Model-based comparison of subcutaneous versus sublingual apomorphine administration in the treatment of motor fluctuations in Parkinson’s disease

IF 2.2 4区 医学 Q3 PHARMACOLOGY & PHARMACY Journal of Pharmacokinetics and Pharmacodynamics Pub Date : 2024-04-05 DOI:10.1007/s10928-024-09914-x
Azmi Nasser, Roberto Gomeni, Gianpiera Ceresoli-Borroni, Lanyi Xie, Gregory D. Busse, Zare Melyan, Jonathan Rubin
{"title":"Model-based comparison of subcutaneous versus sublingual apomorphine administration in the treatment of motor fluctuations in Parkinson’s disease","authors":"Azmi Nasser, Roberto Gomeni, Gianpiera Ceresoli-Borroni, Lanyi Xie, Gregory D. Busse, Zare Melyan, Jonathan Rubin","doi":"10.1007/s10928-024-09914-x","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>The objective of this study was to compare the effectiveness of subcutaneous (SC) and sublingual (SL) formulations of apomorphine for the treatment of motor fluctuations in Parkinson’s disease using a pharmacokinetics (PK)/pharmacodynamics (PD) modeling approach. The PK of SC and SL apomorphine are best described by a one-compartment model with first-order absorption and a two-compartment model with delayed absorption, respectively. The PK/PD model relating apomorphine plasma concentrations to the Unified Parkinson’s Disease Rating Scale (UPDRS) motor scores was described by a sigmoidal E<sub>max</sub> model assuming effective concentration = drug concentration in an effect compartment. Apomorphine concentrations and UPDRS motor scores were simulated from the PK/PD models using 500 hypothetical subjects. UPDRS motor score change from baseline was evaluated using time to clinically relevant response, response duration, area under the curve, maximal response, and time to maximal response. Higher doses of each apomorphine formulation were associated with shorter time to response, longer response duration, and greater maximal response. Although the mean maximal responses to SC and SL apomorphine were comparable, the time to response was four times shorter (7 vs. 31 min) and time to maximal response was two times shorter (27 vs. 61 min) for 4 mg SC vs. 50 mg SL. Thus, faster onset of action was observed for the SC formulation compared to SL. These data may be useful for physicians when selecting “on demand” therapy for patients with Parkinson’s disease experiencing motor fluctuations.</p>","PeriodicalId":16851,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Pharmacokinetics and Pharmacodynamics","volume":"12 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.2000,"publicationDate":"2024-04-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Pharmacokinetics and Pharmacodynamics","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10928-024-09914-x","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"PHARMACOLOGY & PHARMACY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The objective of this study was to compare the effectiveness of subcutaneous (SC) and sublingual (SL) formulations of apomorphine for the treatment of motor fluctuations in Parkinson’s disease using a pharmacokinetics (PK)/pharmacodynamics (PD) modeling approach. The PK of SC and SL apomorphine are best described by a one-compartment model with first-order absorption and a two-compartment model with delayed absorption, respectively. The PK/PD model relating apomorphine plasma concentrations to the Unified Parkinson’s Disease Rating Scale (UPDRS) motor scores was described by a sigmoidal Emax model assuming effective concentration = drug concentration in an effect compartment. Apomorphine concentrations and UPDRS motor scores were simulated from the PK/PD models using 500 hypothetical subjects. UPDRS motor score change from baseline was evaluated using time to clinically relevant response, response duration, area under the curve, maximal response, and time to maximal response. Higher doses of each apomorphine formulation were associated with shorter time to response, longer response duration, and greater maximal response. Although the mean maximal responses to SC and SL apomorphine were comparable, the time to response was four times shorter (7 vs. 31 min) and time to maximal response was two times shorter (27 vs. 61 min) for 4 mg SC vs. 50 mg SL. Thus, faster onset of action was observed for the SC formulation compared to SL. These data may be useful for physicians when selecting “on demand” therapy for patients with Parkinson’s disease experiencing motor fluctuations.

Abstract Image

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
基于模型比较皮下注射和舌下注射阿朴吗啡治疗帕金森病运动波动的效果
本研究的目的是采用药代动力学(PK)/药效学(PD)建模方法,比较阿朴吗啡皮下注射剂型(SC)和舌下含服剂型(SL)治疗帕金森病运动性波动的疗效。阿朴吗啡皮下注射剂和单剂量注射剂的 PK 分别用一阶吸收的一室模型和延迟吸收的二室模型进行了最佳描述。阿朴吗啡血浆浓度与帕金森病统一评定量表(UPDRS)运动评分之间的PK/PD模型由一个假设有效浓度=效应区药物浓度的曲线Emax模型来描述。使用 500 例假设受试者,通过 PK/PD 模型模拟阿朴吗啡浓度和 UPDRS 运动评分。通过临床相关反应时间、反应持续时间、曲线下面积、最大反应和达到最大反应时间来评估UPDRS运动评分与基线相比的变化。每种阿朴吗啡制剂的剂量越高,反应时间越短,反应持续时间越长,最大反应越大。虽然阿扑吗啡皮下注射剂和静脉注射剂的平均最大反应相当,但 4 毫克皮下注射剂和 50 毫克静脉注射剂的反应时间缩短了四倍(7 分钟对 31 分钟),最大反应时间缩短了两倍(27 分钟对 61 分钟)。因此,与 SL 相比,SC 制剂的起效时间更快。这些数据可能有助于医生为出现运动波动的帕金森病患者选择 "按需 "疗法。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.90
自引率
4.00%
发文量
39
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: Broadly speaking, the Journal of Pharmacokinetics and Pharmacodynamics covers the area of pharmacometrics. The journal is devoted to illustrating the importance of pharmacokinetics, pharmacodynamics, and pharmacometrics in drug development, clinical care, and the understanding of drug action. The journal publishes on a variety of topics related to pharmacometrics, including, but not limited to, clinical, experimental, and theoretical papers examining the kinetics of drug disposition and effects of drug action in humans, animals, in vitro, or in silico; modeling and simulation methodology, including optimal design; precision medicine; systems pharmacology; and mathematical pharmacology (including computational biology, bioengineering, and biophysics related to pharmacology, pharmacokinetics, orpharmacodynamics). Clinical papers that include population pharmacokinetic-pharmacodynamic relationships are welcome. The journal actively invites and promotes up-and-coming areas of pharmacometric research, such as real-world evidence, quality of life analyses, and artificial intelligence. The Journal of Pharmacokinetics and Pharmacodynamics is an official journal of the International Society of Pharmacometrics.
期刊最新文献
Novel endpoints based on tumor size ratio to support early clinical decision-making in oncology drug-development. Translational pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic modelling of the anti-ADAMTS-5 NANOBODY® (M6495) using the neo-epitope ARGS as a biomarker. QSP modeling of a transiently inactivating antibody-drug conjugate highlights benefit of short antibody half life. A PopPBPK-RL approach for precision dosing of benazepril in renal impaired patients. Comparison of the power and type 1 error of total score models for drug effect detection in clinical trials.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1