Prediction of Pharmacokinetics Prior to In Vivo Studies. 1. Mechanism‐Based Prediction of Volume of Distribution
Abstract
In drug discovery and nonclinical development the volume of distribution at steady state (V(ss)) of each novel drug candidate is commonly determined under in vivo conditions. Therefore, it is of interest to predict V(ss) without conducting in vivo studies. The traditional description of V(ss) corresponds to the sum of the products of each tissue:plasma partition coefficient (P(t:p)) and the respective tissue volume in addition to the plasma volume. Because data on volumes of tissues and plasma are available in the literature for mammals, the other input parameters needed to estimate V(ss) are the P(t:p)'s, which can potentially be predicted with established tissue composition-based equations. In vitro data on drug lipophilicity and plasma protein binding are the input parameters used in these equations. Such a mechanism-based approach would be particularly useful to provide first-cut estimates of V(ss) prior to any in vivo studies and to explore potential unexpected deviations between sets of predicted and in vivo V(ss) data, when the in vivo data become available during the drug development process. The objective of the present study was to use tissue composition-based equations to predict rat and human V(ss) prior to in vivo studies for 123 structurally unrelated compounds (acids, bases, and neutrals). The predicted data were compared with in vivo data obtained from the literature or at Roche. Overall, the average ratio of predicted-to-experimental rat and human V(ss) values was 1.06 (SD = 0.817, r = 0.78, n = 147). In fact, 80% of all predicted values were within a factor of two of the corresponding experimental values. The drugs can therefore be separated into two groups. The first group contains 98 drugs for which the predicted V(ss) were within a factor of two of those experimentally determined (average ratio of 1.01, SD = 0.39, r = 0.93, n = 118), and the second group includes 25 other drugs for which the predicted and experimental V(ss) differ by a factor larger than two (average ratio of 1.32, SD = 1.74, r = 0.42, n = 29). Thus, additional relevant distribution processes were neglected in predicting V(ss) of drugs of the second group. This was true especially in the case of some cationic-amphiphilic bases. The present study is the first attempt to develop and validate a mechanistic distribution model for predicting rat and human V(ss) of drugs prior to in vivo studies.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
The Kp values for each tissue can be calculated by three mechanistic models.
“The K p values for each tissue can be calculated by three mechanistic models (Table 2). 42 , 43 , 44”
From Does the choice of applied physiologically‐based pharmacokinetics platform matter? A case study on simvastatin disposition and drug–drug interaction (2022) · cites this paper as [43]
A PBPK model with all perfusion-limited tissues (Kp values calculated with Poulin-extracellular method) reasonably simulated the plasma concentrations and matched the low Vss.
“A PBPK model with all perfusion-limited tissues ( K p values calculated with Poulin-extracellular method, equation 4 in [69]) reasonably simulated the plasma concentrations and matched the low V ss .”
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 212 · Cited by 568
- Authors
- Poulin, P., & Theil, F.
- Affiliations
- F. Hoffmann-La Roche AG (CH)
- Corresponding author
- Poulin, Patrick
- ORCID
- Theil, Frank‐Peter
- Venue
- Journal of Pharmaceutical Sciences
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2002-01
- Volume
- 91
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 129-156
- ISSN
- 0022-3549 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2039250788
- Cited by
- 568
- References
- 212
- Citations by year
- 2026: 18 · 2025: 23 · 2024: 23 · 2023: 28 · 2022: 26 · 2021: 32 · 2020: 30 · 2019: 20 · 2018: 21 · 2017: 26 · 2016: 22 · 2015: 25 · 2014: 25 · 2013: 41 · 2012: 37
- FWCI
- 15.72
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Journal of Pharmaceutical Sciences (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computational Theory and Mathematics › Computational Drug Discovery Methods
- Life Sciences › Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutics › Pharmacology › Pharmacogenetics and Drug Metabolism
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Pediatrics, Perinatology and Child Health › Pharmaceutical studies and practices
- Keywords
- volume of distribution, lipophilicity, plasma protein binding, drug distribution, forecast verification, in vitro-in vivo extrapolation, drug discovery, nonclinical development, plasma volume
- MeSH terms
- Animals, Chemistry, Physical, Pharmaceutical Preparations, Humans, Models, Biological, Models, Chemical, Pharmacokinetics, Tissue Distribution, Rats, Chemical Phenomena
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review