Cited by 108Computational Drug Discovery MethodsPharmacogenetics and Drug MetabolismDrug Solubulity and Delivery Systems

An Evaluation of the Utility of Physiologically Based Models of Pharmacokinetics in Early Drug Discovery

Parrott, Neil, Paquereau, Nicolas, Coassolo, Philippe, Lavé, Thierry·2005·Journal of Pharmaceutical Sciences

Abstract

Generic physiologically-based models of pharmacokinetics were evaluated for early drug discovery. Plasma profiles after intravenous and oral dosing were simulated in rat for 68 compounds from six chemical classes. Input data consisted of structure based predictions of lipophilicity, ionization, and protein binding plus intrinsic clearance measured in rat hepatocytes, single measured values of aqueous solubility, and artificial membrane permeability. LogP of compounds was high with a mean of 3.9 while free fraction in plasma (mean 9%) and solubility (mean 37 microg/mL) were low. Predicted and observed clearance and volume showed mean fold-error and R2 of 1.8, 0.56, and 1.9, 0.25 respectively. Predicted bioavailability showed strong bias to under prediction correlated to very low aqueous solubility and a theoretical correction for bile salt solubilization in vivo brought some improvement in average prediction error (to 31%). Overall, this evaluation shows that generic simulation may be applicable for typical drug-like compounds to predict differences in pharmacokinetic parameters of more than twofold based upon minimal measured input data. However verification of the simulations with in vivo data for a few compounds of each compound class is recommended since recent discovery compounds may have properties beyond the scope of the current generic models.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1002/jps.20419

Cites

45 of 45 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Parrott, N., Paquereau, N., Coassolo, P., & Lavé, T.
Affiliations
F. Hoffmann-La Roche AG (CH)
Corresponding author
Parrott, Neil
Venue
Journal of Pharmaceutical Sciences
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2005-10
Volume
94
Issue
10
Pages
2327-2343
ISSN
0022-3549 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2039539582
Cited by
107
References
45
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 1 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 4 · 2022: 2 · 2021: 4 · 2020: 2 · 2019: 4 · 2018: 10 · 2017: 1 · 2016: 8 · 2015: 5 · 2014: 4 · 2013: 8 · 2012: 9
FWCI
5.42
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
  • Life Sciences › Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutics › Pharmaceutical Science › Drug Solubulity and Delivery Systems
Keywords
physiologically based pharmacokinetic modeling, early drug discovery, bioavailability prediction, clearance prediction, volume of distribution, lipophilicity prediction, protein binding, water solubility, membrane permeability, rat hepatocytes, structure-based prediction
MeSH terms
Animals, Biological Availability, Computer Simulation, Pharmaceutical Preparations, Intestinal Absorption, Male, Models, Biological, Pharmacokinetics, Solubility, Time Factors, Drug Design, Reproducibility of Results, Rats, Wistar, Area Under Curve, Rats

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