Skip to main content
Advertisement

Main menu

  • Home
  • Articles
    • Current Issue
    • Fast Forward
    • Latest Articles
    • Special Sections
    • Archive
  • Information
    • Instructions to Authors
    • Submit a Manuscript
    • FAQs
    • For Subscribers
    • Terms & Conditions of Use
    • Permissions
  • Editorial Board
  • Alerts
    • Alerts
    • RSS Feeds
  • Virtual Issues
  • Feedback
  • Submit
  • Other Publications
    • Drug Metabolism and Disposition
    • Journal of Pharmacology and Experimental Therapeutics
    • Molecular Pharmacology
    • Pharmacological Reviews
    • Pharmacology Research & Perspectives
    • ASPET

User menu

  • My alerts
  • Log in
  • My Cart

Search

  • Advanced search
Drug Metabolism & Disposition
  • Other Publications
    • Drug Metabolism and Disposition
    • Journal of Pharmacology and Experimental Therapeutics
    • Molecular Pharmacology
    • Pharmacological Reviews
    • Pharmacology Research & Perspectives
    • ASPET
  • My alerts
  • Log in
  • My Cart
Drug Metabolism & Disposition

Advanced Search

  • Home
  • Articles
    • Current Issue
    • Fast Forward
    • Latest Articles
    • Special Sections
    • Archive
  • Information
    • Instructions to Authors
    • Submit a Manuscript
    • FAQs
    • For Subscribers
    • Terms & Conditions of Use
    • Permissions
  • Editorial Board
  • Alerts
    • Alerts
    • RSS Feeds
  • Virtual Issues
  • Feedback
  • Submit
  • Visit dmd on Facebook
  • Follow dmd on Twitter
  • Follow ASPET on LinkedIn
Research ArticleSpecial Section on Transporters in Drug Disposition and Pharmacokinetic Prediction—Perspective

Navigating Transporter Sciences in Pharmacokinetics Characterization Using the Extended Clearance Classification System

Ayman F. El-Kattan and Manthena V. S. Varma
Drug Metabolism and Disposition May 2018, 46 (5) 729-739; DOI: https://doi.org/10.1124/dmd.117.080044
Ayman F. El-Kattan
Pharmacokinetics Dynamics and Metabolism, Medicine Design, Pfizer Global Research and Development, Pfizer Inc., Cambridge, Massachusetts (A.F.E.-K.); and Pharmacokinetics Dynamics and Metabolism, Medicine Design, Pfizer Global Research and Development, Pfizer Inc., Groton, Connecticut (M.V.S.V.)
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Manthena V. S. Varma
Pharmacokinetics Dynamics and Metabolism, Medicine Design, Pfizer Global Research and Development, Pfizer Inc., Cambridge, Massachusetts (A.F.E.-K.); and Pharmacokinetics Dynamics and Metabolism, Medicine Design, Pfizer Global Research and Development, Pfizer Inc., Groton, Connecticut (M.V.S.V.)
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • Article
  • Figures & Data
  • Info & Metrics
  • eLetters
  • PDF
Loading

Abstract

Membrane transporters play an important role in the absorption, distribution, clearance, and elimination of drugs. Supported by the pharmacokinetics data in human, several transporters including organic anion transporting polypeptide (OATP)1B1, OATP1B3, organic anion transporter (OAT)1, OAT3, organic cation transporter (OCT)2, multidrug and toxin extrusion (MATE) proteins, P-glycoprotein and breast cancer resistance protein are suggested to be of clinical relevance. An early understanding of the transporter role in drug disposition and clearance allows reliable prediction/evaluation of pharmacokinetics and changes due to drug-drug interactions (DDIs) or genetic polymorphisms. We recently proposed an extended clearance classification system (ECCS) based on simple drug properties (i.e., ionization, permeability, and molecular weight) to predict the predominant clearance mechanism. According to this framework, systemic clearance of class 1B and 3B drugs is likely determined by the OATP-mediated hepatic uptake. Class 3A and 4 drugs, and certain class 3B drugs, are predominantly cleared by renal, wherein, OAT1, OAT3, OCT2, and MATE proteins could contribute to their active renal secretion. Intestinal efflux and uptake transporters largely influence the oral pharmacokinetics of class 3A, 3B, and 4 drugs. We discuss the paradigm of applying the ECCS framework in mapping the role of clinically relevant drug transporters in early discovery and development; thereby implementing the right strategy to allow optimization of drug exposure and evaluation of clinical risk due to DDIs and pharmacogenomics.

