What do we Mean by Dose

PBPK Modeling to Simulate the Fate of Compounds in Living Organisms

Pharmacokinetics study the fate of xenobiotics in a living organism. Physiologically based pharmacokinetic (PBPK) models provide realistic descriptions of xenobiotics' absorption, distribution, metabolism, and excretion processes. They model the body as a set of homogeneous compartments representing organs, and their parameters refer to anatomical, physiological, biochemical, and physicochemical entities. They offer a quantitative mechanistic framework to understand and simulate the time-course of the concentration of a substance in various organs and body fluids. These models are well suited for performing extrapolations inherent to toxicology and pharmacology (e.g., between species or doses) and for integrating data obtained from various sources (e.g., in vitro or in vivo experiments, structure-activity models). In this chapter, we describe the practical development and basic use of a PBPK model from model building to model simulations, through implementation with an easily accessible free software.

Development, Testing, Parameterisation and Calibration of a Human PBPK Model for the Plasticiser, Di-(2-propylheptyl) Phthalate (DPHP) Using in Silico, in vitro and Human Biomonitoring Data

A physiologically based pharmacokinetic model for Di-(2-propylheptyl) phthalate (DPHP) was developed to interpret the biokinetics in humans after single oral doses. The model was parameterized with in vitro and in silico derived parameters and uncertainty and sensitivity analysis was used during the model development process to assess structure, biological plausibility and behaviour prior to simulation and analysis of human biological monitoring data. To provide possible explanations for some of the counter-intuitive behaviour of the biological monitoring data the model included a simple lymphatic uptake process for DPHP and enterohepatic recirculation (EHR) for DPHP and the mono ester metabolite mono-(2-propylheptyl) phthalate (MPHP). The model was used to simultaneously simulate the concentration-time profiles of blood DPHP, MPHP and the urinary excretion of two metabolites, mono-(2-propyl-6-hydroxyheptyl) phthalate (OH-MPHP) and mono-(2-propyl-6-carboxyhexyl) phthalate (cx-MPHP). The availability of blood and urine measurements permitted a more robust qualitative and quantitative investigation of the importance of EHR and lymphatic uptake. Satisfactory prediction of blood DPHP and urinary metabolites was obtained whereas blood MPHP was less satisfactory. However, the delayed peak of DPHP concentration relative to MPHP in blood and second order metabolites in urine could be explained as a result of three processes: 1) DPHP entering the systemic circulation from the lymph, 2) rapid and very high protein binding and 3) the efficiency of the liver in removing DPHP absorbed via the hepatic route. The use of sensitivity analysis is considered important in the evaluation of uncertainty around in vitro and in silico derived parameters. By quantifying their impact on model output sufficient confidence in the use of a model should be afforded. This approach could expand the use of PBPK models since parameterization with in silico techniques allows for rapid model development. This in turn could assist in reducing the use of animals in toxicological evaluations by enhancing the utility of “read across” techniques.

Modeling Pharmacokinetics

Pharmacokinetics is the study of the fate of xenobiotics in a living organism. Physiologically based pharmacokinetic (PBPK) models provide realistic descriptions of xenobiotics' absorption, distribution, metabolism, and excretion processes. They model the body as a set of homogeneous compartments representing organs, and their parameters refer to anatomical, physiological, biochemical, and physicochemical entities. They offer a quantitative mechanistic framework to understand and simulate the time-course of the concentration of a substance in various organs and body fluids. These models are well suited for performing extrapolations inherent to toxicology and pharmacology (e.g., between species or doses) and for integrating data obtained from various sources (e.g., in vitro or in vivo experiments, structure-activity models). In this chapter, we describe the practical development and basic use of a PBPK model from model building to model simulations, through implementation with an easily accessible free software.

Alternative (non-animal) methods for cosmetics testing: current status and future prospects-2010

The 7th amendment to the EU Cosmetics Directive prohibits to put animal-tested cosmetics on the market in Europe after 2013. In that context, the European Commission invited stakeholder bodies (industry, non-governmental organisations, EU Member States, and the Commission's Scientific Committee on Consumer Safety) to identify scientific experts in five toxicological areas, i.e. toxicokinetics, repeated dose toxicity, carcinogenicity, skin sensitisation, and reproductive toxicity for which the Directive foresees that the 2013 deadline could be further extended in case alternative and validated methods would not be available in time. The selected experts were asked to analyse the status and prospects of alternative methods and to provide a scientifically sound estimate of the time necessary to achieve full replacement of animal testing. In summary, the experts confirmed that it will take at least another 7-9 years for the replacement of the current in vivo animal tests used for the safety assessment of cosmetic ingredients for skin sensitisation. However, the experts were also of the opinion that alternative methods may be able to give hazard information, i.e. to differentiate between sensitisers and non-sensitisers, ahead of 2017. This would, however, not provide the complete picture of what is a safe exposure because the relative potency of a sensitiser would not be known. For toxicokinetics, the timeframe was 5-7 years to develop the models still lacking to predict lung absorption and renal/biliary excretion, and even longer to integrate the methods to fully replace the animal toxicokinetic models. For the systemic toxicological endpoints of repeated dose toxicity, carcinogenicity and reproductive toxicity, the time horizon for full replacement could not be estimated.

