DOCSLIB.ORG

Modelling the Genesis and Treatment of Cancer: the Potential 5 Role of Physiologically Based Pharmacodynamics

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Modelling the Genesis and Treatment of Cancer: the Potential 5 Role of Physiologically Based Pharmacodynamics EUROPEANJOURNALOFCANCER46 (2010) 21– 32 available at www.sciencedirect.com journal homepage: www.ejconline.com Position Paper Modelling the genesis and treatment of cancer: The potential 5 role of physiologically based pharmacodynamics Jean-Louis Steimer a, Svein G. Dahl b, Dinesh P. De Alwis c, Ursula Gundert-Remy d, Mats O. Karlsson e, Jirina Martinkova f, Leon Aarons g,*, Hans-Ju¨ rgen Ahr h, Jean Clairambault i, Gilles Freyer j, Lena E. Friberg e, Steven E. Kern k, Annette Kopp-Schneider l, Wolf-Dieter Ludwig m, Giuseppe De Nicolao n, Maurizio Rocchetti o,In˜ aki F. Troconiz p a Novartis Pharma AG, Basel, Switzerland b Department of Pharmacology, Institute of Medical Biology, University of Tromsø, Norway c Eli Lilly & Company, Surrey, UK d Bundesinstitut fu¨ r Risikobewertung, Berlin, Germany e Uppsala University, Uppsala, Sweden f Charles University of Prague, Faculty of Medicine in Hradec Kralove, Hradec Kralove, Czech Republic g University of Manchester, Manchester, United Kingdom h Bayer Health Care, Leverkusen, Germany i INRIA, Paris, France j Medical Oncology Unit, Centre Hospitalier Lyon-Sud, Pierre-Be´nite, France k College of Pharmacy, University of Utah, USA l Department of Biostatistics, German Cancer Research Center, Heidelberg, Germany m Robert-Ro¨ssle-Klinik Oncology and Tumorimmunology, Berlin-Buch, Germany n Department of Computer Engineering and Systems Science, University of Pavia, Pavia, Italy o Accelera, Milan, Italy p Departamento de Farmacia y Tecnologı´aFarmace´utica, University Navarra, Pamplona, Spain ARTICLE INFO ABSTRACT Article history: Physiologically based modelling of pharmacodynamics/toxicodynamics requires an a priori Received 16 April 2009 knowledge on the underlying mechanisms causing toxicity or causing the disease. In the Received in revised form 30 context of cancer, the objective of the expert meeting was to discuss the molecular under- September 2009 standing of the disease, modelling approaches used so far to describe the process, preclin- Accepted 9 October 2009 ical models of cancer treatment and to evaluate modelling approaches developed based on Available online 1 December 2009 improved knowledge. 5 This paper is based in part on discussions at a COST B25 expert meeting held in Prague, Czech Republic, on 20–21st September 2007. Participating experts were Leon Aarons (UK), Hans-Ju¨ rgen Ahr (Germany), Jean Clairambault (France), Svein G. Dahl (Norway), Dinesh De Alwis (UK), Gilles Freyer (France), Lena Friberg (Sweden), Ursula Gundert Remy (Germany), Steve Kern (US), Anette Kopp-Schneider (Germany), Wolf-Dieter Ludwig (Germany), Jirina Martinkova (Czech Republic), Maurizio Rocchetti (Italy), Giuseppe De Nicolao (Italy), Jean-Louis Steimer (Switzerland), In˜ aki F. Troconiz (Spain). * Corresponding author: Address: University of Manchester, School of Pharmacy and Pharmaceutical Sciences, Oxford Road, M13 9PL Manchester, United Kingdom. Tel.: +44 161 275 2357; fax: +44 161 275 2396. E-mail address: [email protected] (L. Aarons). 0959-8049/$ - see front matter Ó 2009 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. doi:10.1016/j.ejca.2009.10.011 22 EUROPEANJOURNALOFCANCER46 (2010) 21– 32 Molecular events in cancerogenesis can be detected using ‘omics’ technology, a tool applied Keywords: in experimental carcinogenesis, but also for diagnostics and prognosis. The molecular Pharmacokinetics understanding forms the basis for new drugs, for example targeting protein kinases specif- Pharmacodynamics ically expressed in cancer. At present, empirical preclinical models of tumour growth are in Physiologically based modelling great use as the development of physiological models is cost and resource intensive. Cancerogenesis Although a major challenge in PKPD modelling in oncology patients is the complexity of Cancer therapeutics the system, based in part on preclinical models, successful models have been constructed Physiologically based models describing the mechanism of action and providing a tool to establish levels of biomarker Molecular mechanisms associated with efficacy and assisting in defining biologically effective dose range selection Intracellular pharmacokinetics– for