Cited by 101Pharmacogenetics and Drug MetabolismDrug Transport and Resistance MechanismsDrug-Induced Hepatotoxicity and Protection

Prediction of Drug-Drug Interactions Arising from CYP3A induction Using a Physiologically Based Dynamic Model

Open access
Almond, Lisa M., Mukadam, Sophie, Gardner, Iain, Okialda, Krystle, Wong, Susan, Hatley, Oliver, Tay, Suzanne, Rowland-Yeo, Karen +3 more·2016·Drug Metabolism and Disposition

Abstract

Using physiologically based pharmacokinetic modeling, we predicted the magnitude of drug-drug interactions (DDIs) for studies with rifampicin and seven CYP3A4 probe substrates administered i.v. (10 studies) or orally (19 studies). The results showed a tendency to underpredict the DDI magnitude when the victim drug was administered orally. Possible sources of inaccuracy were investigated systematically to determine the most appropriate model refinement. When the maximal fold induction (Indmax) for rifampicin was increased (from 8 to 16) in both the liver and the gut, or when the Indmax was increased in the gut but not in liver, there was a decrease in bias and increased precision compared with the base model (Indmax = 8) [geometric mean fold error (GMFE) 2.12 vs. 1.48 and 1.77, respectively]. Induction parameters (mRNA and activity), determined for rifampicin, carbamazepine, phenytoin, and phenobarbital in hepatocytes from four donors, were then used to evaluate use of the refined rifampicin model for calibration. Calibration of mRNA and activity data for other inducers using the refined rifampicin model led to more accurate DDI predictions compared with the initial model (activity GMFE 1.49 vs. 1.68; mRNA GMFE 1.35 vs. 1.46), suggesting that robust in vivo reference values can be used to overcome interdonor and laboratory-to-laboratory variability. Use of uncalibrated data also performed well (GMFE 1.39 and 1.44 for activity and mRNA). As a result of experimental variability (i.e., in donors and protocols), it is prudent to fully characterize in vitro induction with prototypical inducers to give an understanding of how that particular system extrapolates to the in vivo situation when using an uncalibrated approach.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1124/dmd.115.066845

Cites

62 of 62 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

  • A minor discrepancy was the overprediction of the induction effect mediated by rifampicin in Simcyp.

    “A minor discrepancy was the overprediction of the induction effect mediated by rifampicin in Simcyp (Figure 6), which has also been reported previously for SVL and midazolam as victim drugs. 39”

    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 [39]

    The Results section reports that the base rifampicin model underpredicted the magnitude of the interaction with orally administered midazolam, rather than overpredicting the induction effect. The Introduction likewise describes underprediction for rifampicin and oral midazolam; the Results figure caption identifies simvastatin among the victim drugs evaluated but does not reverse that reported direction. (LLM, conf=0.89)

    Checked by a reasoning model — may be wrong.

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • There are several previously published PBPK models for simvastatin: one in Simcyp, two in PK-Sim, and another semimechanistic PBPK model in NONMEM.

    “There are several previously published PBPK models for simvastatin: one in Simcyp, 39 two in PK‐Sim 47 , 48 and another semimechanistic PBPK model in NONMEM. 49”

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Almond, L. M., Mukadam, S., Gardner, I., Okialda, K., Wong, S., Hatley, O., Tay, S., Rowland-Yeo, K., Jamei, M., Rostami-Hodjegan, A., & Kenny, J. R.
Affiliations
Genentech (US)
Corresponding author
Almond, Lisa M.
Venue
Drug Metabolism and Disposition
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2016-06
Volume
44
Issue
6
Pages
821-832
ISSN
0090-9556 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2323380120
Cited by
101
References
62
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 4 · 2024: 16 · 2023: 9 · 2022: 12 · 2021: 17 · 2020: 10 · 2019: 11 · 2018: 8 · 2017: 9 · 2016: 3
FWCI
12.92
Type
journal article
Language
en
Update notices
erratum (2016-06-01)
Open access
Locations
  • Drug Metabolism and Disposition (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Research Explorer (The University of Manchester) (submittedVersion)
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
drug-drug interactions, CYP3A4 induction, rifampicin, physiologically based pharmacokinetic modeling, model calibration, carbamazepine, phenytoin, phenobarbital, in vitro-in vivo extrapolation, oral administration
MeSH terms
Administration, Oral, Carbamazepine, Drug Interactions, Enzyme Induction, Humans, Liver, Models, Biological, Phenobarbital, Phenytoin, Rifampin, RNA, Messenger, Hepatocytes, Gastrointestinal Tract, Cytochrome P-450 CYP3A

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