2015
DOI: 10.1124/dmd.115.065920
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Physiologically Based Pharmacokinetic (PBPK) Modeling and Simulation Approaches: A Systematic Review of Published Models, Applications, and Model Verification

Abstract: Modeling and simulation of drug disposition has emerged as an important tool in drug development, clinical study design and regulatory review, and the number of physiologically based pharmacokinetic (PBPK) modeling related publications and regulatory submissions have risen dramatically in recent years. However, the extent of use of PBPK modeling by researchers, and the public availability of models has not been systematically evaluated. This review evaluates PBPK-related publications to 1) identify the common … Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

3
292
0

Year Published

2016
2016
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
5
3

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 381 publications
(295 citation statements)
references
References 165 publications
3
292
0
Order By: Relevance
“…PBPK models represent a quantitative system that combines human physiology and drug-specific information, in which the impact of physiological changes (including those pertaining to age-dependent development) on drug absorption, distribution, metabolism, and excretion processes can be evaluated. The past decade observed an increased interest in applying PBPK in academic research and drug development (Rowland et al, 2011;Sager et al, 2015). The advent of specialized PBPK platforms further broadens the use of PBPK (Edginton et al, 2006;Johnson et al, 2006Johnson et al, , 2010Edginton and Willmann, 2008;Rowland et al, 2011).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…PBPK models represent a quantitative system that combines human physiology and drug-specific information, in which the impact of physiological changes (including those pertaining to age-dependent development) on drug absorption, distribution, metabolism, and excretion processes can be evaluated. The past decade observed an increased interest in applying PBPK in academic research and drug development (Rowland et al, 2011;Sager et al, 2015). The advent of specialized PBPK platforms further broadens the use of PBPK (Edginton et al, 2006;Johnson et al, 2006Johnson et al, , 2010Edginton and Willmann, 2008;Rowland et al, 2011).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Thus, many dynamic methods, assuming either full or semi PBPK models, have been proposed previously. 4) Their basic concept is to simulate the in vivo levels of a perpetrator and a victim by inputting plural in vitro drug specific parameters as well as predetermined physiological parameters (bottom-up approaches). However, it was a concern that in vitro parameters such as K i, u would have a large bias, and that the plurality of the input parameters would reduce the flexibility of the simulation, making it difficult to achieve an accurate fit of the timedependent plasma victim levels.…”
Section: Traditional Methods For Dynamic Prediction Of Ddimentioning
confidence: 99%
“…13) The AUCR predicted by either a static method [constant unbound inhibitor (I u )-based method] as shown below, or a dynamic method (time-dependent I u -based method) employing physiologically-based pharmacokinetic (PBPK) model, wherein the well-stirred model was applied for the hepatic extraction kinetics, was no more than 5. 4) Typically, the value of AUCR estimated by a well-stirred model-based static method * To whom correspondence should be addressed. e-mail: kiga@dwc.doshisha.ac.jp Table 1.…”
Section: Unusualness Of Ramelteon (Ram)-victimizedmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…The bioavailability of orally administered TDF is estimated at around 25% of the total dose (25), and the bioavailability of 300 mg of orally administered TDF was determined from our simulations (mean Ϯ standard deviation, with minimum and maximum range) as a comparison to further validate the model. As a predetermined measure of success for the model validation, a 0.5-fold difference or less between clinical and predicted pharmacokinetic parameters was deemed acceptably accurate (26,27). Pharmacokinetic parameters were determined by noncompartmental analysis using PK Solutions 2.0 (Summit Research Services, UK).…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%