first dose in man. To follow the concentration in the tumour compartment enables to pharmacodynamics link kinetics and dynamics. In order to obtain a reliable model of tumour growth dynamics Preclinical models and drug effects, specific aspects of the modelling of the concentration–effect relationship in cancer treatment that need to be accounted for include: the physiological/circadian rhythms of the cell cycle; the treatment with combinations and the need to optimally choose appropriate combinations of the multiple agents to study; and the schedule depen- dence of the response in the clinical situation. Ó 2009 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. 1. Introduction 2. Biological mechanisms of cancerogenesis Physiologically based pharmacokinetic models are designed 2.1. Molecular events in cancerogenesis to represent the human body and its physiology. The models allow the implementation of age- and disease-dependent In the traditional approach, the evaluation of the toxic prop- physiological changes enabling simulations and predictions erties of substances is based on phenotypic pathological of the kinetics under special circumstances which are exper- and histopathological characterisation of responses after imentally hardly accessible, e.g. in internal organs such as the exposure which does not allow insight into the underlying liver, and in special ages such as preterm babies. Up to now, toxic mechanism. In recent years, toxicogenomic techniques there are not many examples of a similar approach used to have been used to support the interpretation of the pheno- describe the dynamic part of the relationship between dose typic results by mode of action considerations. Furthermore, and observed effects. Models for pharmacodynamic/toxicody- gene expression techniques using microarrays have been ap- namic effect require a priori knowledge of the mechanistic ba- plied in toxicological studies with the aim of classifying sis of the disease process and at which step in the chain of chemicals using biomarkers based on gene expression 1 events the drug acts. The objective of the expert meeting changes. If the mode of action is understood and can be cap- was, in the context of cancer, to discuss the developments tured in a set of biomarkers, the detection of molecular events in: the molecular understanding of the disease process’ in would allow the prediction of selected toxic effects. Currently, the modelling approaches used so far to describe the disease the carcinogenic potential of chemicals is evaluated with ro- processes; preclinical models of cancer treatment; and thera- dent life time bioassays, which are time consuming and peutic options which have been recently developed based on expensive with respect to cost, number of animals and the improved understanding of the underlying processes. amount of compound required. Since the results of these 2- Thus, the meeting brought together experts involved in eval- year bioassays are not known until late during development uating and modelling steps in carcinogenesis, in the pharma- of new chemical entities, including drugs, and since the short ceutical development of new oncology agents or in the time test battery to assess genotoxicity, a characteristic of therapy of cancer. The discussions among the participants genotoxic carcinogens, is hampered by low specificity, the provided new insight into the contribution of physiologically identification of early biomarkers would be a big step forward. based modelling of pharmacodynamics to current and future Gene expression profiling on Affymetrix arrays has been cancer treatment. used to investigate the molecular events leading to a carcino- 2,3 The manuscript is organised as follows. In the first two genic response in rats. In a first study male rats were dosed sections the molecular basis of cancerogenesis, diagnosis with the genotoxic hepatocarcinogen N-nitrosomorpholine and treatment intervention together with their respective for 7 weeks followed by a treatment-free observation period 4 modelling approaches are presented. Section 4 describes of up to 50 weeks. Already shortly after start of the treat- how modelling and simulation is currently contributing to ment, significant alterations of various genes were observed, many stages and aspects in anticancer drug development: which belong to reasonable mechanistic pathways. Extension preclinical tumour growth models; management of drug (hae- of the observation period did not add much further informa- 5 mo-) toxicity; intra-tumour pharmacokinetics; physiological tion. Therefore, the study duration was limited to 14 d for aspects of tumour cells and predicting outcomes from drug further mechanistic studies and for the selection of early bio- combinations. markers. In a series of short-term in vivo studies, it was inves- EUROPEANJOURNALOFCANCER46 (2010) 21– 32 23 tigated whether carcinogens at doses known to induce liver set of independent validation compound profiles with up to tumours in the 2-year rat bioassay alter the expression of 88% accuracy. This may be considered as a proof of the con- characteristic sets of genes and whether these genes repre- cept that a classification of carcinogens based on short-term sent defined biological pathways. Male rats were dosed with studies is feasible.7 The usefulness of this approach has also five genotoxic and five non-genotoxic hepatocarcinogens.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • The Role of Modelling and Simulation in Drug Development
    The Role of Modelling and Simulation in Drug Development Leon Aarons Manchester Pharmacy School The University of Manchester Plan • Overview • Role of modelling in Phase I drug development • Role of modelling in the development of anti- cancer agents • Summary Models The type of model to be developed should be driven by the available information and the goal of the simulations Category Information Goal needed Explanatory Rich Extrapolation in complex and Mechanistic variable environment models Semi-mechanistic models Empirical Interpolation in Descriptive models “Poor” simple and stable environment Days Months Years 100 10 12tt C() t C12 e C e 1 concentration 0.1 0.01 0 2 4 6 8 10 time k12 1 2 k21 k10 dC() t V1 kVCt()()() kVCt kVCt 1dt 1211 1011 2122 dC() t V2 k V C()() t k V C t 2dt 12 1 1 21 2 2 PBPK MODEL dC() t KpV out, H QCtQC ()().() tCLKpC t H Hdt H A H out, H int H out , H Role of Modelling and Simulation in Phase I Drug Development L. Aarons, M. Karlsson, F. Mentré, F. Rombout, J.-L. Steimer, A. van Peer COST B15 Brussels January 10-11, 2000 Eur.J.Pharm.Sci. 13, 115-122 (2001) COST European COoperation in the Field of Scientific and Technical Research Definition of Phase I • Phase I is the transition Phase from preclinical to clinical evaluation •Learning process primarily focused on: - Safety (Tolerability) - PK/PD - Metabolism - Potential interactions (drugs/food) - Dosage form development (equivalence) Phase I Safety ¥ Tolerability Data • FIM and S/MD study wide dose range • Escalation design • Healthy subjects
    [Show full text]
  • Real Projects with Real Impacts Dave Handelsman, Project Data Sphere, LLC, Cary, NC, USA
    PhUSE US Connect 2019 Paper AB06 The Power of Data Sharing: Real Projects with Real Impacts Dave Handelsman, Project Data Sphere, LLC, Cary, NC, USA ABSTRACT Data sharing leading to improved cancer patient outcomes provides exciting examples of applying Big Data and Analytics to clinical research. Since 2014, Project Data Sphere has aggregated patient-level data from more than 135,000 patients spanning 150 trials, and made this data available for exploration and investigation to more than 2,000 researchers. This successful data sharing program has enabled medically relevant insights to be discovered and published in leading peer-accepted journals, and new research programs are underway, including: • Development of an external control arm for small cell lung cancer that may eliminate the need to enroll cancer patients in standard-of-care comparator treatment arms • Development of machine learning tools for tumor image processing • Investigations into rare but serious adverse events associated with new of immuno-oncology therapies In this session, the opportunities and challenges of clinical trial data sharing will be discussed as they relate to Big Data and Analytics. INTRODUCTION Data sharing has broad meaning, even when discussed in the context of clinical research. Depending on the context, this concept can refer to the sharing of patient-level data traditionally associated with clinical trials, or it can alternatively (or additionally) refer to less traditional data types such as genomics and images, and can also refer to data extracted from electronic health records. For the purposes of this paper, data sharing will be discussed in the context of data made available from completed clinical trials.
