Evidence map›Paper›PMID 20012173›Full record

ArticleJournal of pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics2010

Selection between Michaelis-Menten and target-mediated drug disposition pharmacokinetic models.

Xiaoyu Yan, Donald E Mager, Wojciech Krzyzanski

Abstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics, 2010. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 53 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
53citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

53 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Trial
  7. Trial
  8. Trial
  9. Trial
  10. Trial
  11. Trial
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Xiaoyu YanDepartment of Pharmaceutical Sciences, The State University of New York at Buffalo, 14260, USA.
Donald E Mager
Wojciech Krzyzanski

Funding

MATHEMATICAL MODELS IN PHARMACODYNAMICSR01GM057980 · NIGMS · STATE UNIVERSITY OF NEW YORK AT BUFFALO · PI JUSKO, WILLIAM J., KRZYZANSKI, WOJCIECH · 1998 to 2013
$3.4M
NIGMS NIH HHS R01 GM057980PHS HHS 57980
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Target-mediated drug disposition (TMDD) models have been applied to describe the pharmacokinetics of drugs whose distribution and/or clearance are affected by its target due to high binding affinity and limited capacity. The Michaelis-Menten (M-M) model has also been frequently used to describe the pharmacokinetics of such drugs. The purpose of this study is to investigate conditions for equivalence between M-M and TMDD pharmacokinetic models and provide guidelines for selection between these two approaches. Theoretical derivations were used to determine conditions under which M-M and TMDD pharmacokinetic models are equivalent. Computer simulations and model fitting were conducted to demonstrate these conditions. Typical M-M and TMDD profiles were simulated based on literature data for an anti-CD4 monoclonal antibody (TRX1) and phenytoin administered intravenously. Both models were fitted to data and goodness of fit criteria were evaluated for model selection. A case study of recombinant human erythropoietin was conducted to qualify results. A rapid binding TMDD model is equivalent to the M-M model if total target density R ( tot ) is constant, and R ( tot ) K ( D ) /(K ( D ) + C) ( 2 ) << 1 where K ( D ) represents the dissociation constant and C is the free drug concentration. Under these conditions, M-M parameters are defined as: V ( max ) = k ( int ) R ( tot ) V ( c ) and K ( m ) = K ( D ) where k ( int ) represents an internalization rate constant, and V ( c ) is the volume of the central compartment. R ( tot ) is constant if and only if k ( int ) = k ( deg,) where k ( deg ) is a degradation rate constant. If the TMDD model predictions are not sensitive to k ( int ) or k ( deg ) parameters, the condition of R ( tot ) K ( D ) /(K ( D ) + C) ( 2 ) << 1 alone can preserve the equivalence between rapid binding TMDD and M-M models. The model selection process for drugs that exhibit TMDD should involve a full mechanistic model as well as reduced models. The best model should adequately describe the data and have a minimal set of parameters estimated with acceptable precision.

Indexed as

Nonlinear DynamicsAntibodies, MonoclonalComputer SimulationErythropoietinHumansPhenytoinRecombinant ProteinsAntibodies, MonoclonalErythropoietinPhenytoinRecombinant Proteins

Identifiers

PMID20012173
PMCPMC3157300

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.