Prediction of drug concentration-time data in humans from animals: a comparison of three methods

Applicability of the Øie-Tozer model to predict three types of distribution volume (Vd) in humans: Vd in central compartment, Vd at steady state, and Vd at beta phase

This study aimed to investigate the applicability of the Øie-Tozer model to predict human distribution volume (Vd) in the central compartment (V₁ ), Vd at steady state (Vd_ss ), and Vd at beta phase (Vd_β ) based on animal Vd. Twenty compounds that have a human V₁ /Vd_ss of 0.053-0.66 were selected from the literature. After intravenous administration of the compounds at 0.1 mg/kg to rats, dogs, and monkeys, plasma concentrations were determined, and pharmacokinetic parameters were obtained by one/two-compartmental analyses. The human V₁ , Vd_ss , and Vd_β were predicted from animal Vd using the Øie-Tozer model, and the predictability was compared with that using proportionality and simple allometry. The Øie-Tozer model was the most reliable method for the overall prediction of Vd and applicable for accurately predicting human V₁ , Vd_ss , and Vd_β (89%, 85%, and 68% of the compounds within a 3-fold error, respectively) when data of monkey for V₁ and data of three animal species for Vd_ss and Vd_β were used. Additionally, the predicted human Vd with the two-compartment model was applicable for predicting pharmacokinetic profiles/parameters in humans after intravenous administration of 18 compounds [except for valproic acid (monophasic elimination profile) and chlorpromazine (deviation: Vd_ss < V₁ )]. The prediction was more accurate than that using the predicted Vd_ss with the one-compartment model (e.g., underestimation of maximum plasma concentrations: 2 vs 8 compounds within a 3-fold error, respectively). In summary, the Øie-Tozer model was applicable for predicting human V₁ , Vd_ss , and Vd_β , and their predicted Vd with the two-compartment model can lead to accurate pharmacokinetic prediction of compounds that show biphasic elimination.

ADME of monoclonal antibody biotherapeutics: knowledge gaps and emerging tools

Absorption, distribution, metabolism and excretion (ADME) data are pivotal for small-molecule drug development, with well-developed in vitro and in vivo correlation tools and guidances from regulatory agencies. In the past two decades, monoclonal antibody (mAb) biotherapeutics have been successfully approved, including derived novel conjugates of active molecules (toxins or bioactive peptides) for specific target delivery or half-life extension. However, ADME information of mAb therapeutics lags behind that of small molecules due to the complex nature of the molecules and lack of appropriate tools to study drug exposure, biotransformation, and target engagement in the vascular and tissue spaces. In this perspective, the current knowledge gaps on ADME of mAb-related therapeutics are reviewed with potential solutions from emerging analytical technologies.

Pharmacokinetics, pharmacodynamics and physiologically-based pharmacokinetic modelling of monoclonal antibodies

Development of monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) and their functional derivatives represents a growing segment of the development pipeline in the pharmaceutical industry. More than 25 mAbs and derivatives have been approved for a variety of therapeutic applications. In addition, around 500 mAbs and derivatives are currently in different stages of development. mAbs are considered to be large molecule therapeutics (in general, they are 2-3 orders of magnitude larger than small chemical molecule therapeutics), but they are not just big chemicals. These compounds demonstrate much more complex pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic behaviour than small molecules. Because of their large size and relatively poor membrane permeability and instability in the conditions of the gastrointestinal tract, parenteral administration is the most usual route of administration. The rate and extent of mAb distribution is very slow and depends on extravasation in tissue, distribution within the particular tissue, and degradation. Elimination primarily happens via catabolism to peptides and amino acids. Although not definitive, work has been published to define the human tissues mainly involved in the elimination of mAbs, and it seems that many cells throughout the body are involved. mAbs can be targeted against many soluble or membrane-bound targets, thus these compounds may act by a variety of mechanisms to achieve their pharmacological effect. mAbs targeting soluble antigen generally exhibit linear elimination, whereas those targeting membrane-bound antigen often exhibit non-linear elimination, mainly due to target-mediated drug disposition (TMDD). The high-affinity interaction of mAbs and their derivatives with the pharmacological target can often result in non-linear pharmacokinetics. Because of species differences (particularly due to differences in target affinity and abundance) in the pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of mAbs, pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic modelling of mAbs has been used routinely to expedite the development of mAbs and their derivatives and has been utilized to help in the selection of appropriate dose regimens. Although modelling approaches have helped to explain variability in both pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic properties of these drugs, there is a clear need for more complex models to improve understanding of pharmacokinetic processes and pharmacodynamic interactions of mAbs with the immune system. There are different approaches applied to physiologically based pharmacokinetic (PBPK) modelling of mAbs and important differences between the models developed. Some key additional features that need to be accounted for in PBPK models of mAbs are neonatal Fc receptor (FcRn; an important salvage mechanism for antibodies) binding, TMDD and lymph flow. Several models have been described incorporating some or all of these features and the use of PBPK models are expected to expand over the next few years.