    [Show full text]
  • Hierarchical Mechanistic Modelling of Clinical Pharmacokinetic Data
    Hierarchical mechanistic modelling of clinical pharmacokinetic data A thesis submitted to the University of Manchester for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in the Faculty of Medical and Human Sciences 2015 Thierry Wendling Manchester Pharmacy School Contents List of Figures ........................................................................................................ 6 List of Tables .......................................................................................................... 9 List of abbreviations ............................................................................................ 10 Abstract ................................................................................................................ 13 Declaration ........................................................................................................... 14 Copyright ............................................................................................................. 14 Acknowledgements .............................................................................................. 15 Chapter 1: General introduction ...................................................................... 16 1.1. Modelling and simulation in drug development ........................................ 17 1.1.1. The drug development process .......................................................... 17 1.1.2. The role of pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic modelling in drug development ..................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Drug Structure–Transport Relationships
    J Pharmacokinet Pharmacodyn (2010) 37:541–573 DOI 10.1007/s10928-010-9174-0 Drug structure–transport relationships Michael S. Roberts Received: 10 August 2010 / Accepted: 22 October 2010 / Published online: 24 November 2010 Ó The Author(s) 2010. This article is published with open access at Springerlink.com Abstract Malcolm Rowland has greatly facilitated an understanding of drug structure–pharmacokinetic relationships using a physiological perspective. His view points, covering a wide range of activities, have impacted on my own work and on my appreciation and understanding of our science. This overview summarises some of our parallel activities, beginning with Malcolm’s work on the pH control of amphetamine excretion, his work on the disposition of aspirin and on the application of clearance concepts in describing the disposition of lidocaine. Malcolm also spent a considerable amount of time developing principles that define solute structure and transport/pharmacokinetic relationships using in situ organ studies, which he then extended to involve the whole body. Together, we developed a physiological approach to studying hepatic clearance, introducing the convection–dispersion model in which there was a spread in blood transit times through the liver accompanied by permeation into hepatocytes and removal by metabolism or excretion into the bile. With a range of colleagues, we then further developed the model and applied it to various organs in the body. One of Malcolm’s special interests was in being able to apply this knowledge, together with an understanding of physiological differences in scaling up pharmacokinetics from animals to man. The description of his many other activities, such as the development of clearance concepts, application of pharmacokinetics to the clinical situation and using Based on an invited presentation at the European Pharmaceutical Sciences Meeting: Pharmacokinetics: Spearheading advances and delivering the science (on the occasion of Professor Malcolm Rowland’s 70th birthday) London, October 5, 2009.
    [Show full text]
  • Page | 1 Tuesday 7 June 14:00-18:00 Registration at the Conference
    Tuesday 7 June 14:00-18:00 Registration at the Conference Venue 19:30-21:00 Welcome reception Wednesday 8 June 08:00-08:45 Registration 08:45-09:00 Welcome and Introduction Chair: Oscar Della Pasqua, 09:00-10:20 Immune response to drug treatment and immunotherapy Dinesh De Alwis A biological perspective on immune response to drug treatment 09:00-09:40 Nigel Klein (intended and unintended effects) Intricate PK and PD for the novel immunocytokine CEA-IL2v and their 09:40-10:00 Hans Peter Grimm pre-clinical to clinical translation Investigation of anti-CTLA-4 immuno-oncology therapy through a 10:00-10:20 Kirill Peskov quantitative systems pharmacology model 10:20-11:40 Coffee break, Poster and