedGoogle Scholar
- Lave T, Coassolo P (1998) Commentary on “integration of in vitro data and brain weight in allometric scaling to predict clearance in humans: Some suggestions”. J Pharm Sci 87: 530Google Scholar
- Lave T, Dupin S, Schmitt C, Valles B, Ubeaud G, Chou RC, Jaeck D, Coassolo P (1997b) The use of human hepatocytes to select compounds based on their expected hepatic extraction ratios in humans Pharmaceut Res 14: 152–155Google Scholar
- Lave T, Dupin S, Schmitt M, Kapps M, Meyer J, Morgenroth B, Chou RC, Jaeck D, Coassolo P (1996c) Interspecies scaling of tolcapone, a new inhibitor of catechol-0- methyltransferase ( COMT) Use of in vitro data from hepatocytes to predict metabolic clearance in animals and humans. Xenobiotica 26: 839–851Google Scholar
- Lin JH, Sugiyama Y, Awazu S, Hanano M (1982) Physiological pharmacokinetics of ethoxybenzamide based on biochemical data obtained in vitro as well as on physiological data. J Pharmacol Exp Ther 10: 649–661Google Scholar
- Poulin P, Schoenlein K, Theil F (2001) Prediction of adipose tissue: Plasma partition coefficients for structurally unrelated drugs. J Pharm Sci 90: 436–447Google Scholar