Quantifying and communicating uncertainty in preclinical human dose-prediction

CPT: Pharmacometrics and Systems Pharmacology

Volumn 4, Issue 4, 2015, Pages 243-254

  Sundqvist, M ^a   Lundahl, A ^a   Bredberg, U ^a   Gennemark, P ^a  

^a ASTRAZENECA R AND D   (Sweden)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; DRUG BIOAVAILABILITY; DRUG CLEARANCE; DRUG DEVELOPMENT; DRUG DISTRIBUTION; DRUG DOSE; DRUG EXCRETION; DRUG METABOLISM; DRUG PENETRATION; DRUG SCREENING; DRUG SOLUBILITY; HUMAN; INTRINSIC CLEARANCE; MATHEMATICAL MODEL; MONTE CARLO METHOD; PHYSICAL CHEMISTRY; PRIORITY JOURNAL;

EID: 84936758905     PISSN: None     EISSN: 21638306     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/psp4.32     Document Type: Article

References (69)

1. Sharma, V., &, McNeill, J.H., To scale or not to scale: the principles of dose extrapolation. Br. J. Pharmacol. 157, 907-921 (2009).
2. Nestorov, I., Modelling and simulation of variability and uncertainty in toxicokinetics and pharmacokinetics. Toxicol. Lett. 120, 411-420 (2001).
3. West, G.B., Brown, J.H., &, Enquist, B.J., A general model for the origin of allometric scaling laws in biology. Science 276, 122-126 (1997).
4. Boxenbaum, H., Interspecies scaling, allometry, physiological time, and the ground plan of pharmacokinetics. J. Pharmacokinet. Biopharm. 10, 201-227 (1982).
5. Jones, H.M., Mayawala, K., &, Poulin, P., Dose selection based on physiologically based pharmacokinetic (PBPK) approaches. AAPS J. 15, 377-387 (2013).
6. Ring, B.J., et al,. PhRMA CPCDC initiative on predictive models of human pharmacokinetics, part 3: comparative assessement of prediction methods of human clearance. J. Pharm. Sci. 100, 4090-4110 (2011).
7. Jones, R.D., et al,. PhRMA CPCDC initiative on predictive models of human pharmacokinetics, part 2: comparative assessment of prediction methods of human volume of distribution. J. Pharm. Sci. 100, 4074-4089 (2011).
8. Mahmood, I., Prediction of human drug clearance from animal data: application of the rule of exponents and 'fu Corrected Intercept Method' (FCIM). J. Pharm. Sci. 95, 1810-1821 (2006).
9. Tang, H., &, Mayersohn, M., A global examination of allometric scaling for predicting human drug clearance and the prediction of large vertical allometry. J. Pharm. Sci. 95, 1783-1799 (2006).
10. Tang, H., &, Mayersohn, M., A novel model for prediction of human drug clearance by allometric scaling. Drug Metab. Dispos. 33, 1297-1303 (2005).
11. Lombardo, F., et al,. Comprehensive assessment of human pharmacokinetic prediction based on in vivo animal pharmacokinetic data, part 1: volume of distribution at steady state. J. Clin. Pharmacol. 53, 167-177 (2013).
12. Lombardo, F., et al,. Comprehensive assessment of human pharmacokinetic prediction based on in vivo animal pharmacokinetic data, part 2: clearance. J. Clin. Pharmacol. 53, 178-191 (2013).
13. Hosea, N.A., et al,. Prediction of human pharmacokinetics from preclinical information: comparative accuracy of quantitative prediction approaches. J. Clin. Pharmacol. 49, 513-533 (2009).
14. Fagerholm, U., Prediction of human pharmacokinetics-evaluation of methods for prediction of hepatic metabolic clearance. J. Pharm. Pharmacol. 59, 803-828 (2007).
15. Fagerholm, U., Prediction of human pharmacokinetics-evaluation of methods for prediction of volume of distribution. J. Pharm. Pharmacol. 59, 1181-1190 (2007).
16. Lavé, T., Coassolo, P., &, Reigner, B., Prediction of hepatic metabolic clearance based on interspecies allometric scaling techniques and in vitro-in vivo correlations. Clin. Pharmacokinet. 36, 211-231 (1999).
17. Ward, K.W., &, Smith, B.R., A comprehensive quantitative and qualitative evaluation of extrapolation of intravenous pharmacokinetic parameters from rat, dog, and monkey to humans. I. Clearance. Drug Metab. Dispos. 32, 603-611 (2004).
18. Ward, K.W., &, Smith, B.R., A comprehensive quantitative and qualitative evaluation of extrapolation of intravenous pharmacokinetic parameters from rat, dog, and monkey to humans. II. Volume of distribution and mean residence time. Drug Metab. Dispos. 32, 612-619 (2004).
19. Poulin, P., et al,. 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, 4127-4157 (2011).
20. Hu, T.M., &, Hayton, W.L., Allometric scaling of xenobiotic clearance: uncertainty versus universality. AAPS PharmSci 3, E29 (2001).
21. Huh, Y., Smith, D.E., &, Feng, M.R., Interspecies scaling and prediction of human clearance: comparison of small- and macro-molecule drugs. Xenobiotica 41, 972-987 (2011).
