4.6 Article

Prospective Prediction of Dapaconazole Clinical Drug-Drug Interactions Using an In Vitro to In Vivo Extrapolation Equation and PBPK Modeling

期刊

PHARMACEUTICALS
卷 16, 期 1, 页码 -

出版社

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/ph16010028

关键词

dapaconazole; cytochrome P450; inhibition; in vitro evaluation; human liver microsomes; IVIVE; PBPK model

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This study used static and dynamic approaches to predict dapaconazole clinical drug-drug interactions (DDIs) on main Cytochrome P450 (CYP) isoenzymes. The in vitro inhibition of dapaconazole on various CYP450 isoenzymes was evaluated, and a PBPK model was developed for humans. The analysis suggested that dapaconazole is a weak to strong inhibitor of different CYP isoenzymes depending on the clinical scenario.
This study predicted dapaconazole clinical drug-drug interactions (DDIs) over the main Cytochrome P450 (CYP) isoenzymes using static (in vitro to in vivo extrapolation equation, IVIVE) and dynamic (PBPK model) approaches. The in vitro inhibition of main CYP450 isoenzymes by dapaconazole in a human liver microsome incubation medium was evaluated. A dapaconazole PBPK model (Simcyp version 20) in dogs was developed and qualified using observed data and was scaled up for humans. Static and dynamic models to predict DDIs following current FDA guidelines were applied. The in vitro dapaconazole inhibition was observed for all isoforms investigated, including CYP1A2 (IC50 of 3.68 mu M), CYP2A6 (20.7 mu M), 2C8 (104.1 mu M), 2C9 (0.22 mu M), 2C19 (0.05 mu M), 2D6 (0.87 mu M), and 3A4 (0.008-0.03 mu M). The dynamic (PBPK) and static DDI mechanistic model-based analyses suggest that dapaconazole is a weak inhibitor (AUCR > 1.25 and <2) of CYP1A2 and CYP2C9, a moderate inhibitor (AUCR > 2 and <5) of CYP2C8 and CYP2D6, and a strong inhibitor (AUCR >= 5) of CYP2C19 and CYP3A, considering a clinical scenario. The results presented may be a useful guide for future in vivo and clinical dapaconazole studies.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据