20.02.2013 Views

Drug Targeting Organ-Specific Strategies

Drug Targeting Organ-Specific Strategies

Drug Targeting Organ-Specific Strategies

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

Create successful ePaper yourself

Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.

13.2 Pharmacokinetics and Pharmacodynamics, Modelling, Simulation, and Data Analysis 341<br />

creased number of parameters increases the problem of assigning reliable values to these parameters,<br />

both in simulation (Section 13.2.7) and in data analysis (Section 13.2.8). As a general<br />

rule, the number of compartments should be chosen carefully, according to the parsimony<br />

principle: start the modelling with the simplest model that can discriminate the processes<br />

of interest. If the chosen model does not provide satisfactory results (in terms of credible predictions<br />

or satisfactory goodness-of-fit), the model can be explored further by adding compartments<br />

or connections in a step-by-step procedure.<br />

On the other hand, PB-PK models are frequently used in toxicokinetics for a different<br />

purpose, that is, the model should be able to explain the drug distribution over a large number<br />

of tissues as measured from in vivo animal studies, with the eventual goal of data extrapolation<br />

to man. In this case, the starting point is a model including each organ and tissue from<br />

which measurements are available. If necessary, the number of compartments can be reduced<br />

by combining compartments with similar properties. A detailed description of the process of<br />

explicit (or formal) combining has been given by Nestorov et al. [19] and Weiss [20].<br />

The principles of PB-PK modelling will be explained using the model of Hunt [6], depicted<br />

in Figure 13.4, a PB-PK model suited for evaluation of drug targeting strategies (Sections<br />

13.3.2 and 13.4). For this model, the following set of differential equations describing the drug<br />

transport (mass per unit of time) can be written according to mass balance:<br />

V C · dC C = RC + Q R · C R + QT · C T + QE · C E – (QR + Q T + Q E) · C C<br />

dt K R K T K E<br />

V R · dC R = RR + Q R · C C – Q R · C R – CLR · C R<br />

dt K R<br />

V T · dC T = RT + Q T · C C – Q T · C T – CLT · C T<br />

dt K T<br />

V E · dC E = RE + Q E · C C – Q E · C E – CLE · C E<br />

dt K E<br />

(13.5)<br />

(13.6)<br />

(13.7)<br />

(13.8)<br />

where V is the volume of the compartment, C is the drug concentration, Q is the blood (or<br />

plasma, whichever is the reference fluid) flow, K is the tissue/blood partition coefficient, CL<br />

is the (elimination) clearance, and R is the rate of drug input; subscripts C, R, T and E refer<br />

to the central compartment, response (or target) compartment, toxicity compartment, and<br />

elimination compartment, respectively (Note: Hunt et al. [6] did not include the partition coefficient<br />

K as such, in their equations. Rather, their tissue concentrations refer to a blood or<br />

plasma concentration which is in equilibrium with the tissue concentration, equal to the ratio<br />

C/K; consequently, their tissue volumes refer to apparent volumes, equal to the product K · V).<br />

13.2.4.3 Compartmental Models Versus Physiologically-based Models<br />

Although compartmental models and physiologically-based models may at first, seem quite<br />

different, and are usually treated as two different classes of models, both approaches are actually<br />

similar [17].When appropriately defined, probably any PB-PK model can be written as<br />

a compartmental model and vice versa. This can be seen by comparing the models in Figures<br />

13.1 and 13.3, and their mathematical descriptions in Eq. 13.1 and 13.5.

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!