Comparisons of Four Protein-Binding Models Characterizing the Pharmacokinetics of Unbound Phenytoin in Adult Patients Using Non-Linear Mixed-Effects Modeling

Abstract Background and objective Phenytoin is extensively protein bound with a narrow therapeutic range. The unbound phenytoin is pharmacologically active, but total concentrations are routinely measured in clinical practice. The relationship between free and total phenytoin has been described by v...

Descripción completa

Guardado en:
Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Heajin Jun, Yan Rong, Catharina Yih, Jordan Ho, Wendy Cheng, Tony K. L. Kiang
Formato: article
Lenguaje:EN
Publicado: Adis, Springer Healthcare 2020
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://doaj.org/article/39ca7c0df77643c69970309d8cdedeff
Etiquetas: Agregar Etiqueta
Sin Etiquetas, Sea el primero en etiquetar este registro!
id oai:doaj.org-article:39ca7c0df77643c69970309d8cdedeff
record_format dspace
spelling oai:doaj.org-article:39ca7c0df77643c69970309d8cdedeff2021-12-02T19:16:11ZComparisons of Four Protein-Binding Models Characterizing the Pharmacokinetics of Unbound Phenytoin in Adult Patients Using Non-Linear Mixed-Effects Modeling10.1007/s40268-020-00323-21174-58861179-6901https://doaj.org/article/39ca7c0df77643c69970309d8cdedeff2020-10-01T00:00:00Zhttps://doi.org/10.1007/s40268-020-00323-2https://doaj.org/toc/1174-5886https://doaj.org/toc/1179-6901Abstract Background and objective Phenytoin is extensively protein bound with a narrow therapeutic range. The unbound phenytoin is pharmacologically active, but total concentrations are routinely measured in clinical practice. The relationship between free and total phenytoin has been described by various binding models with inconsistent findings. Systematic comparison of these binding models in a single experimental setting is warranted to determine the optimal binding behaviors. Methods Non-linear mixed-effects modeling was conducted on retrospectively collected data (n = 37 adults receiving oral or intravenous phenytoin) using a stochastic approximation expectation–maximization algorithm in MonolixSuite-2019R2. The optimal base structural model was initially developed and utilized to compare four binding models: Winter–Tozer, linear binding, non-linear single-binding site, and non-linear multiple-binding site. Each binding model was subjected to error and covariate modeling. The final model was evaluated using relative standard errors (RSEs), goodness-of-fit plots, visual predictive check, and bootstrapping. Results A one-compartment, first-order absorption, Michaelis–Menten elimination, and linear protein-binding model best described the population pharmacokinetics of free phenytoin at typical clinical concentrations. The non-linear single-binding-site model also adequately described phenytoin binding but generated larger RSEs. The non-linear multiple-binding-site model performed the worst, with no identified covariates. The optimal linear binding model suggested a relatively high binding capacity using a single albumin site. Covariate modeling indicated a positive relationship between albumin concentration and the binding proportionality constant. Conclusions The linear binding model best described the population pharmacokinetics of unbound phenytoin in adult subjects and may be used to improve the prediction of free phenytoin concentrations.Heajin JunYan RongCatharina YihJordan HoWendy ChengTony K. L. KiangAdis, Springer HealthcarearticleTherapeutics. PharmacologyRM1-950ENDrugs in R&D, Vol 20, Iss 4, Pp 343-358 (2020)
institution DOAJ
collection DOAJ
language EN
topic Therapeutics. Pharmacology
RM1-950
spellingShingle Therapeutics. Pharmacology
RM1-950
Heajin Jun
Yan Rong
Catharina Yih
Jordan Ho
Wendy Cheng
Tony K. L. Kiang
Comparisons of Four Protein-Binding Models Characterizing the Pharmacokinetics of Unbound Phenytoin in Adult Patients Using Non-Linear Mixed-Effects Modeling