Introduction

Poor pharmacokinetics was attributed to almost 40% of the overall attrition during drug development during the 1990s (Kola and Landis, 2004). This was largely due to limitations in quantitative predictive tools resulting in unexpected high intestinal and hepatic extraction. To overcome high first-pass liabilities and filter out compounds with high metabolic clearance, drug discovery teams adopted evolving in vitro tools such as human liver microsomes and hepatocytes to facilitate clearance optimization in early discovery. Improvements in human reagents and translation methodologies further allowed the successful prediction of human hepatic clearance mediated by drug metabolizing enzymes for new molecular entities (NMEs) (Houston, 1994; Obach, 1999; Hosea et al., 2009; Ring et al., 2011; Di et al., 2013).

It is now recognized that membrane transporters expressed in a variety of body organs such as liver, brain, intestine, and kidney play an important role in the absorption, distribution, clearance, and elimination (ADCE) of drugs and metabolites (Giacomini et al., 2010). About 400 membrane proteins categorized into two superfamilies of ATP-binding cassette (ABC) and solute carrier (SLC) transporters have been identified in the human body. However, less than 20 of these are considered relevant in the ADCE of drugs (Giacomini et al., 2010). In several cases, the clinical significance of the drug transporters was ascertained by transporter genetic polymorphism and drug-drug interaction (DDI) studies, which demonstrated major changes in the pharmacokinetics and/or consequent clinical responses of the substrate drugs (Shitara and Sugiyama, 2006; Niemi et al., 2011; Elsby et al., 2012; Lai et al., 2012).

Organic anion transporting polypeptides (OATP)1B1 (SLCO1B1), OATP1B3 (SLCO1B3), and OATP2B1 (SLCO2B1), the organic anion transporter [(OAT) OAT2, SLC22A7)], the organic cation transporter [(OCT) OCT1, SLC22A1), and the sodium taurocholate cotransporting polypeptide (SLC10A1) are hepatic sinusoidal transporters shown to drive hepatic uptake of a wide variety of drugs and metabolites. On the other hand, canalicular membrane transporters such as multidrug resistance protein [(MRP) MRP2, ABCC2], breast cancer resistance protein [(BCRP) ABCG2], and P-glycoprotein [(P-gp) ABCB1] mediate biliary secretion (Müller and Jansen, 1997; Chandra and Brouwer, 2004; Giacomini et al., 2010; Shitara et al., 2013; Pfeifer et al., 2014). In kidney, OAT1, OAT3, and OCT2 localized on the basolateral membrane and multidrug and toxin extrusion (MATE) proteins (MATE1/2-K) expressed on the apical membrane of the proximal tubule cells are of relevance in active renal secretion of drugs. While many ABCs and SLCs have been identified in human intestine, efflux transporters including P-gp and BCRP are often implicated in limiting oral drug absorption (Kim et al., 1998; Varma et al., 2003, 2010a; Kunta and Sinko, 2004; Giacomini et al., 2010; Estudante et al., 2013). Collectively, clinical evidence points to the need to understand the role of OATP1B1, OATP1B3, OAT1, OAT3, OCT2, MATE1, MATE2-K, P-gp, and BCRP in the disposition of investigational drugs (Giacomini et al., 2010; http://www.ema.europa.eu/docs/en_GB/document_library/Scientific_guideline/2012/07/WC500129606.pdf; http://www.fda.gov/downloads/drugs/guidancecomplianceregulatoryinformation/guidances/ucm292362.pdf). Nevertheless, other transporters could be of high relevance in the pharmacokinetics of certain chemotypes and warrants characterization on a case-by-case basis.

