RE: Intra-species PK scaling from adults to infantsfor antibody drugs
Huadong,
Just to clarify - basal metabolic rate scaling with wt^3/4 across species is a
well supported finding based on observations from as far back as the 1930's (a
good review of the early work available in most medical libraries is: Kleiber
M. 1947. Body size and metabolic rate. Physiological Reviews, 27: 511-41). The
explanation of this 'fourth dimension' (you would expect BMR to scale with a
1/3 multiple power if it was based just on size measured in three dimensions)
has puzzled mathematicians/physicists/biologists for the last 75 years and I
think you are right to say that West and Brown's theories have been challenged
(incidentally my favorite explanation is in McMahon T.1973. Size and Shape in
Biology. Science, 179:1201-4). Despite the controversy on explaining wt^3/4,
it remains a fundamental observation which most biologists seem to agree on
(from my reading).
Joe
At 20:52 14/02/2007, Jakob Ribbing wrote:
>Hi Huadong,
>You say that you do not think that the allometry law should be fixed to 1
>for volume-based parameters. I think that we all agree to that the apparent
>volumes are sometimes not proportional to body weight. However, when this
>happens it is because something else is confounded with body size, for
>example body composition: Heavy subjects generally are more obese. This
>could make the exponent larger than 1 for a drug which is highly lipophilic
>and lower than 1 for a drug which is mainly water soluble, but this does not
>change the allometric law.
>
>Although not applicable in your case, here is a very good reference on what
>measure of body size (WT, LBW, FFM) may be the most appropriate to use,
>depending on the lipophilicity of the drug:
>Green B, Duffull SB. What is the best size descriptor to use for
>pharmacokinetic studies in the obese? Br J Clin Pharmacol 2004;58(2):119-33.
>
>Regards,
>
>Jakob
>
>________________________________________
Quoted reply history
>From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
>Behalf Of Huadong Tang
>Sent: den 14 februari 2007 19:10
>To: Nick Holford; nmusers
>Subject: Re: [NMusers] Intra-species PK scaling from adults to infantsfor
>antibody drugs
>
>Hi Nick,
>
>Some delayed comments.
>
>First is about a trivial comment on the allometry theory. Personally I don't
>think the allometry has gained sufficient theoretical support. West's model
>(referene 8) based on the fractal network to prove the 3/4 law is still
>controversial, which involves both mathematical and statistical aspects. The
>observational data to support the power law is also insufficient; the 2/3 or
>3/4 value is still uncertain for the metabolic rate acorss species, for
>example. Some allometry (if it is defined as the study of body size and its
>consquence) phenomenon is a statistical illusion as illustrated in Nee's
>paper, Science 309, 1236 (2005); here I am not arguing the allometry
>phenomenon does not exist, what I am trying is that the allometry law should
>not be fixed at certain values (0.75 for metabolic rate etc, 1 for volume
>based parameter, etc). The variability is more obvious in our PK area, where
>the compounds vary with much greater uncertainty in the exponents.
>
>Further from the above argument, I don't see strong evidence that we need to
>fix an exponent at certain value. In the context of modeling, body weight is
>also a covariate in the model, same as age etc; a THETA estimation
>for weight should be as feasible as that for age. Of course, by this there
>would be additional parameters to the model. But sometimes,the model could
>turn out to give an exponent that is very different from 0.75, then it may
>be the value in doing this.
>
>I agree that it is not a good idea to "scale" Ka between adult and infants.
>The general observation of smaller Ka (or longer MRT of absorption) in
>large species (so higher weight) should not be extended without enough
>evidence to that between infant and adult.
>
>Thanks
>
>Huadong
>
>
>
>
>>>> Nick Holford <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 2/2/2007 3:47 PM >>>
>Hi,
>
>I think that this discussion needs to take care not to mix up the
>predictions of allometry with other factors (e.g. adults vs children).
>
>Allometric theory (see refs 9 and 10 below) is concerned with how biological
>properties can be predicted when weights are different. Note that implicitly
>this means that all other factors are considered to be identical. Allometric
>theory does not attempt to explain differences which arise from other
>factors eg. age, organ failure, species, drug interactions, etc.
>
>Work done in children and adults has applied allometric theory to predict
>pharmacokinetic differences attributable to weight alone and then has sought
>to explain the remaining differences in terms of age (e.g. see refs 1-8
>below). The age influences on clearance and volume can be interpreted as
>being due to developmental maturation. They are quite separate from the
>changes predicted from allometric scaling. I suggest you take a look at some
>of the papers which demonstrate how allometric theory and empirical age
>models can be combined.
