4.4 Article

Development of an integrated multi-species and multi-dose route PBPK model for volatile methyl siloxanes-D4 and D5

期刊

REGULATORY TOXICOLOGY AND PHARMACOLOGY
卷 74, 期 -, 页码 S1-S13

出版社

ACADEMIC PRESS INC ELSEVIER SCIENCE
DOI: 10.1016/j.yrtph.2015.12.010

关键词

Octamethylcyclotetrasiloxane; Decamethylcyclopentasiloxane; D4; D5; Siloxane; PBPK; Kinetics; Risk assessment; Cyclic volatile methyl siloxane; Pharmacokinetics; Physiologically based pharmacokinetic model

向作者/读者索取更多资源

There are currently seven published physiologically based pharmacokinetic (PBPK) models describing aspects of the pharmacokinetics of octamethylcyclotetrasiloxane (D4) and decamethylcyclopentasiloxane (D5) for various exposure routes in rat and human. Each model addressed the biological and physicochemical properties of D4 and D5 (highly lipophilic coupled with low blood: air partition coefficient and high liver clearance) that result in unique kinetic behaviors as well differences between D4 and D5. However, the proliferation of these models resulted in challenges for various risk assessment applications when needing to determine the optimum model for estimating dose metrics. To enhance the utility of these PBPK models for risk assessment, we integrated the suite of structures into one coherent model capable of simulating the entire set of existing data equally well as older more limited scope models. In this paper, we describe the steps required to develop this integrated model, the choice of physiological, partitioning and biochemical parameters for the model, and the concordance of the model behavior across key data sets. This integrated model is sufficiently robust to derive relevant dose metrics following individual or combined dermal and inhalation exposures of workers, consumer or the general population to D4 and D5 for route-to-route, interspecies and high to low dose extrapolations for risk assessment. (C) 2015 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Inc.

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

4.4
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