Application of physiologically based pharmacokinetic modeling to understand real-world outcomes in patients receiving imatinib for chronic myeloid leukemia.
Josephine A Adattini, Jeffry Adiwidjaja, Annette S Gross, Andrew J McLachlan
{"title":"Application of physiologically based pharmacokinetic modeling to understand real-world outcomes in patients receiving imatinib for chronic myeloid leukemia.","authors":"Josephine A Adattini, Jeffry Adiwidjaja, Annette S Gross, Andrew J McLachlan","doi":"10.1002/prp2.1082","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>We aimed to use physiologically based pharmacokinetic (PBPK) modeling and simulation to predict imatinib steady-state plasma exposure in patients with chronic myeloid leukemia (CML) to investigate variability in outcomes. A validated imatinib PBPK model (Simcyp Simulator) was used to predict imatinib AUC<sub>ss</sub> , C<sub>ss,min</sub> and C<sub>ss,max</sub> for patients with CML (n = 68) from a real-world retrospective observational study. Differences in imatinib exposure were evaluated based on clinical outcomes, (a) Early Molecular Response (EMR) achievement and (b) occurrence of grade ≥3 adverse drug reactions (ADRs), using the Kruskal-Wallis rank sum test. Sensitivity analyses explored the influence of patient characteristics and drug interactions on imatinib exposure. Simulated imatinib exposure was significantly higher in patients who achieved EMR compared to patients who did not (geometric mean AUC<sub>0-24,ss</sub> 51.2 vs. 42.7 μg h mL<sup>-1</sup> , p < 0.05; C<sub>ss,min</sub> 1.1 vs. 0.9 μg mL<sup>-1</sup> , p < 0.05; C<sub>ss,max</sub> 3.4 vs. 2.8 μg mL<sup>-1</sup> , p < 0.05). Patients who experienced grade ≥3 ADRs had a significantly higher simulated imatinib exposure compared to patients who did not (AUC<sub>0-24,ss</sub> 56.1 vs. 45.9 μg h mL<sup>-1</sup> , p < 0.05; C<sub>ss,min</sub> 1.2 vs. 1.0 μg mL<sup>-1</sup> , p < 0.05; C<sub>ss,max</sub> 3.7 vs. 3.0 μg mL<sup>-1</sup> , p < 0.05). Simulations identified a range of patient (sex, age, weight, abundance of hepatic CYP2C8 and CYP3A4, α<sub>1</sub> -acid glycoprotein concentrations, liver and kidney function) and medication-related factors (dose, concomitant CYP2C8 modulators) contributing to the inter-individual variability in imatinib exposure. Relationships between imatinib plasma exposure, EMR achievement and ADRs support the rationale for therapeutic drug monitoring to guide imatinib dosing to achieve optimal outcomes in CML.</p>","PeriodicalId":19948,"journal":{"name":"Pharmacology Research & Perspectives","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.9000,"publicationDate":"2023-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10326685/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Pharmacology Research & Perspectives","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1002/prp2.1082","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PHARMACOLOGY & PHARMACY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
We aimed to use physiologically based pharmacokinetic (PBPK) modeling and simulation to predict imatinib steady-state plasma exposure in patients with chronic myeloid leukemia (CML) to investigate variability in outcomes. A validated imatinib PBPK model (Simcyp Simulator) was used to predict imatinib AUCss , Css,min and Css,max for patients with CML (n = 68) from a real-world retrospective observational study. Differences in imatinib exposure were evaluated based on clinical outcomes, (a) Early Molecular Response (EMR) achievement and (b) occurrence of grade ≥3 adverse drug reactions (ADRs), using the Kruskal-Wallis rank sum test. Sensitivity analyses explored the influence of patient characteristics and drug interactions on imatinib exposure. Simulated imatinib exposure was significantly higher in patients who achieved EMR compared to patients who did not (geometric mean AUC0-24,ss 51.2 vs. 42.7 μg h mL-1 , p < 0.05; Css,min 1.1 vs. 0.9 μg mL-1 , p < 0.05; Css,max 3.4 vs. 2.8 μg mL-1 , p < 0.05). Patients who experienced grade ≥3 ADRs had a significantly higher simulated imatinib exposure compared to patients who did not (AUC0-24,ss 56.1 vs. 45.9 μg h mL-1 , p < 0.05; Css,min 1.2 vs. 1.0 μg mL-1 , p < 0.05; Css,max 3.7 vs. 3.0 μg mL-1 , p < 0.05). Simulations identified a range of patient (sex, age, weight, abundance of hepatic CYP2C8 and CYP3A4, α1 -acid glycoprotein concentrations, liver and kidney function) and medication-related factors (dose, concomitant CYP2C8 modulators) contributing to the inter-individual variability in imatinib exposure. Relationships between imatinib plasma exposure, EMR achievement and ADRs support the rationale for therapeutic drug monitoring to guide imatinib dosing to achieve optimal outcomes in CML.
我们的目的是使用基于生理的药代动力学(PBPK)建模和模拟来预测慢性髓性白血病(CML)患者的伊马替尼稳态血浆暴露,以研究结果的变异性。通过验证的伊马替尼PBPK模型(Simcyp Simulator)来预测CML患者(n = 68)的伊马替尼AUCss、Css、min和Css、max。使用Kruskal-Wallis秩和检验,根据临床结果(a)早期分子反应(EMR)的实现和(b)≥3级药物不良反应(adr)的发生来评估伊马替尼暴露的差异。敏感性分析探讨了患者特征和药物相互作用对伊马替尼暴露的影响。模拟伊马替尼暴露在患者明显高于EMR相比,患者没有(几何平均数AUC0-24,党卫军51.2 vs 42.7μg h mL-1 p党卫军,最小1.1 vs 0.9μg mL-1 p党卫军,最大3.4 vs 2.8μg mL-1 p 0-24,党卫军56.1 vs 45.9μg h mL-1 p党卫军,最小1.2 vs 1.0μg mL-1 p党卫军,最大3.7 vs 3.0μg mL-1 p浓度1酸性糖蛋白,肝脏和肾脏功能)和与药物因素(剂量,伴随CYP2C8调节剂)导致伊马替尼暴露的个体间变异性。伊马替尼血浆暴露、EMR实现和不良反应之间的关系支持治疗药物监测的基本原理,以指导伊马替尼给药,以实现CML的最佳结果。
期刊介绍:
PR&P is jointly published by the American Society for Pharmacology and Experimental Therapeutics (ASPET), the British Pharmacological Society (BPS), and Wiley. PR&P is a bi-monthly open access journal that publishes a range of article types, including: target validation (preclinical papers that show a hypothesis is incorrect or papers on drugs that have failed in early clinical development); drug discovery reviews (strategy, hypotheses, and data resulting in a successful therapeutic drug); frontiers in translational medicine (drug and target validation for an unmet therapeutic need); pharmacological hypotheses (reviews that are oriented to inform a novel hypothesis); and replication studies (work that refutes key findings [failed replication] and work that validates key findings). PR&P publishes papers submitted directly to the journal and those referred from the journals of ASPET and the BPS