PRT to predict pharmacokinetic profiles as part of a bioequivalence study of the drug deferasirox

Introduction. Deferasirox is a complexing drug and belongs to class II according to the biopharmaceutical classification system (BCS), has acidic properties and belongs to subclass “a” (acid). This class is characterized by high permeability and low solubility, which limits the absorption of the active substance into the blood. As a result, the development of drugs with an active substance that can be assigning BCS to this class is a difficult task, and for generic drugs it is also associated with a high risk of obtaining unproven equivalence during clinical trials. To minimize the above risks, a physiologically relevant test was carried out with further data processing and construction of putative pharmacokinetic profiles.

Aim. The aim of the study is to conduct a physiologically relevant test (PRT) to predict in vitro pharmacokinetic profiles and compare them with in vivo data as part of a bioequivalence study of deferasirox.

Materials and methods. The objects of the study are "Deferasirox, film-coated tablets, 360 mg" of a domestic manufacturer and "Jadenu®, film-coated tablets, 360 mg" (WTN22 series, expiration date until 10.2023, Novartis Pharma Stein AG, Switzerland). A physiologically relevant test was performed on the device SC PRT-6, Compliance. Quantitative analysis was carried out by HPLC-UV method.Pharmacokinetic profiles were modeled using PK-Sim® (Systems Biology Software Suite 11.2, Bayer Technology Services GmbH, Germany) based on data obtained from physiologically relevant test.

Results and discussion. A physiologically relevant drug test for deferasirox was performed and release profiles were obtained, which formed the basis of a physiologically based pharmacokinetic model together with data on the physicochemical properties of the studied compound and literature data on the pharmacokinetics of deferasirox. The pharmacokinetic profiles obtained as part of the simulation on a virtual population were compared with data obtained during clinical trials.

Conclusion. A physiologically relevant test for the drug deferasirox was carried out, quantitative determination in the samples was carried out by HPLC-UV. The test resulted in data that allowed prediction of pharmacokinetic profiles that reflected the same differences observed in the profiles of the test and reference drug in the comparative pharmacokinetics and bioequivalence study of deferasirox drugs.

1. Zhuang X., Lu C. PBPK modeling and simulation in drug research and development. Acta Pharmaceutica Sinica B. 2016;6(5):430–440. DOI: 10.1016/j.apsb.2016.04.004.

2. Bois F. Y., Jamei M., Clewell H. J. PBPK modelling of inter-individual variability in the pharmacokinetics of environmental chemicals. Toxicology. 2010;278(3):256–267. DOI: 10.1016/j.tox.2010.06.007.

3. Kuepfer L., Niederalt C., Wendl T., Schlender J.-F., Willmann S., Lippert J., Block M., Eissing T., Teutonico D. Applied Concepts in PBPK Modeling: How to Build a PBPK/PD Model. CPT: Pharmacometrics & Systems Pharmacology. 2016;5(10):516–531. DOI: 10.1002/psp4.12134.

4. Dallmann A., Solodenko J., Ince I., Eissing T. Applied Concepts in PBPK Modeling: How to Extend an Open Systems Pharmacology Model to the Special Population of Pregnant Women. CPT: Pharmacometrics & Systems Pharmacology. 2018;7(7):419–431. DOI: 10.1002/psp4.12300.

5. Björkman S. Prediction of drug disposition in infants and children by means of physiologically based pharmacokinetic (PBPK) modelling: theophylline and midazolam as model drugs. British Journal of Clinical Pharmacology. 2005;59(6):691–704. DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2125.2004.02225.x.

6. Hsueh C.-H., Hsu V., Zhao P., Zhang L., Giacomini K. M., Huang S.-M. PBPK modeling of the effect of reduced kidney function on the pharmacokinetics of drugs excreted renally by organic anion transporters. Clinical Pharmacology & Therapeutics. 2018;103(3):485–492. DOI: 10.1002/cpt.750.

7. Cheeti S., Budha N. R., Rajan S., Dresser M. J., Jin J. Y. A physiologically based pharmacokinetic (PBPK) approach to evaluate pharmacokinetics in patients with cancer. Biopharmaceutics & drug disposition. 2013;34(3):141–154. DOI: 10.1002/bdd.1830.

8. Zhou L., Sharma P., Yeo K. R., Higashimori M., Xu H., Al-Huniti N., Zhou D. Assessing pharmacokinetic differences in Caucasian and East Asian (Japanese, Chinese and Korean) populations driven by CYP2C19 polymorphism using physiologically-based pharmacokinetic modelling. European Journal of Pharmaceutical Sciences. 2019;139:105061. DOI: 10.1016/j.ejps.2019.105061.

9. Sarangapani R., Teeguarden J., Andersen M. E., Reitz R. H., Plotzke K. P. Route-specific differences in distribution characteristics of octamethylcyclotetrasiloxane in rats: analysis using PBPK models. Toxicological Sciences. 2003;71(1):41–52. DOI: 10.1093/toxsci/71.1.41.

10. Ke A. B., Nallani S. C., Zhao P., Rostami-Hodjegan A., Unadkat J. D. A PBPK model to predict disposition of CYP3A-metabolized drugs in pregnant women: verification and discerning the site of CYP3A induction. CPT: Pharmacometrics & Systems Pharmacology. 2012;1(9):1–10. DOI: 10.1038/psp.2012.2.

11. Duan P., Zhao P., Zhang L. Physiologically based pharmacokinetic (PBPK) modeling of pitavastatin and atorvastatin to predict drug-drug interactions (DDIs). European Journal of Drug Metabolism and Pharmacokinetics. 2017;42:689–705. DOI: 10.1007/s13318-016-0383-9.

12. Jones H. M., Gardner I. B., Watson K. J. Modelling and PBPK Simulation in Drug Discovery. The AAPS Journal. 2009;11(1):155–166. DOI: 10.1208/s12248-009-9088-1.

13. Tanaka C. Clinical pharmacology of deferasirox. Clinical Pharmacokinetics. 2014;53(8):679–694. DOI: 10.1007/s40262-014-0151-4.

14. Farmoudeh A., Rezaeiroshan A., Abbaspour M., Nokhodchi A., Ebrahimnejad P. Solid dispersion pellets: an efficient pharmaceutical approach to enrich the solubility and dissolution rate of deferasirox. BioMed research international. 2020;2020(1):8583540. DOI: 10.1155/2020/8583540.

15. Koziolek M., Grimm M., Becker D., Iordanov V., Zou H., Shimizu J., Wanke C., Garbacz G., Weitschies W. Investigation of pH and temperature profiles in the GI tract of fasted human subjects using the Intellicap® system. Journal of Pharmaceutical Sciences. 2015;104(9):2855–2863. DOI: 10.1002/jps.24274.

16. Kerlin P., Zinsmeister A., Phillips S. Relationship of motility to flow of contents in the human small intestine. Gastroenterology. 1982;82(4):701–706. DOI: 10.1016/0016-5085(82)90314-6.

17. Willmann S., Thelen K., Lippert J. Integration of dissolution into physiologically-based pharmacokinetic models III: PK-Sim®. Journal of Pharmacy and Pharmacology. 2012;64(7):997–1007. DOI: 10.1111/j.2042-7158.2012.01534.x.

18. Willmann S., Lippert J., Sevestre M., Solodenko J., Fois F., Schmitt W. PK-Sim®: a physiologically based pharmacokinetic ‘whole-body’ model. BIOSILICO. 2003;1(4):121–124. DOI: 10.1016/s1478-5382(03)02342-4.