22. Ito, K., &, Houston, J.B., Prediction of human drug clearance from in vitro and preclinical data using physiologically based and empirical approaches. Pharm. Res. 22, 103-112 (2005).
23. Gueorguieva, I., Nestorov, I.A., Aarons, L., &, Rowland, M., Uncertainty analysis in pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics: application to naratriptan. Pharm. Res. 22, 1614-1626 (2005).
24. Lavé, T., Parrott, N., Grimm, H.P., Fleury, A., &, Reddy, M., Challenges and opportunities with modelling and simulation in drug discovery and drug development. Xenobiotica 37, 1295-1310 (2007).
25. Kato, M., Tachibana, T., Ito, K., &, Sugiyama, Y., Evaluation of methods for predicting drug-drug interactions by Monte Carlo simulation. Drug Metab. Pharmacokinet. 18, 121-127 (2003).
26. von Winterfeldt, D., Bridging the gap between science and decision making. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 110 (suppl. 3), 14055-14061 (2013).
27. Spiegelhalter, D., Pearson, M., &, Short, I., Visualizing uncertainty about the future. Science 333, 1393-1400 (2011).
28. Fischhoff, B., The sciences of science communication. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 110 (suppl. 3), 14033-14039 (2013).
29. Holford, N.H., A size standard for pharmacokinetics. Clin. Pharmacokinet. 30, 329-332 (1996).
30. Lave, T., Dupin, S., Schmitt, C., Chou, R.C., Jaeck, D., &, Coassolo, P., Integration of in vitro data into allometric scaling to predict hepatic metabolic clearance in man: application to 10 extensively metabolized drugs. J. Pharm. Sci. 86, 584-590 (1997).
31. Sohlenius-Sternbeck, A.K., et al,. Practical use of the regression offset approach for the prediction of in vivo intrinsic clearance from hepatocytes. Xenobiotica 42, 841-853 (2012).
32. Houston, J.B., Utility of in vitro drug metabolism data in predicting in vivo metabolic clearance. Biochem. Pharmacol. 47, 1469-1479 (1994).
33. Naritomi, Y., Terashita, S., Kagayama, A., &, Sugiyama, Y., Utility of hepatocytes in predicting drug metabolism: comparison of hepatic intrinsic clearance in rats and humans in vivo and in vitro. Drug Metab. Dispos. 31, 580-588 (2003).
34. Riley, R.J., McGinnity, D.F., &, Austin, R.P., A unified model for predicting human hepatic, metabolic clearance from in vitro intrinsic clearance data in hepatocytes and microsomes. Drug Metab. Dispos. 33, 1304-1311 (2005).
35. Amidon, G.L., Lennernäs, H., Shah, V.P., &, Crison, J.R., A theoretical basis for a biopharmaceutic drug classification: the correlation of in vitro drug product dissolution and in vivo bioavailability. Pharm. Res. 12, 413-420 (1995).
36. Thomas, V.H., et al,. The road map to oral bioavailability: an industrial perspective. Expert Opin. Drug Metab. Toxicol. 2, 591-608 (2006).
37. Lipinski, C.A., Drug-like properties and the causes of poor solubility and poor permeability. J. Pharmacol. Toxicol. Methods 44, 235-249 (2000).
38. Stegemann, S., Leveiller, F., Franchi, D., de Jong, H., &, Lindén, H., When poor solubility becomes an issue: from early stage to proof of concept. Eur. J. Pharm. Sci. 31, 249-261 (2007).
39. Di, L., et al,. A perspective on the prediction of drug pharmacokinetics and disposition in drug research and development. Drug Metab. Dispos. 41, 1975-1993 (2013).
40. Artursson, P., &, Karlsson, J., Correlation between oral drug absorption in humans and apparent drug permeability coefficients in human intestinal epithelial (Caco-2) cells. Biochem. Biophys. Res. Commun. 175, 880-885 (1991).
41. Sjögren, E., et al,. In silico predictions of gastrointestinal drug absorption in pharmaceutical product development: application of the mechanistic absorption model GI-Sim. Eur. J. Pharm. Sci. 49, 679-698 (2013).
42. Gertz, M., Houston, J.B., &, Galetin, A., Physiologically based pharmacokinetic modeling of intestinal first-pass metabolism of CYP3A substrates with high intestinal extraction. Drug Metab. Dispos. 39, 1633-1642 (2011).
43. Gertz, M., Harrison, A., Houston, J.B., &, Galetin, A., Prediction of human intestinal first-pass metabolism of 25 CYP3A substrates from in vitro clearance and permeability data. Drug Metab. Dispos. 38, 1147-1158 (2010).
44. Chiou, W.L., Jeong, H.Y., Chung, S.M., &, Wu, T.C., Evaluation of using dog as an animal model to study the fraction of oral dose absorbed of 43 drugs in humans. Pharm. Res. 17, 135-140 (2000).
