4.5 Article

Population Pharmacodynamic Modeling of Exenatide After 2-Week Treatment in STZ/NA Diabetic Rats

Journal

JOURNAL OF PHARMACEUTICAL SCIENCES
Volume 102, Issue 10, Pages 3844-3851

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1002/jps.23682

Keywords

Type 2 diabetes; exenatide; pharmacokinetics; pharmacodynamics; mathematical modeling

Funding

  1. NIH [GM57980]
  2. Center for Protein Therapeutics, University at Buffalo, SUNY

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The purpose of this study is to investigate the effect of exenatide on glycemic control following two administration routes in a streptozotocin/nicotinamide (STZ/NA)-induced diabetic rat model, and to develop a pharmacodynamic model to better understand the disease progression and the action of exenatide in this experimental system. Two groups of STZ/NA-induced diabetic rats were treated for 2 weeks with 20 (g/kg/day) of exenatide, either by continuous subcutaneous (SC) infusion or two SC injections daily. Disease progression was associated with slower glucose utilization. Fasting blood glucose was significantly reduced by 30 mg/dL in both treatment groups at the end of 2 weeks. A subsequent intravenous glucose tolerance test (IVGTT) confirmed an improved glucose tolerance in both treatment groups; however, overall glycemic control was similar between groups, likely due to the relatively low and short-term drug exposure. A population indirect response model was successfully developed to simultaneously describe the STZ/NA-induced disease progression, responses to an IVGTT, and exenatide effects on these systemic challenges. The unified model includes a single set of parameters, and the cumulative area under the drug-receptor concentration curve was used as a unique driving force to account for systemic effects long after drug elimination. (c) 2013 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. and the American Pharmacists Association J Pharm Sci 102:3844-3851, 2013

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available