“…An observation of tissue-plasma partition coefficients being greater than their steady-state values after equilibration and consequently at terminal phase is in agreement with the general statement that V $ > V ss . 1 Hypothetically, the difference between the exactly calculated distribution volumes and the ones obtained by the commonly used equations can be large. For instance, if the parameters were taken as P l-p = 30, P f-p = 0.2, r = 0.55, V = 10 L, and Cl int f u /(rQ) = 5 (keeping the other parameters the same as used to generate Table 1), we would get the exact value of V ss as 74.3 L, whereas the common calculation by Eq.…”
Section: The Accuracy Of the Prediction Of Distribution Volumes By Thmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In general, for a linear pharmacokinetic system, V $ ≥ V ss . 1 A substantial difference between V $ and V ss may indicate a relatively slow kinetics of drug transfer between plasma and peripheral tissues (organs) along with the slower elimination process, which, in turn, leads to a possible substantial delay in reaching the steady state in the body (or in certain organ) compared with plasma. 2 Both V ss and V $ are very complicated parameters determined by the physicochemical properties of the system.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…4 for the terminal volumeof distribution. 1,7 An alternative method to obtain V ss is to calculate it based on the physicochemical properties of a drug, so that according to Eq. 1, it can be written as…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The true value of t 1/2 may be much longer (by an order of magnitude) than that taken as t 1/2 ≈ ln2V ss /Cl because V $ can be much greater than V ss . 1 Formally, the assumption of central elimination embedded in the commonly used Eqs. 3 and 4 is rarely met.…”
“…An observation of tissue-plasma partition coefficients being greater than their steady-state values after equilibration and consequently at terminal phase is in agreement with the general statement that V $ > V ss . 1 Hypothetically, the difference between the exactly calculated distribution volumes and the ones obtained by the commonly used equations can be large. For instance, if the parameters were taken as P l-p = 30, P f-p = 0.2, r = 0.55, V = 10 L, and Cl int f u /(rQ) = 5 (keeping the other parameters the same as used to generate Table 1), we would get the exact value of V ss as 74.3 L, whereas the common calculation by Eq.…”
Section: The Accuracy Of the Prediction Of Distribution Volumes By Thmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In general, for a linear pharmacokinetic system, V $ ≥ V ss . 1 A substantial difference between V $ and V ss may indicate a relatively slow kinetics of drug transfer between plasma and peripheral tissues (organs) along with the slower elimination process, which, in turn, leads to a possible substantial delay in reaching the steady state in the body (or in certain organ) compared with plasma. 2 Both V ss and V $ are very complicated parameters determined by the physicochemical properties of the system.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…4 for the terminal volumeof distribution. 1,7 An alternative method to obtain V ss is to calculate it based on the physicochemical properties of a drug, so that according to Eq. 1, it can be written as…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The true value of t 1/2 may be much longer (by an order of magnitude) than that taken as t 1/2 ≈ ln2V ss /Cl because V $ can be much greater than V ss . 1 Formally, the assumption of central elimination embedded in the commonly used Eqs. 3 and 4 is rarely met.…”
“…bolus administration, significant amounts of these drugs reach peripheral compartment during the initial distribution phase, and slow return to the central compartment limits the speed of drug elimination from the body during the elimination phase (Figures 1 and 3A). For such drugs, volume of distribution changes with time as a function of tissue penetration and binding of the drug [37,38]. In this case, the volume of distribution is initially low (V 1 --volume of the central compartment), increases to the higher value (V SS --steady-state volume) when the steady-state is achieved and reaches the maximum value (V b --terminal volume of distribution) during the elimination phase (linear terminal phase) ( Figure 3B and Table 2).…”
Section: Lack Of Distribution Equilibriummentioning
The Øie-Tozer model can serve for predicting unbound volume of drug distribution for 'classical' small molecular mass drugs with linear pharmacokinetics. However, more detailed mechanism-based distribution models should be used in preclinical and clinical settings for drugs that exhibit more complex pharmacokinetic behavior.
In 1979, the late Dr. Darrell R. Abernethy and colleagues began a series of clinical studies aimed at understanding the pertinent determinants of drug distribution, elimination, and clearance in obesity, and how those variables are interconnected. The studies confirmed that volume of distribution (Vd) and clearance are the principal independent biological variables, which conjointly determine elimination of half‐life as a dependent variable. For drugs distributed by passive diffusion, their pharmacokinetic Vd — after correcting for plasma protein binding — was increased in obesity, depending in part on the physicochemical lipophilicity of the individual drugs, and the quantitative extent of obesity in overweight individuals. Across all studies, the ratio of mean clearance in obese divided by control groups had an overall median value of 1.21 (range, 0.75‐3.11), indicating a small and variable effect of obesity on clearance, without clear directionality. Since drug clearance was not clearly related to lipophilicity or degree of obesity, the prolonged half‐life of lipophilic drugs in patients with obesity was largely explained by the increased Vd. Dr. Abernethy further identified delayed attainment of steady state after initiation of multiple‐dose treatment, and delayed washout after termination of dosage, as potential clinical consequences of the extended half‐life in people with obesity. These consequences for specific drugs have been recently emphasized in contemporary studies of chronic dosage in subjects with obesity. Without data identifying an obesity‐related change in clearance for a specific drug, maintenance doses (in milligrams) should be based on ideal weight rather than adjusted upward on the basis of total weight.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.