>
>It is not a good idea to try to estimate an allometric exponent from typical
>PK data because 1) there is already a good theoretical prediction for the
>correct value 2) estimation bias for the exponent is difficult to evaluate
>because of small sample sizes and often narrow weight ranges plus
>confounding factors such as age.
>
>I dont think it is a good idea to expect allometric scaling to explain
>variability in first-order absorption rate constants. Absorption rates are
>determined strongly by the physical properties of the drug and the
>development of absorption processes in infants. I find it hard to imagine
>how the theory of allometry can be used to predict drug absorption rate
>constants when weights change.
>
>Nick
>
>1. Anderson BJ, Allegaert K, Van den Anker JN, Cossey V, Holford NH.
>Vancomycin pharmacokinetics in preterm neonates and the prediction of adult
>clearance. Br J Clin Pharmacol. 2006 Jul 21.
>2. Anderson BJ, Allegaert K, Holford NH. Population clinical pharmacology
>of children: modelling covariate effects. Eur J Pediatr. 2006
>Dec;165(12):819-29.
>3. Allegaert K, Anderson BJ, Cossey V, Holford NH. Limited predictability
>of amikacin clearance in extreme premature neonates at birth. Br J Clin
>Pharmacol. 2006 Jan;61(1):39-48.
>4. Bouwmeester NJ, Anderson BJ, Tibboel D, Holford NH. Developmental
>pharmacokinetics of morphine and its metabolites in neonates, infants and
>young children. Br J Anaesth. 2004 Feb;92(2):208-17.
>5. van der Marel CD, Anderson BJ, van Lingen RA, Holford NH, Pluim MA,
>Jansman FG, et al. Paracetamol and metabolite pharmacokinetics in infants.
>Eur J Clin Pharmacol. 2003 Jul;59(3):243-51.
>6. Anderson BJ, Holford NHG. Allometric size modelling for diclofenac and
>metabolite pharmacokinetic interpretation in children. Australasian Society
>for Clinical and Experimental Pharmacology and Toxicology; 2003; Sydney,
>Australia; 2003.
>7. Anderson BJ, van Lingen RA, Hansen TG, Lin YC, Holford NHG.
>Acetaminophen developmental pharmacokinetics in premature neonates and
>infants: a pooled population analysis. Anesthesiology. 2002;96(6):1336-45.
>8. Anderson BJ, McKee AD, Holford NHG. Size, myths and the clinical
>pharmacokinetics of analgesia in paediatric patients. Clin Pharmacokinet.
>1997;33(5):313-27.
>9. West GB, Brown JH, Enquist BJ. A general model for the origin of
>allometric scaling laws in biology. Science. 1997;276:122-26.
>10. West GB, Brown JH, Enquist BJ. The fourth dimension of life: fractal
>geometry and allometric scaling of organisms. Science.
>1999;284(5420):1677-9.
>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> It is an interesting topic. The followings are only some thoughts.
>>
>> FcRn is a receptor that was named by "Fc receptor of neonate" discovered
>first in mice species. So it is reasonable to
>> expect that in human infant population as well. But pls do some search on
>if studies have been done in human species.
>> On the other hand, the IgG level in infants would be much lower than that
>in adults, therefore, the FcRn mediated
>> protective mechanism would be expected to be relatively stronger in
>infants. As a result, the CL for the exogenous Ab
>> may not follow the general allometric "rule" of exponent at 0.75 across
>infant and adults. Let the population model do the
>> estimation of the exponent. The individual plotting any logBW vs logCL is
>subject to high risk of obtaining abnormal
>> exponents, esp when the errors in the CL (or AUC) measurement is large.
>>
>> About Ka, if the general allometric "rule" (i really don't want to call it
>a rule) of exponent for frist-order rate constants
>> holds at -0.25, you would expect Ka in infant is higher than that in
>adults - just an explanation to your observation.
>>
>> Hope this helps.
>>
>> Huadong Tang
>>
>> Drug Safety and Metabolism-Pharmacokinetics
>> Wyeth Research
>> Pearl River, NY 10923
>>
>>
>> >>> "Zhao, Liang" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 2/2/2007 10:14 AM >>>
>> Joe,
>>
>> "Another possible approach would be to look at AUCs of raw data, calculate
>CL and plot log CL vs log wt and see
>> what slope, therefore weight exponent, to use in your modelling, as it is
>likely that CL will vary with an exponent of wt. "
>> It is hard to calculate AUC of neonate or infant due to the low number of
>allowance for blood samplings (e.g., 2 sampling point
>> with 4 weeks apart) and previous trials were not designed in a way that
>adopt heterogenous sampling schedules and usually
>> bloods were sampled very rigidly (e.g, at hours 48 and 720). So the Data
>is "strictly" sparse even for NONMEM.
