4.2 Review

Human-on-a-chip design strategies and principles for physiologically based pharmacokinetics/pharmacodynamics modeling

Journal

INTEGRATIVE BIOLOGY
Volume 7, Issue 4, Pages 383-391

Publisher

ROYAL SOC CHEMISTRY
DOI: 10.1039/c4ib00292j

Keywords

-

Categories

Funding

  1. National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences at the National Institutes of Health [UH2TR000156-01]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Advances in maintaining multiple human tissues on microfluidic platforms has led to a growing interest in the development of microphysiological systems for drug development studies. Determination of the proper design principles and scaling rules for body-on-a-chip systems is critical for their strategic incorporation into physiologically based pharmacokinetic (PBPK)/pharmacodynamic (PD) model-aided drug development. While the need for a functional design considering organ-organ interactions has been considered, robust design criteria and steps to build such systems have not yet been defined mathematically. In this paper, we first discuss strategies for incorporating body-on-a-chip technology into the current PBPK modeling-based drug discovery to provide a conceptual model. We propose two types of platforms that can be involved in the different stages of PBPK modeling and drug development; these are mu Organs-on-a-chip and mu Human-on-a-chip. Then we establish the design principles for both types of systems and develop parametric design equations that can be used to determine dimensions and operating conditions. In addition, we discuss the availability of the critical parameters required to satisfy the design criteria, consider possible limitations for estimating such parameter values and propose strategies to address such limitations. This paper is intended to be a useful guide to the researchers focused on the design of microphysiological platforms for PBPK/PD based drug discovery.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.2
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available