Here, we review the mechanistic aspects of major clearance mechanisms—namely, hepatic uptake, metabolism, and renal clearance—and present the scope and utility of the extended clearance classification system (ECCS) as a framework for navigating through transporter sciences in the process of characterizing clearance and disposition mechanism(s) and predicting transporter-mediated DDIs in drug discovery and development.

Extended Clearance Classification System

Based on the premise that early identification of clearance mechanisms can facilitate adopting the right strategy and tools for quantitative pharmacokinetic predictions, we recently proposed a framework called the extended clearance classification system (Varma et al., 2015b). The primary scope of this classification system is to identify the clearance mechanism (rate-determining step) of NMEs using physicochemical properties and in vitro/in silico data readily available in early drug discovery. According to the ECCS, NMEs are classified based on permeability, molecular weight, and ionization state, which have previously been shown to be strongly associated with major clearance mechanisms, i.e., hepatic uptake, metabolism, and renal clearance. For example, Benet and coworkers proposed that high permeable compounds show a high extent of metabolism (>70%) and vice versa (Wu and Benet, 2005). On the other hand, Pfizer and colleagues demonstrated that high molecular weight (≥400 Da) acids/zwitterions undergo hepatic uptake via OATP transporters, which is often the rate-determining step in their clearance (Varma et al., 2012a). Additionally, compounds undergoing biliary excretion often involve hepatic uptake as the rate-determining step in their systemic clearance. Subsequently, we established permeability cutoff of 5 × 10−6 cm/s using in-house low-efflux Madin-Darby canine kidney cell lines in the process of implementing the ECCS right from the early stages of drug discovery (Varma et al., 2012b). Extensive validation of the ECCS resulted in overall good predictive rates (Varma et al., 2015b, 2017a; El-Kattan et al., 2016). The general characteristics of the six classes, with respect to the clearance mechanism, are as follows (Fig. 1):

Fig. 1.
  • Download figure
  • Open in new tab
  • Download powerpoint
Fig. 1.

ECCS for predicting the clearance mechanism (rate-determining process) (Varma et al., 2015b). Hepatic uptake mediated by OATPs is likely the rate-determining step in the clearance of class 1B and 3B compounds. Renal transporters, OAT1 and OAT3, contribute to the active secretion of class 3A, 3B, and 4 compounds, while OCT2 and/or MATE proteins are involved in renal secretion of class 4 compounds.

  • ECCS class 1A: Acids/zwitterions with small molecular weight (<400 Da) and high permeability. The clearance of class 1A compounds is determined by metabolic rates with extent of metabolism ≥70%. These tend to be metabolized by UDP glucuronosyltransferase (UGT) ≅ CYP2C enzymes > > esterases > > CYP3A4 enzymes.

  • ECCS class 1B: Large molecular weight (≥400 Da) acids/zwitterions with high permeability. These compounds involve hepatic uptake mediated by OATP1B1/1B3 in their systemic clearance. Once in the liver, they are generally metabolized by CYP2C > esterases > UGT > CYP3A enzymes and excreted in bile/urine as metabolites. The extent of metabolism is high (≥70%).

  • ECCS class 2: Bases/neutrals with high membrane permeability. class 2 compounds are cleared by metabolism (high extent of metabolism ≥70%). They are primarily metabolized by enzymes such as CYP3A4 > > UGT > CYP2D6 > esterases = CYP2C. The high contribution of CYP3A4, CYP2D6, and UGT enzymes is in agreement with the basic nature of many of these drug molecules and their higher lipophilicity (log DpH7.4).

  • ECCS class 3A: Acids/zwitterions with small molecular weight (<400 Da) and low permeability. Class 3A compounds are renally cleared, where OAT1 and OAT3 transporters are potentially involved in their active renal secretion. These are also potential substrates for efflux transporters such as BCRP, MRP2, and P-gp, which facilitate active secretion of hydrophilic compounds across the apical membrane of proximal tubule cells.

  • ECCS class 3B: Large molecular weight (≥400 Da) Acids/zwitterions with low permeability Their mechanism of clearance elimination is either active hepatic uptake and/or renal elimination. The hepatic uptake is typically mediated by OATP transporters; once in the liver, they tend to be eliminated in bile as unchanged drug. Renal secretion is primarily mediated by OAT transporters.

