Cited by 26Pharmacogenetics and Drug MetabolismDrug Transport and Resistance MechanismsDrug-Induced Hepatotoxicity and Protection

Clearance-dependent underprediction of in vivo intrinsic clearance from human hepatocytes: comparison with permeabilities from artificial membrane (PAMPA) assay, in silico and caco-2 assay, for 65 drugs

Hallifax, David, Turlizzi, Elisa, Zanelli, Ugo, Houston, J. Brian·2012·European Journal of Pharmaceutical Sciences

Abstract

Underprediction of in vivo intrinsic clearance (CLint) from suspended human hepatocytes has recently been shown to be clearance-dependent although the mechanistic basis is currently unknown. One possible explanation is rate limiting transmembrane (passive) permeation into hepatocytes in vitro; evidence to support this has been minor to date, but there has not been a systematic exploration of the impact of passive permeability in vitro. To investigate the relationship between underprediction of in vivo CLint and potentially rate limiting permeability, permeability constants (Px, collated from published studies and determined experimentally in this study), using three alternative methodologies (parallel artificial membrane permeability assay (PAMPA), caco-2 permeability assay and calculated using an empirical model) were compared with CLint from suspended human hepatocytes for 65 drugs from a recently reported database of clearance predictions. Although there was an approximate correspondence between hepatocyte CLint and permeability measured by PAMPA (but not by caco-2 or modelling), prediction accuracy was not dependent on the relative permeability (measured as the ratio of CLint to permeability), indicating the absence of a general rate limitation by passive hepatocyte uptake on metabolic clearance. Further investigation into rate-dependent CLint in hepatocytes is required.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.ejps.2011.12.010

Cites

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?

The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet

References 15 · Cited by 26

Authors
Hallifax, D., Turlizzi, E., Zanelli, U., & Houston, J. B.
Affiliations
  • University of Manchester (GB)
  • Siena Biotech (Italy) (IT)
Corresponding author
Hallifax, David
Venue
European Journal of Pharmaceutical Sciences
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2012-04
Volume
45
Issue
5
Pages
570-574
ISSN
0928-0987 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2158053130
Cited by
26
References
15
Citations by year
2024: 1 · 2023: 1 · 2022: 5 · 2021: 1 · 2020: 4 · 2018: 2 · 2017: 2 · 2016: 1 · 2015: 1 · 2014: 2 · 2013: 4 · 2012: 2
FWCI
2.71
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • European Journal of Pharmaceutical Sciences (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Research Explorer (The University of Manchester) (publishedVersion)
Funders
Sixth Framework Programme
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutics › Pharmacology › Pharmacogenetics and Drug Metabolism
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Oncology › Drug Transport and Resistance Mechanisms
  • Life Sciences › Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutics › Pharmacology › Drug-Induced Hepatotoxicity and Protection
Keywords
intrinsic clearance, human hepatocytes, passive permeability, Pampas, Caco-2 permeability, drug clearance prediction, hepatocyte uptake
MeSH terms
Cell Membrane Permeability, Humans, Membranes, Artificial, Pharmacokinetics, Caco-2 Cells, Hepatocytes, Cell Line, Tumor

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