45. Sjögren, E,. et al. In vivo methods for drug absorption-comparative physiologies, model selection, correlations with in vitro methods (IVIVC), and applications for formulation/API/excipient characterization including food effects. Eur. J. Pharm. Sci. 57, 99-151 (2014).
46. Zou, P., et al,. Applications of human pharmacokinetic prediction in first-in-human dose estimation. AAPS J. 14, 262-281 (2012).
47. Smith, D.A., Pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics in toxicology. Xenobiotica 27, 513-525 (1997).
48. Kanui, T.I., &, Hole, K., Morphine induces aggression but not analgesia in the naked mole-rat (Heterocephalus glaber). Comp. Biochem. Physiol. C. 96, 131-133 (1990).
49. Aitken, M.M., Species differences in pharmacodynamics: some examples. Vet. Res. Commun. 7, 313-324 (1983).
50. Dougherty, J.P., &, Aloyo, V.J., Pharmacological and behavioral characterization of the 5-HT2A receptor in C57BL/6N mice. Psychopharmacology (Berl) 215, 581-593 (2011).
51. Kleitz, H.K., Cornil, C.A., Balthazart, J., &, Ball, G.F., Species differences in the relative densities of D1- and D2-like dopamine receptor subtypes in the Japanese quail and rats: an in vitro quantitative receptor autoradiography study. Brain Behav. Evol. 73, 81-90 (2009).
52. Gupta, R.S., Chopra, A., &, Stetsko, D.K., Cellular basis for the species differences in sensitivity to cardiac glycosides (digitalis). J. Cell. Physiol. 127, 197-206 (1986).
53. Gennemark, P., et al,. A modeling approach for compounds affecting body composition. J. Pharmacokinet. Pharmacodyn. 40, 651-667 (2013).
54. Meno-Tetang, G.M., &, Lowe, P.J., On the prediction of the human response: a recycled mechanistic pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic approach. Basic Clin. Pharmacol. Toxicol. 96, 182-192 (2005).
55. Mager, D.E., &, Jusko, W.J., Development of translational pharmacokinetic-pharmacodynamic models. Clin. Pharmacol. Ther. 83, 909-912 (2008).
56. Chang, C., et al,. Quantitative PK-PD model-based translational pharmacology of a novel kappa opioid receptor antagonist between rats and humans. AAPS J. 13, 565-575 (2011).
57. Visser, S.A., et al,. Model-based drug discovery: implementation and impact. Drug Discov. Today 18, 764-775 (2013).
58. Barton, H.A., et al,. Characterizing uncertainty and variability in physiologically based pharmacokinetic models: state of the science and needs for research and implementation. Toxicol. Sci. 99, 395-402 (2007).
59. Budescu, D.V., Broomell, S., &, Por, H.H., Improving communication of uncertainty in the reports of the intergovernmental panel on climate change. Psychol. Sci. 20, 299-308 (2009).
60. Pidgeon, N., &, Fischhoff, B., The role of social and decision sciences in communicating uncertain climate risks. Nat. Clim. Chang. 1, 35-41 (2011).
61. Sommerville, R.C., &, Hassol, S.J., Communicating the science of climate change. Physics Today 64, 48-53 (2011).
62. Zhang, L., Hub, M., Thieke, C., Floca, R.O., &, Karger, C.P., A method to visualize the uncertainty of the prediction of radiobiological models. Phys. Med. 29, 556-561 (2013).
63. Olofsson, J., Nyholm T, Georg, D., Ahnesjö, A., &, Karlsson, M., Evaluation of uncertainty predictions and dose output for model-based dose calculations for megavoltage photon beams. Med. Phys. 33, 2548-2556 (2006).
64. Morgan, G.M., et al,. Best practice approaches for characterizing, communicating, and incorporating scientific uncertainty in climate decision making. U.S. Climate Change Science Program, Synthesis and Assessment Product 5.2 January (2009).
65. Campbell, P., Understanding the receivers and the reception of science's uncertain messages. Philos. Trans. A. Math. Phys. Eng. Sci. 369, 4891-4912 (2011).
66. Oie, S., &, Tozer, T.N., Effect of altered plasma protein binding on apparent volume of distribution. J. Pharm. Sci. 68, 1203-1205 (1979).
67. Lindhardt, E., &, Gennemark, P., Automated analysis of routinely generated preclinical pharmacokinetic and pharacodynamic data. J. Bioinform. Comput. Biol. 12, 1450010 (2014).
68. Thompson, R.A., et al,. In vitro approach to assess the potential for risk of idiosyncratic adverse reactions caused by candidate drugs. Chem. Res. Toxicol. 25, 1616-1632 (2012).
69. Moss, R., &, Schneider, S., Uncertainties in the IPCC TAR: recommendations to lead authors for more consistent assessment and reporting. In: Guidance Papers on the Crosscutting Issues of the Third Assessment Report of the IPCC (eds., Pachauri, P., Taniguchi, T., &, Tanaka, K,.) 33-51 (IPCC Geneva, Geneva, Switzerland, 2000).