Software session I Posters in Group I (with poster numbers starting with I-) are accompanied by their presenter 11:40-12:20 Systems pharmacology Chair: Charlotte Kloft 11:40-12:00 Kapil Gadkar A Six-Stage Workflow for Robust Application of Systems Pharmacology The zebrafish as model for translational systems pharmacology: 12:00-12:20 Rob van Wijk expanding the allometric scale in vertebrates with five orders of magnitude 12:20-13:50 Lunch Chair: Leon Aarons, Shasha 13:50-15:05 Growth (I) Jumbe Introduction to the Gates' Healthy Birth, Growth & Development 13:50-14:05 Shasha Jumbe knowledge integration project 14:05-14:45 Louise Ryan Trajectory modelling based on early childhood longitudinal growth data Page | 1 Determinants for physical growth patterns in low- and middle-income 14:45-15:05 Niclas Jonsson countries 15:05-15:10 Announcement of WCoP 2016
    [Show full text]
  • J Samuel Pérez-Blanco, Pharm.D, Phd Avda. Licenciado
    J Samuel Pérez-Blanco, Pharm.D, PhD Avda. Licenciado Méndez Nieto sn Full Assistant Professor Pharmacokinetics 37003 Salamanca, Spain Tel: +34 677584202 Last update: June 26th, 2019 [email protected] PROFESSIONAL EXPERIENCE Oct 2018 Assistant Professor of pharmacokinetics at Pharmacy and Pharmaceutical Currently Technology, Science Department, University of Salamanca, Spain Application and development of new methodologies of Pharmacokinetic/Pharmacodinamic in approve drugs Pharmacy and Master Degree lecturer Supervision of undergraduate, graduate and PhD students (pharmacokinetics) Jul 2016 Research Scientist in Pharmacometrics Department at Janssen Pharmaceutica Sep 2018 (Johnson & Jonhson), Beerse, Belgium Pharmacokinetic/Pharmacodinamic M&S activities Drug development in clinical phases using mechanistic-based M&S New Drug Approval portfolios (NDA) to regulatory agencies (FDA, EMA, etc.) Oct 2010 Assistant Professor of pharmacokinetics at Pharmacy and Pharmaceutical Jul 2016 Technology, Science Department, University of Salamanca, Spain Research project supervision of pharmacy students in final year Demonstration, seminars and classes of biopharmaceutics & pharmacokinetics Development of education and training material and course organization Virtual training in pharmaceutical care and laboratory inspection (Second Life) Research fields: population pharmacokinetics (model building, evaluation, simulations), therapeutic drug monitoring, analytical methods Nov 2013 Head researcher of pharmacometrics sub-study of GEL-R-COMP 13
    [Show full text]
  • Development of a Novel Simplified PBPK Absorption Model to Explain the Higher Relative Bioavailability of the OROS® Formulation of Oxybutynin
    The AAPS Journal ( # 2016) DOI: 10.1208/s12248-016-9965-3 Research Article Development of a Novel Simplified PBPK Absorption Model to Explain the Higher Relative Bioavailability of the OROS® Formulation of Oxybutynin Andrés Olivares-Morales,1,2,5 Avijit Ghosh,3 Leon Aarons,1 and Amin Rostami-Hodjegan1,4 Received 27 April 2016; accepted 21 July 2016 Abstract. A new minimal Segmented Transit and Absorption model (mSAT) model has been recently proposed and combined with intrinsic intestinal effective permeability (Peff,int) to predict the regional gastrointestinal (GI) absorption (fabs) of several drugs. Herein, this model was extended and applied for the prediction of oral bioavailability and pharmacoki- netics of oxybutynin and its enantiomers to provide a mechanistic explanation of the higher relative bioavailability observed for oxybutynin’s modified-release OROS® formulation compared to its immediate-release (IR) counterpart. The expansion of the model involved the incorporation of mechanistic equations for the prediction of release, transit, dissolution, permeation and first-pass metabolism. The predicted pharmacokinetics of oxybutynin enantiomers after oral administration for both the IR and OROS® formulations were in close agreement with the observed data. The predicted absolute bioavailability for the IR formulation was within 5% of the observed value, and the model adequately predicted the higher relative bioavailability observed for the OROS® formulation vs. the IR counterpart. From the model predictions, it can be noticed that the higher bioavailability observed for the OROS® formulation was mainly attributable to differences in the intestinal availability (FG) rather than due to a higher colonic fabs, thus confirming previous hypotheses. The predicted fabs was almost 70% lower for the OROS® formulation compared to the IR formulation, whereas the FG was almost eightfold higher than in the IR formulation.