  • ECCS class 4: Bases/neutrals with low permeability. They are primarily eliminated renally with low extent of metabolism <30%. Their renal elimination is mediated by OAT1, OAT3, and/or OCT2, and P-gp and MATE1/2K appear to be the major efflux transporters affecting renal elimination.

The permeability categorization here is based on the Madin-Darby canine kidney cells with low efflux activity (Di et al., 2011). Tools based on artificial membranes (e.g., phospholipid-derived parallel artificial membrane permeability assay membranes) (Yu et al., 2015) or other cell types (e.g., Caco-2 cells with chemical inhibition of transporters) (Fredlund et al., 2017) could be validated to serve this purpose. Since many of the cell types express a wide range of transporters to varying degrees, validation should also focus on assessing the risk of misclassification (high vs. low permeability) due to active mechanisms. Madin-Darby canine kidney cell expression of known renal uptake transporters such as OATs and OCTs is very low (Aslamkhan et al., 2003), thus may provide good measure of passive transcellular permeability.

Hepatic Clearance and Quantitative Role of Transport and Metabolism

Increasing knowledge regarding the role of transporters in drug clearance led to the introduction of the extended clearance concept by Sirianni and Pang (1997), which was extensively investigated by Sugiyama and coworkers and several other research groups (Shitara and Sugiyama, 2006; Poirier et al., 2009; Watanabe et al., 2009; Jones et al., 2012; Varma et al., 2012c, 2015b; Gertz et al., 2013; Jamei et al., 2014; Patilea-Vrana and Unadkat, 2016). Considering the physiological components, the extended clearance concept defines the intrinsic hepatic clearance (CLint,h) as an interplay of various processes, namely, passive diffusion clearance (PSpd), transporter-mediated sinusoidal influx clearance (PSinflux), basolateral efflux clearances (PSefflux), and biliary and metabolic intrinsic clearances (CLint = CLint,bile + CLint,met). The interplay between these four processes defines the rate-determining step in hepatic clearance, which is mathematically expressed as follows (Liu and Pang, 2005):Embedded Image(1)The total hepatic blood clearance (CLh), assuming well-stirred conditions, can therefore be expressed using eq. 2:Embedded Image(2)where Qh is the hepatic blood flow; Eh is the hepatic extraction ratio; and fu,b is the unbound fraction in blood. Over the last few years, the extended clearance concept has captured significant attention due to its ability to address questions related to drug clearance, DDIs, and pharmacogenomics, where the extent of metabolism was not able to quantitatively rationalize (Watanabe et al., 2010; Jones et al., 2012; Varma et al., 2014).

The limiting conditions of the extended clearance term can be referred to as rapid-equilibrium and uptake-determined clearance. The extended clearance term (eq. 2) is reduced to the rapid-equilibrium condition (eq. 3) when the compound is not a substrate for hepatic uptake transporters (e.g., OATP1B1/1B3 and sodium taurocholate cotransporting polypeptide) and the value of PSpd is significantly higher than the value of CLint.Embedded Image(3)It is generally acceptable to assume the rapid-equilibrium condition for the compounds of ECCS class 2, where metabolism is typically the rate-determining step in their hepatic clearance (e.g., midazolam, propranolol, nifedipine, and verapamil) (El-Kattan et al., 2016). For such compounds, hepatic clearance is expected to be well predicted using human liver microsomes for cytochrome P450 substrates and human hepatocytes for other drug metabolizing enzymes such as sulfotransferases, aldehyde oxidase, UGTs, glutathione transferase, etc. (Houston, 1994; Obach, 1999; Williams et al., 2004; Hosea et al., 2009; Di et al., 2013).