description Abstract Background and objective Phenytoin is extensively protein bound with a narrow therapeutic range. The unbound phenytoin is pharmacologically active, but total concentrations are routinely measured in clinical practice. The relationship between free and total phenytoin has been described by various binding models with inconsistent findings. Systematic comparison of these binding models in a single experimental setting is warranted to determine the optimal binding behaviors. Methods Non-linear mixed-effects modeling was conducted on retrospectively collected data (n = 37 adults receiving oral or intravenous phenytoin) using a stochastic approximation expectation–maximization algorithm in MonolixSuite-2019R2. The optimal base structural model was initially developed and utilized to compare four binding models: Winter–Tozer, linear binding, non-linear single-binding site, and non-linear multiple-binding site. Each binding model was subjected to error and covariate modeling. The final model was evaluated using relative standard errors (RSEs), goodness-of-fit plots, visual predictive check, and bootstrapping. Results A one-compartment, first-order absorption, Michaelis–Menten elimination, and linear protein-binding model best described the population pharmacokinetics of free phenytoin at typical clinical concentrations. The non-linear single-binding-site model also adequately described phenytoin binding but generated larger RSEs. The non-linear multiple-binding-site model performed the worst, with no identified covariates. The optimal linear binding model suggested a relatively high binding capacity using a single albumin site. Covariate modeling indicated a positive relationship between albumin concentration and the binding proportionality constant. Conclusions The linear binding model best described the population pharmacokinetics of unbound phenytoin in adult subjects and may be used to improve the prediction of free phenytoin concentrations.
format article
author Heajin Jun
Yan Rong
Catharina Yih
Jordan Ho
Wendy Cheng
Tony K. L. Kiang
author_facet Heajin Jun
Yan Rong
Catharina Yih
Jordan Ho
Wendy Cheng
Tony K. L. Kiang
author_sort Heajin Jun
title Comparisons of Four Protein-Binding Models Characterizing the Pharmacokinetics of Unbound Phenytoin in Adult Patients Using Non-Linear Mixed-Effects Modeling
title_short Comparisons of Four Protein-Binding Models Characterizing the Pharmacokinetics of Unbound Phenytoin in Adult Patients Using Non-Linear Mixed-Effects Modeling
title_full Comparisons of Four Protein-Binding Models Characterizing the Pharmacokinetics of Unbound Phenytoin in Adult Patients Using Non-Linear Mixed-Effects Modeling
title_fullStr Comparisons of Four Protein-Binding Models Characterizing the Pharmacokinetics of Unbound Phenytoin in Adult Patients Using Non-Linear Mixed-Effects Modeling
title_full_unstemmed Comparisons of Four Protein-Binding Models Characterizing the Pharmacokinetics of Unbound Phenytoin in Adult Patients Using Non-Linear Mixed-Effects Modeling
title_sort comparisons of four protein-binding models characterizing the pharmacokinetics of unbound phenytoin in adult patients using non-linear mixed-effects modeling
publisher Adis, Springer Healthcare
publishDate 2020
url https://doaj.org/article/39ca7c0df77643c69970309d8cdedeff
work_keys_str_mv AT heajinjun comparisonsoffourproteinbindingmodelscharacterizingthepharmacokineticsofunboundphenytoininadultpatientsusingnonlinearmixedeffectsmodeling
AT yanrong comparisonsoffourproteinbindingmodelscharacterizingthepharmacokineticsofunboundphenytoininadultpatientsusingnonlinearmixedeffectsmodeling
AT catharinayih comparisonsoffourproteinbindingmodelscharacterizingthepharmacokineticsofunboundphenytoininadultpatientsusingnonlinearmixedeffectsmodeling
AT jordanho comparisonsoffourproteinbindingmodelscharacterizingthepharmacokineticsofunboundphenytoininadultpatientsusingnonlinearmixedeffectsmodeling
AT wendycheng comparisonsoffourproteinbindingmodelscharacterizingthepharmacokineticsofunboundphenytoininadultpatientsusingnonlinearmixedeffectsmodeling
AT tonyklkiang comparisonsoffourproteinbindingmodelscharacterizingthepharmacokineticsofunboundphenytoininadultpatientsusingnonlinearmixedeffectsmodeling
_version_ 1718376964468768768