    [Show full text]
  • Curriculum Vitae
    Curriculum Vitae PERSONAL INFORMATION Leon Aarons WORK EXPERIENCE March 1976- Present Professor The University of Manchester (United Kingdom) Researcher and teacher in the areas of pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics EDUCATION AND TRAINING September 1971-December 1973 PhD The University of Manchester (United Kingdom) PhD in Theoretical Chemistry ADDITIONAL INFORMATION Expertise Pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic modelling; population pharmacokinetic modellingt; optimal design of pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic clinical trials; physiologically based pharmacokinetic modelling; drug absorption modelling Publications S.Y.A. Cheung, T. Rodgers, L. Aarons, I. Gueorguieva, G.L. Dickinson, S. Murby, C. Brown, B. Collins, M. Rowland, Whole body physiologically based modelling of -blockers in the rat: events in tissues and plasma following an i.v. bolus dose, Br J Pharmacol DOI:10.1111/bph.14071 (2017). Y.T. Patel, V.M. Daryani, P. Patel, D. Zhou, J. Fangusaro, D.J. Carlile, P.D. Martin, L Aarons, C.F. Stewart, 'Population pharmacokinetics of selumetinib and its metabolite N-desmethyl-selumetinib in adult patients with advanced solid tumors and children with low-grade gliomas CPT Pharmacometrics Syst Pharmacol 6, 305-314 (2017). S.C. Goulooze, S. Völler, P.A.J. Völitalo, E.A.M. Calvier, L. Aarons, E.H.J. Krekels, C.A.J. Knibbe, The influence of normalization weight in population pharmacokinetic covariate models, Clin Pharmacokinet DOI:10.1007/s40262-018-0652-7 (2018). C. Imholt,| T. Abdulla,| A. Stevens,| P. Edwards,| J. Jacob, D. Woods, E. Rogers, L. Aarons, D. Segelcke, Establishment and validation of microsampling techniques in wild rodents for ecotoxicological research, Appl Toxicol DOI: 10.1002/jat.3635 (2018). E.C.
    [Show full text]
  • PBPK) Models of Methyl-Tertiary Butyl Ether (MTBE
    ABSTRACT SMITH, NIKKI SHAVON. A Comparison of Physiologically-Based Pharmacokinetic (PBPK) Models of Methyl-Tertiary Butyl Ether (MTBE). (Under the direction of Hien T. Tran and Marina V. Evans.) Methyl-tertiary-butyl ether (MTBE) is a gasoline additive that gained widespread use after the passage of the Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990 designed to help reduce urban air pollution and toxic air emissions. Reports of water contamination and adverse health affects from inhalation exposure to MTBE also grew. We review MTBE carcinogenicity studies conducted in rodents and complete physiologically-based pharmacokinetic (PBPK) inhalation model comparisons, parameter estimation, and an assessment of design elements that help fit available human data. PBPK models are mathematical constructs that consider different organs and tis- sues as compartments and make it possible to obtain a quantitative characterization of concentration-time profiles in the respective compartments. We specifically test a hypothesis whether complexity should be added to the lung compartment for substances with a large blood:air partition coefficient. Further, since rats exposed to MTBE exhibited renal tumors, we consider metabolism as a mode of action for that endpoint and we include a kidney metabolism pathway, which is generally not used in PBPK models, in our model. Finally, we use sensitivity analysis and model validation and comparison techniques to assess the lung complexity hypothesis, draw conclusions about the inclusion of the kidney metabolism pathway, and drive model design iterations by removing parameters, and thus, metabolism pathways that are not significant to the models’ results. Initial model analysis outcomes indicate that model simplicity prevails and adding lung complexity for the test case high blood:air partition coefficient substance (in this case MTBE’s metabolite, tert-Butyl-alcohol) is not desirable.
    [Show full text]
  • Population Modelling
    ® 1999 Elsevier Science B.V, All rights reserved. Variability in Human Drug Response 239 G.T. Tucker, Editor Population Modelling Leon Aarons School of Pharmacy and Pharmaceutical Sciences, University of Manchester, Manchester, U.K. ABSTRACT Frequently dosing recommendations that emerge from a clinical drug development program are found inappropriate and when individual dose adjustment is needed, the recommendations provided may not be informative enough to allow the adjustment to be undertaken in an optimal manner. Frequently, and particularly in the later stages of drug development, only relatively sparse observational concentration and effect data are available. Recently developed statistical methods offer the possibility of gaining integrated information on pharmacokinetics and response from such data, obtained directly in patients who are being treated with the drug under development. The methods allow the incorporation of data from patient groups which are often excluded from classically designed clinical trials and also the analysis of a variety of unbalanced designs that frequently arise in the evaluation of dose or concentration- efficacy and -safety profiles, which do not readily lend themselves to other forms of statistical analysis. The analysis of sparse observational data, which is called the population approach, has been implemented in phase in studies to obtain additional information about the PK/PD model. However, the primary purpose of phase III clinical trials generally is not PK/PD and consequently population PK/PD studies must be carefully interwoven with existing protocols. Key words: drug development, pharmacokinetics, pharmacodynamics, sparse data. Correspondence: Leon Aarons, School of Pharmacy and Pharmaceutical Sciences, University of Manchester, Manchester M13 9PL, U.K., Tel: 444-161-275-2357, Fax: +44-161-275-2396, Email: [email protected] INTRODUCTION Pharmacokinetics, from the literal Greek meaning of the name, is the study of drug movement in the body.