On the other hand, uptake-determined clearance can be assumed (eq. 4) when a compound shows active hepatic uptake, and the value of PSpd is significantly lower than the value of CLint.Embedded Image(4)Most class 3B compounds and several class 1B compounds with hepatic uptake are shown to possess such characteristics (Watanabe et al., 2009; Maeda et al., 2011). Examples of drugs with hepatic uptake as the rate-determining step for their systemic clearance include HMG-CoA reductase inhibitors (statins) and angiotensin II antagonists (sartans). In vitro metabolic clearance measured in human liver microsomes tends to underpredict hepatic clearance. However, predictions substantially improve if hepatic intrinsic uptake clearance measured in suspension or cultured human hepatocytes (e.g., the sandwich culture hepatocyte model) are considered (Watanabe et al., 2010; Jones et al., 2012; Ménochet et al., 2012; Varma et al., 2014; Bi et al., 2017; Kimoto et al., 2017). The role of active hepatic uptake as the rate-determining step in the systemic clearance of class 1B and 3B drugs is substantiated by DDIs (Shitara et al., 2006; Maeda et al., 2011; Prueksaritanont et al., 2014; El-Kattan et al., 2016) and SLCO1B1 polymorphism reports (encoding OATP1B1) (Nishizato et al., 2003; Niemi et al., 2005; Link et al., 2008; Ieiri et al., 2009).

ECCS and Victim DDIs Involving Major Hepatic Transporters.

We recently evaluated extensive and unbiased data sets of clinical DDIs of victim drugs with first-choice clinical probe inhibitors recommended to investigate transporter activity involving OATP1B1/1B3 (rifampicin and cyclosporine), P-gp and BCRP (cyclosporine), OAT1/3 (probenecid), and OCT2 and MATE proteins (cimetidine) (Varma et al., 2017a). We identified a total of 276 interaction pairs (23 pairs for rifampicin, 43 pairs for cyclosporine, 62 pairs for probenecid, and 148 pairs for cimetidine) with the ECCS class assigned using our in-house permeability data, molecular weight, and ionization, and we analyzed the DDI liability per ECCS class.

Clearly, coadministration of the OATP1B1/1B3 probe inhibitor, rifampicin, caused moderate [area under the plasma concentration-time curve (AUC) ratio 2–5] and high (AUC ratio > 5) interactions for class 1B and 3B drugs. Consistent with ECCS predictions, only no/low (AUC ratio < 2) interactions are evident for classes 1A, 3A, 2, and 4, although availability of clinical data for drugs in these classes—especially classes 1A and 3A—are relatively sparse (Fig. 2A). Nonetheless, very limited exceptions emerged following this exercise. For example, ambrisentan, a borderline class 3A drug, yielded ∼2-fold interaction with rifampicin. This drug has been shown to be a substrate to OATPs, and the observed interaction can be ascribed to inhibition of OATP1B1/1B3-mediated hepatic uptake (Harrison et al., 2010). Overall, this analysis verifies that the clearance of class 1B and 3B drugs, but not others, is driven by OATP-mediated hepatic uptake. Furthermore, note that the systemic clearance of the high permeable compounds with high extent of metabolism (class 1B) can be determined predominantly by OATPs. For example, Maeda et al. (2011) investigated the impact of a single dose rifampicin (OATP1B1/1B3 probe inhibitor) versus itraconazole (CYP3A4 probe inhibitor) on the pharmacokinetics of atorvastatin, a class 1B drug. Atorvastatin systemic exposure was only altered in the presence of rifampicin, but not by itraconazole, suggesting that its systemic clearance is primarily determined by hepatic uptake alone, although atorvastatin showed a high extent of CYP3A metabolism (>70%). On the other hand, plasma exposure of class 1B drugs such as cerivastatin is influenced by both OATP and cytochrome P450s (Varma et al., 2015a). In the case of atorvastatin, the CLint value is six to seven times higher than the PSpd value, and therefore its hepatic clearance is uptake determined (eq. 5), while cerivastatin is an example where the values of CLint and PSpd are somewhat similar, and thus their hepatic clearance is determined by extended clearance (Varma et al., 2014).

Fig. 2.
  • Download figure
  • Open in new tab
  • Download powerpoint
Fig. 2.

