Cited by 16Pharmaceutical studies and practicesPharmacogenetics and Drug MetabolismAnimal testing and alternatives

Development of a Hybrid Physiologically Based Pharmacokinetic Model with Drug‐Specific Scaling Factors in Rat to Improve Prediction of Human Pharmacokinetics

Sayama, Hiroyuki, Komura, Hiroshi, Kogayu, Motohiro, Iwaki, Masahiro·2013·Journal of Pharmaceutical Sciences

Abstract

Accurate prediction of pharmacokinetics (PK) in humans has been a vital part of drug discovery. The aims of this study are to verify the usefulness of scaling factors for clearance (CL) and apparent volume of distribution at the steady state (Vss ) estimated from the difference between observed and predicted PK profiles in rats for human PK prediction, and to develop a novel hybrid physiologically based pharmacokinetic (PBPK) model with the two scaling factors. The human prediction accuracies for CL with in vitro-in vivo extrapolation and Vss with a tissue composition model were improved by using rat-scaling factors. This improvement was explainable by data that the scaling factors for CL and Vss in rats were correlated with those in humans. The predictability of plasma concentration-time profiles by the hybrid PBPK model incorporating two scaling factors was compared mainly with that by the conventional PBPK model. The hybrid PBPK model yielded higher prediction accuracy for plasma concentrations than the conventional method. Furthermore, we proposed a tiered approach using the three prediction methods, including the hybrid Dedrick approach, that were previously reported (Sayama H, Komura H, Kogayu M. 2013. Drug Metab Dispos 41:498-507), taking the available information in the individual stages of drug discovery and development into consideration.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1002/jps.23726

Cites

28 of 28 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

1 of the 29 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Sayama, H., Komura, H., Kogayu, M., & Iwaki, M.
Affiliations
  • Japan Tobacco (Japan) (JP)
  • Kindai University (JP)
Corresponding author
Komura, Hiroshi
Venue
Journal of Pharmaceutical Sciences
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2013-11
Volume
102
Issue
11
Pages
4193-4204
ISSN
0022-3549 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2016381390
Cited by
16
References
29
Citations by year
2021: 1 · 2020: 2 · 2019: 4 · 2018: 3 · 2017: 1 · 2016: 3 · 2014: 2
FWCI
1.56
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Journal of Pharmaceutical Sciences (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pediatrics, Perinatology and Child Health › Pharmaceutical studies and practices
  • Life Sciences › Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutics › Pharmacology › Pharmacogenetics and Drug Metabolism
  • Health Sciences › Veterinary › Small Animals › Animal testing and alternatives
Keywords
scale factor, human pharmacokinetic prediction, rat-to-human extrapolation, in vitro-in vivo extrapolation, clearance, volume of distribution, plasma concentration-time curve
MeSH terms
Animals, Computer Simulation, Pharmaceutical Preparations, Humans, Metabolic Clearance Rate, Models, Biological, Pharmacokinetics, 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