Quantitative prediction of human pharmacokinetics is critical in assessing the viability of drug candidates and in determining first-in-human dosing. Numerous prediction methodologies, incorporating both in vitro and preclinical in vivo data, have been developed in recent years, each with advantages and disadvantages. However, the lack of a comprehensive data set, both preclinical and clinical, has limited efforts to evaluate the optimal strategy (or strategies) that results in quantitative predictions of human pharmacokinetics. To address this issue, the authors conducted a retrospective analysis using 50 proprietary compounds for which in vitro, preclinical pharmacokinetic data and oral single-dose human pharmacokinetic data were available. Five predictive strategies, involving either allometry or use of unbound intrinsic clearance from microsomes or hepatocytes, were then compared for their ability to predict human oral clearance, half-life through predictions of systemic clearance, volume of distribution, and bioavailability. Use of a single-species scaling approach with rat, dog, or monkey was as accurate as or more accurate than using multiple-species allometry. For those compounds cleared almost exclusively by P450-mediated pathways, scaling from human liver microsomes was as predictive as single-species scaling of clearance based on data from rat, dog, or monkey. These data suggest that use of predictive methods involving either single-species in vivo data or in vitro human liver microsomes can quantitatively predict human in vivo pharmacokinetics and suggest the possibility of streamlining the predictive methodology through use of a single species or use only of human in vitro microsomal preparations.

The ability to cross the blood brain barrier (BBB), sometimes expressed as BBB+ and BBB-, is a very important property in drug design. Several computational methods have been employed for the prediction of BBB-penetrating (BBB+) and nonpenetrating (BBB-) compounds with overall accuracies from 75 to 97%. However, most of these models use a large number of descriptors (67-199), and it is not easy to implement the models in order to predict values of BBB+/-. In this work, 19 simple molecular descriptors calculated from Algorithm Builder and fragmentation schemes were used for the analysis of 1593 BBB+/- data. The results show that hydrogen-bonding properties of compounds play a very important role in modeling BBB penetration. Several BBB models based on hydrogen-bonding properties, such as Abraham descriptors, polar surface area (PSA), and number of hydrogen bonding donors and acceptors, have been built using binomial-PLS analysis. The results show that the overall classification accuracy for a training set is over 90%, and overall prediction accuracy for a test set is over 95%.

Physiologically based pharmacokinetic (PBPK) modeling is a valuable tool in drug development and regulatory assessment, as it offers the opportunity to simulate the pharmacokinetics of a compound, with a mechanistic understanding, in a variety of populations and situations. This work reviews the use and impact of such modeling in selected regulatory procedures submitted to the European Medicines Agency (EMA) before the end of 2015, together with its subsequent reflection in public documents relating to the assessment of these procedures. It is apparent that the reference to PBPK modeling in regulatory public documents underrepresents its use. A positive trend over time of the number of PBPK models submitted is shown, and in a number of cases the results of these may impact the decision-making process or lead to recommendations in the product labeling. These results confirm the need for regulatory guidance in this field, which is currently under development by the EMA.

The results from this evaluation demonstrate the utility of PBPK methodology for the prediction of human pharmacokinetics. This methodology can be applied at different stages to enhance the understanding of the compounds in a particular chemical series, guide experiments, aid candidate selection and inform clinical trial design.