Victim DDIs per ECCS class with OATP1B1/1B3 probe inhibitor, rifampicin (A), and OATP1B1/1B3, P-gp, and BCRP probe inhibitor, cyclosporine (B). Schematics depicting the major transporters affected by these inhibitors are shown. Data points represent the mean AUC ratio of each victim-inhibitor pair from a single study or averaged value from multiple studies where available. Pink data points represent drugs with metabolism as the rate-determining clearance mechanism, blue data points represent drugs with hepatic uptake as the predominant clearance mechanism, and aqua data points represent drugs with predominant renal clearance. N is the number of interactions per ECCS class. Horizontal lines depict the categories of DDI magnitude: no (<1.25×), low (1.25×–2×), moderate (2×–5×), and high (>5×). Pie charts depict the percentage of interactions per ECCS class in the no (green), low (yellow), moderate (pink), and high (red) DDI magnitude categories. Data figures were adapted from Varma et al. (2017a) with copyright statement from the original paper.

Hybrid parameters have been proposed to describe the predominant role of uptake and/or metabolic and biliary clearances for a given drug (Yoshikado et al., 2017a,b). Of particular interest are the β and RDIF values. The β value is defined as the fraction of metabolism + biliary clearance (CLint) to all the intracellular fates of a drug including basolateral (active + passive) effluxEmbedded Image(5)The RDIF value is the ratio of passive to total hepatic uptake clearances (eq. 6), implied to describe the significance of active uptake to total hepatic clearanceEmbedded Image(6)Accordingly, for compounds with low β values (<0.3), a change in the CLint value would lead to altered systemic exposure; however, compounds with high β values are expected to have uptake-determined clearance. In a recent clinical study, the effect of single dose rifampicin (OATP inhibitor) or itraconazole (CYP3A inhibitor; 200 mg, intravenous dose) on the pharmacokinetics of subtherapeutic doses of bosentan (class 1B), repaglinide (class 1B), clarithromycin (class 2), simeprevir (class 1B), and midazolam (class 2, CYP3A probe substrate) administered orally as a cocktail was evaluated (Yoshikado et al., 2017a). Rifampicin treatment significantly increased the plasma AUCs of bosentan, repaglinide, and simepravir (3.2-, 1.9-, and 7.2-fold, respectively), while itraconazole showed a notable impact on clarithromycin, simeprevir, and midazolam plasma exposure (2.3-, 2.2-, and 3.7-fold, respectively). Based on the relatively large estimated β value and small RDIF value, bosentan can be categorized as OATP-mediated uptake-determined clearance. However, low derived RDIF and β values suggest that simeprevir follows extended clearance, where both uptake and metabolism are major contributors to its systemic clearance (Snoeys et al., 2016; Yoshikado et al., 2017a).

Collectively, the impact of variation in the functional activity of hepatic metabolizing enzymes by drug inhibition or genetic variation on the systemic exposure of class 1B drugs depends on the interplay of transport and metabolism. In contrast, inhibition of biliary efflux should have a minimal effect on the plasma exposure of hepatic-cleared class 3B drugs (Watanabe et al., 2009; Varma et al., 2012c; Jamei et al., 2014; Kimoto et al., 2017) since such drugs possess very low passive permeability to back diffusion from the liver to plasma compartment. Therefore, OATP-mediated uptake is considered the rate-determining step in the class 3B drug clearance. However, recent studies demonstrated a significant role of basolateral efflux transporters such as MRP3 and MRP4 in the translocation of class 3B drugs from liver to plasma, suggesting that inhibition of biliary efflux may alter plasma exposure in such cases (Pfeifer et al., 2013, 2014). Further quantitative understanding on the role of basolateral efflux in hepatic clearance is warranted to factor this mechanism in evaluating DDIs.