>>
>> "Or you could just estimate a THETA for an exponent of wt on CL. I
>suppose your aim is to delineate size from
>> maturational processes which will affect CL"
>> That is a good suggestion. I might have a base model with high ETA's on CL
>rather than go ahead estimate THETA. Plot
>> those ETA's or individual CL's against covairates like weight, BSA, and
>gestational age might give some hint.
>>
>> Jeroen,
>> Thank you for hint. It make me realize that it is a very gray area.
>> One thing I did find is that the absorption rate (Ka) seems to be higher
>in infant than adult. That is, if I fix Ka, obtained from
>> adult data (IM administration), to infant data, the model undersestimated
>the conc's for those who were evaluated several
>> hours earlier than the first nominal time, and the IPRE or PRED went up
>after and were good for those who were evaluated
>> after the first nominal time. Given the physiology composition of infant,
>I will assume that is a reasonable assumption.
>> I will update my findings with you to see the normal allometric WT**0.75
>principle will hold (Inspired by Dr. Nick Holford, since
>> he will nominate me for Nobel Prize if I find something different ...)
>>
>> Regards,
>>
>> Liang
>>
>>
>>
>> From: Elassaiss - Schaap, J. (Jeroen)
>[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> Sent: Friday, February 02, 2007 5:41 AM
>> To: Zhao, Liang
>> Cc: Joseph Standing
>> Subject: RE: [NMusers] Intra-species PK scaling from adults to infants for
>antibody drugs
>>
>> Liang,
>>
>> Please be careful, as specific capacities may not scale well across age
>groups in man (from neonate to elderly). Relative
>> metabolic capacities for clearance of small molecules appear to change
>markedly, for example. I do not know how that
>> translates to antibody kinetics. You may find relevant hits in the
>following search:
>>
> http://scholar.google.nl/scholar?hl=nl&lr=&q=pediatric+pharmacokinetic+antib
>ody
>>
>> best regards,
>> Jeroen
>>
>> J. Elassaiss-Schaap
>> Scientist PK/PD
>> Organon NV
>> PO Box 20, 5340 BH Oss, Netherlands
>> Phone: + 31 412 66 9320
>> Fax: + 31 412 66 2506
>> e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Joseph
>> Standing
>> Sent: Friday, 02 February, 2007 10:14
>> To: Zhao, Liang; [email protected]
>> Subject: Re: [NMusers] Intra-species PK scaling from adults to
>infants for antibody drugs
>>
>> Liang,
>>
>> One approach would be to use allometric scaling of wt^0.75 on CL and
>just wt on VD. However, this is
>> based on observations across species in adult animals of how basal
>metabolic rate scales with weight. How
>> BMR scales with wt within a species during development has yet to be
>investigated to my knowledge
>> (please send me references if you know different).
>>
>> Another possible approach would be to look at AUCs of raw data,
>calculate CL and plot log CL vs log wt
>> and see what slope, therefore weight exponent, to use in your
>modelling, as it is likely that CL will vary with
>> an exponent of wt. Or you could just estimate a THETA for an
>exponent of wt on CL. I suppose your aim
>> is to delineate size from maturational processes which will affect
>CL, and that is easier said than done!
>>
>> Can't offer any advice on FcRn recycling as I don't know what it
>means, but assume that if it is a clearance
>> process then bigger animals will clear the antibody faster, therefore
>CL will increase with weight in some
>> way.
>>
>> Joe
>>
>>
>> Joseph F Standing
>> Centre for Paediatric Pharmacy Research
>> School of Pharmacy/UCL Institute of Child Health
>> 29/39 Brunswick Square
>> London WC1N 1AX
>>
>>
>> At 18:29 01/02/2007, Zhao, Liang wrote:
>>
>> Dear all,
>>
>> Is there any population model/experience available to perform
>intra-species PK scaling from adults to infants for
>> antibody drugs?
>>
>> Specifically, how to scale volume of distribution and clearance if
>the antibody is eliminated via FcRn recycling route
>> (t1/2 = ~20 days).
>>
>> High appreciation for your inputs!
>>
>>
>>
>> Liang Zhao Ph. D.
>>
>>
>> This message, including attachments, is confidential and may be
>privileged. If you are not an intended recipient, please
>> notify the sender then delete and destroy the original message and all
>copies. You should not copy, forward and/or
>> disclose this message, in whole or in part, without permission of the
>sender.
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
>--
>Nick Holford, Dept Pharmacology & Clinical Pharmacology
>University of Auckland, 85 Park Rd, Private Bag 92019, Auckland, New Zealand
>email:[EMAIL PROTECTED] tel:+64(9)373-7599x86730 fax:373-7556
> http://www.health.auckland.ac.nz/pharmacology/staff/nholford/