Biomonitoring of inhaled complex mixtures--ambient air, diesel exhaust and cigarette smoke

Human biomonitoring comprises the determination of biomarkers in body-fluids, cells and tissues. Biomarkers are generally assigned to one of three classes, namely, biomarkers of exposure, effect or susceptibility. Since biomarkers represent steps in an exposure-disease continuum, their application in epidemiological studies ('molecular epidemiology') shows promise. However, to be a predictor of disease, a biomarker has to be validated. Validation criteria for a biomarker include intrinsic qualities such as specificity, sensitivity, knowledge of background in the population, existence of dose-response relationships, degree of inter- and intra-individual variability, knowledge of the kinetics, confounding and modifying factors. In addition, properties of the sampling and analytical procedures are of relevance, including constraints and non-invasiveness of sampling, stability of sample as well as simplicity, high sensitivity, specificity and speed of the analytical method. It is of particular importance to prove by suitable studies that the biomarker of exposure indicates the actual exposure, the biomarker of effect strongly predicts the actual risk of disease and the biomarker of susceptibility actually modifies the risk. Biomonitoring of the exposure to complex mixtures such as polluted ambient air, diesel exhaust or tobacco smoke is a particular challenge since these exposures have many constituents in common and many people were exposed to more than one of these mixtures. Data on the exposure to polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAH) and benzene from ambient air, diesel exhaust and tobacco smoke will be presented. In addition, some source-specific biomarkers such as nitro-arenes and nicotine metabolites as well as their application in population groups will be discussed. The second part of the presentation addresses the application of biomarkers for assessing so called 'potentially reduced exposure products' (PREPs). According to a recent report of the Institute of Medicine (USA), "reducing risk of disease by reducing exposure to tobacco toxicants is feasible" and "surrogate biological markers that are associated with tobacco-related diseases could be used to offer guidance as to whether or not PREPs are likely to be risk-reducing." In general, the same validation criteria apply as discussed above. In addition, it is suggested that a panel of biomarkers should be used, representing both smoke phases (gas and particulate phase) and the various chemical classes of smoke constituents (e.g., carbonyls, benzene, PAH, tobacco-specific nitrosamines, aromatic amines). Also, a panel of biomarkers of effect should cover the major known adverse effects of smoking (e.g., oxidative stress, inflammatory processes, lipid peroxidation, lipometabolic disorders, mutagenic effects). Biomarkers of nicotine and carbon monoxide uptake are of interest for evaluating the smoking and inhalation behavior, respectively. Finally, suitable study designs for evaluating PREPs are discussed. It is concluded that suitable biomarkers for assessing the exposure to complex mixtures such as ambient air, diesel exhaust and tobacco smoke as well as for evaluating the exposure-reducing properties of PREPs are already available. Future efforts should focus on the development and validation of biomarkers of effect.

Inhalation studies in laboratory animals--current concepts and alternatives

Highly standardized and controlled inhalation studies are required for hazard identification to make test results reproducible and comparable and to fulfill general regulatory requirements for the registration of new drugs, pesticides, or chemicals. Despite significant efforts, the results of inhalation studies have to be analyzed judiciously due to the great number of variables. These variables may be related to technical issues or to the specific features of the animal model. Although inhalation exposure of animals mimics human exposure best, ie, error-prone route-to-route extrapolations are not necessary, not all results obtained under such very rigorous test conditions may necessarily also occur under real-life exposure conditions. Attempts are often made to duplicate as closely as possible these real-life exposure conditions of humans in appropriate bioassays. However, this in turn might affect established baseline data, rendering the interpretation of new findings difficult. In addition, specific use patterns, eg, of inhalation pharmaceuticals or pesticide-containing consumer products, may impose test agent-specific constraints that challenge traditional approaches. Moreover, specific modes of action of the substance under investigation, the evaluation of specific endpoints, or the clarification of equivocal findings in common rodent species may require exposure paradigms or the use of animal species not commonly used in inhalation toxicology. However, particularly in inhalation toxicology, the choice of animal models for inhalation toxicity testing is usually based on guideline requirements and practical considerations, such as exposure technology, expediency, and previous experience rather than validity for use in human beings. Larger animal species, apart from the welfare aspects, may require larger inhalation chambers to accommodate the animals, but for technical reasons and the difficulty of generating homogeneous exposure atmospheres in such inhalation chambers, this may jeopardize the outcome of the study. Some of the many variables and possible artifacts likely to occur in animal inhalation studies are addressed in this paper.

Dose-response assessment strategies for endocrine-active compounds

Hazard identification provides evidence for the potential of compounds to cause effects in exposed people. Dose-response assessments define the range of exposure conditions associated with minimal risks of adverse effects. With endocrine-active compounds (EACs), the vast majority of resources are presently being applied to hazard identification. In the past, dose-response assessments have been based on empirical analysis of these relationships. The empirical underpinnings of these models do not permit conclusions about the low-dose and interspecies extrapolation of the animal study results. Biologically based dose-response assessments relying on knowledge of mode-of-action (pharmacodynamics) and dosimetry (pharmacokinetics) offer promise to develop broadly applicable strategies for quantitative dose-response assessments with these EACs. These approaches would focus on normal physiological endocrine signaling processes in the body, their associated control mechanisms, and the interaction among different internal signaling pathways. A critical element of signaling is regulation of the concentration of the signaling compound, e.g., steroid sex hormone. Exogenous compounds that act as signals but evade the normal homeostatic control of signaling compound concentrations represent one class of EACs. Other molecular components of these signaling systems include receptors, second messengers, and DNA-accessory/transcriptional protein complexes; EACs may interfere with the functions of any of these components. The challenge facing the toxicology and risk assessment professions is to base regulatory strategies on the interaction of these EACs with the fundamental control mechanisms which regulate responses throughout the body and to determine the extent to which these interactions create specific dose-response behaviors in the living animals.