In the case of interactions with cyclosporine, an inhibitor of hepatic OATP1B1/1B3 and intestinal P-gp/BCRP at clinically relevant doses, all class 1B and the majority of the class 3B drugs showed moderate-to-high AUC ratios (AUC ratio 2–16) (Fig. 2B). The interactions with cyclosporine in the other classes are low to moderate (AUC ratio 1.25–5), and are likely associated with inhibition of intestinal P-gp and/or BCRP—particularly for class 4 drugs. For example, aliskiren and colchicine are known P-gp substrates with permeability-limited absorption and show up to 4.5-fold interaction with cyclosporine (Rebello et al., 2011; Terkeltaub et al., 2011). Inhibition of intestinal metabolism via CYP3A by cyclosporine could also be a contributing factor for class 2 drugs with low-to-moderate intestinal availability (Fg). Evidently, midazolam and ticagrelor, metabolized by CYP3A in the intestine, present a ∼2-fold AUC change when coadministered with cyclosporine. Nevertheless, cyclosporine-induced changes in presystemic disposition (Fa and Fg) may contribute to the DDIs for class 1B and 3B compounds (Varma et al., 2012c). The analyses of exhaustive and unbiased clinical DDIs data sets involving rifampicin and cyclosporine clearly illustrate the utility of the ECCS in identifying DDI risk associated with OATPs (Varma et al., 2017a).

Role of Transporters in Renal Drug Clearance

Renal blood clearance (CLrenal,b) is determined by glomerular filtration, tubular secretion, and reabsorption processes; and is mathematically described by (Russel et al., 2002; Lee and Kim, 2004; Feng et al., 2010; Morrissey et al., 2013):Embedded Image(7)where, fu,b is the unbound blood fraction; GFR is the glomerular filtration rate; CLsec is active renal secretory clearance; and Freabs is the reabsorbed fraction of filtered and secreted drug. Thus, CLsec can be defined, assuming a well-stirred model, as follows:Embedded Image(8)where Qr is the renal blood flow (15.7 ml/min/kg) (Davies and Morris, 1993), and CLint,sec is the intrinsic secretory clearance.

Localized on the basolateral membrane of the proximal tubules, OAT1, OAT3, and OCT2 are involved in the uptake of drugs, and are associated with clinical DDIs (Masereeuw and Russel, 2001; Lee and Kim, 2004; Feng et al., 2010; Morrissey et al., 2013). On other hand, tubular reabsorption often depends on the passive permeability of compounds (Varma et al., 2009; Scotcher et al., 2016). The ECCS framework suggests that drugs with low passive permeability are likely cleared by urinary route (>70% of the systemic clearance), with the exception of high molecular weight acids or zwitterions (class 3B), in which case hepatic uptake may also be the rate-determining process in the systemic clearance (Varma et al., 2015b). Our group recently evaluated the role of OATs in the renal secretion of 31 compounds from ECCS classes 1A, 3A, 3B, and 4 (Mathialagan et al., 2017). Some trends emerged: class 1A and 3A compounds (low molecular weight acids/zwitterions) show major involvement of OAT1 or OAT3, class 4 compounds (low permeable bases/neutrals) are secreted by either OAT2 or OAT3, while all class 3B compounds (high molecular weight, low permeable acids/zwitterions) are predominantly secreted by OAT3 alone. Additionally, OAT3 emerged as a major contributor in renal secretion for the majority of the 31 compounds evaluated, implying its clinical significance in a wide variety of drugs. OCT2 primarily transports organic cations and neutral compounds, and many of the OCT2 substrates characterized to have significant renal secretion belong to ECCS class 4 (El-Kattan et al., 2016). Collectively, the ECCS can indicate the potential contribution of CLrenal,b to the total body clearance, as well as a sense of likely transporters involved in renal secretion, which needs to be followed up with quantitative predictions.

Allometric scaling using animal data is widely applied in extrapolating pharmacokinetic parameters, including renal clearance, in order to predict clinical pharmacokinetics (Paine et al., 2011). Such scaling methodology may be useful for drugs that are eliminated in the urine by the glomerular filtration process as unchanged drug. However, allometry may not be a reliable methodology for drugs cleared predominantly by transporter-mediated active processes because of possible species differences in transporter expression and function (Chu et al., 2013). Prediction of active secretion is hindered by lack of established in vitro-in vivo extrapolation methodologies—owing to the limitations in wider availability of primary cell systems (Brown et al., 2008). Nevertheless, approaches based on human kidney slices and transfected cell systems have been successfully applied in clearance and DDI predictions (Nozaki et al., 2007; Posada et al., 2015; Mathialagan et al., 2017).

