4.1 Review

Organs-on-a-chip: Current applications and consideration points for in vitro ADME-Tox studies

期刊

DRUG METABOLISM AND PHARMACOKINETICS
卷 33, 期 1, 页码 49-54

出版社

JAPANESE SOC STUDY XENOBIOTICS
DOI: 10.1016/j.dmpk.2018.01.003

关键词

Cell-based assay; Organs-on-a-chip; ADME-Tox; Drug discovery; Safety assessment; Standardization; Inter-organ network; Enterohepatic circulation; Gut-liver axis

资金

  1. Japan Agency for Medical Research and Development, AMED [17ak0101073j1001, 17bk0104075j0001]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Assay systems using in vitro cultured cells are increasingly applied for evaluation of the efficacy, safety, and toxicity of drug candidates. In vitro cell-based assays have two main applications in the drug discovery process: searching for a compound that is effective against the target disease (seed investigation) and confirmation of safety during use of the identified compounds (safety assessment). Currently available in vitro cell-based assays have been designed to evaluate the efficacy and toxicity in single organs, but the in vivo pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of the administered drug candidates have not been considered. Thus, an evaluation system that interconnects cell culture units, one of which has appropriate drug metabolism activities and the other assesses the efficacy and toxicity of compounds, is needed. Accordingly, the in vitro ADME-Tox culture system known as organs-on-a-chip has been proposed. In this review, after introducing the organs-on-a-chip system, the evaluation of enterohepatic circulation and the gut-liver axis relationship will be presented as an example of the application of the organs-on-a-chip system for ADME studies based on inter-organ network. Additionally, the functions required for the organs-on-a-chip system and the necessity of standardization of cells mounted on the chip system will be discussed. (c) 2018 The Japanese Society for the Study of Xenobiotics. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

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

4.1
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