    [Show full text]
  • A Workshop, Presenting the Basic Concepts and Applications of Pharmacokinetics in the Pharmaceutical, Clinical, and Veterinary S
    A 5-day Workshop, taught by leading experts, MAIN ORGANISER APPLICATION FORM presenting the basic concepts of pharmacokinetics with pharmaceutical and clinical applications. MALCOLM ROWLAND or apply online www.pkworkshops.com For Whom Intended Pharmaceutical scientists, Malcolm Rowland is Professor Emeritus Name _________________________________ pharmacologists and other scientists, pharmacists, and (Pharmacy), and member, Centre for Applied (Dr/Ms/Mr/..) First name Surname/Family name physicians wishing to understand and apply Pharmacokinetic Research, University of pharmacokinetic principles in drug selection, drug Manchester, England. His main research interests development, protocol design, drug evaluation, drug are in the physiological basis of pharmacokinetics Occupation registration and in the establishment of dosage and its application to drug discovery, development ___________________________________________ regimens. Emphasis is placed on relating pharmaco- and use. He is the author of over 300 research Institution or Company kinetics to underlying physiological processes, with a articles, reviews and book chapters. Together with ___________________________________________ brief introduction to pharmacodynamics. Only Dr. T.N. Tozer, Professor Rowland has written Department limited exposure to pharmacokinetics is assumed. Introduction to Pharmacokinetics and ___________________________________________ Workshop Content The Workshop is divided into Pharmacodynamics: The Quantitative Basis of lectures and associated small group workshops,
    [Show full text]
  • Page | 1 Tuesday June 10 18.30-20.00 Registration at The
    Tuesday June 10 18.30-20.00 Registration at the Cruise Terminal 20.30-22.30 Welcome reception at the Santísima Trinidad located in front of Hotel Melia Wednesday June 11 08:00-08:45 Registration 08:45-09:00 Welcome and Introduction Chair: Leon Aarons and Panos 09:00-10:20 OrBiTo and Mechanistic absorption modelling Macheras Amin Rostami- OrBiTo - translating mechanistic knowledge on absorption into predictive 09:00-09:40 Hodjegan models Benjamin Mechanism-based modelling of gastric emptying and bile release in response 09:40-10:00 Guiastrennec to caloric intake Andrés An in silico physiologically-based pharmacokinetic (PBPK) study of the impact 10:00-10:20 Olivares- of the drug release rate on oral absorption, gut wall metabolism and relative Morales bioavailability 10:20-11:50 Coffee break, Poster and Software session I Posters in Group I (with poster numbers starting with I-) are accompanied by their presenter 11:50-12:40 Facilitating Modelling and Simulation Chair: Charlotte Kloft Development of Virtual Population for a Quantitative Systems Pharmacology 11:50-12:10 Kapil Gadkar model 12:10-12:30 Maciej Swat PharmML 1.0 – An Exchange Standard for Models in Pharmacometrics Marc 12:30-12:40 Proposal for a Web-Based Open Pharmacometrics Curriculum Gastonguay 12:40-14:10 Lunch 14:10-15:10 Model-based individualisation Chair: Nick Holford Pierre 14:10-14:50 Implementing model-based individualization in the clinic Marquet Page | 1 Núria Buil A step forward toward personalised medicine in oncology: Population 14:50-15:10 Bruna modelling for
    [Show full text]