ECCS and Victim DDIs Involving Major Renal Transporters

Probenecid, a recommended probe inhibitor of OAT1/3, elicits a low-to-moderate AUC increase associated with decreased renal clearance for class 3A, 3B, and 4 drugs (Fig. 3A) (Varma et al., 2017a). For example, the largest of such interactions with probenecid involve furosemide and cephradine with about a 3-fold AUC increase. On the other hand, cimetidine, an OCT2/MATE probe inhibitor, shows low interaction (<2-fold) due to inhibition of renal secretion for class 4 drugs only (Fig. 3B). Also, DDIs involving inhibition of renal OAT1/3 are possible for class 3A, 3B, and 4 drugs, while OCT2-mediated interactions are limited to class 4 drugs (El-Kattan et al., 2016; Mathialagan et al., 2017). Cimetidine inhibits OCT2 and MATE1/2K at clinically relevant concentrations and the majority of OCT2 substrates are also transported by MATE1/2K. Additionally, the relatively selective MATE1/2K inhibitor pyrimethamine significantly increased plasma exposure of metformin (Kusuhara et al., 2011); therefore, the contribution of MATE1/2K to renal DDIs for class 4 drugs cannot be ruled out based on the available clinical data. However, given the overlapping substrate specificity between OCT2 and MATE proteins and basolateral uptake often being the rate-determining process for systemic clearance (Varma et al., 2015b), evaluating OCT2 activity alone could serve the purpose of DDI risk assessment in the clinic.

Fig. 3.
  • Download figure
  • Open in new tab
  • Download powerpoint
Fig. 3.

Victim DDIs per ECCS class with OAT1 and OAT3 probe inhibitor, probenecid (A), and OCT2 and MATEs probe inhibitor, cimetidine (B). Schematics depicting the major transporters affected by these inhibitors are shown. Data points represent the mean AUC ratio of each victim-inhibitor pair from a single study or averaged value from multiple studies where available. Only drugs with renal clearance as the predominant clearance mechanism are presented here. Other legend details are similar to Fig. 2. Data figures were adapted from Varma et al. (2017a) with copyright statement from the original paper.

Oral Absorption per ECCS Class and Impact of Drug Transporters

Following oral administration, absorption is the process that defines drug transfer from the site of administration in the gastrointestinal tract to the enterocyte. Drug molecules can cross the apical intestinal membrane via various mechanisms following oral dosing. They include passive diffusion or active transport (Lennernäs, 1998). Passive diffusion involves two pathways: 1) the paracellular pathway, where small molecular weight hydrophilic drugs diffuse through the aqueous pores at the tight junctions between the enterocytes; and 2) the transcellular (lipophilic) pathway, which requires lipophilic drug diffusion across the lipid cell membrane of the intestinal enterocyte. The active transport pathway is mediated by the interplay of influx and efflux transporters. The significance of each pathway is governed by the drug’s physicochemical properties and its affinity for various efflux and influx transporters (Lipinski, 2000; Hurst et al., 2007; Varma et al., 2010a,b; Yang and Smith, 2013). Typically, compounds that are absorbed by the transcellular pathway tend to have higher intestinal permeability and absorption relative to those absorbed via the paracellular pathway. Understanding the dominant absorption pathway is key to predicting drug absorption and factors that may affect the overall process.

The ECCS can provide initial guidance on the potential absorption liabilities of NMEs early on in drug discovery (Fig. 4). Compounds with high permeability (i.e., classes 1A, 1B, and 2) tend to have high fa values (≥85%) (El-Kattan et al., 2016); interestingly, neither solubility nor efflux transporter information provided additional perspective on the noted high absorption for the majority of these high permeability molecules. These compounds are absorbed predominantly via the passive transcellular pathway, which is consistent with their overall hydrophobicity. However, classes 3A, 3B, and 4 tend to have low oral absorption in humans (fa ≤ 85%). Indeed, intestinal efflux transporters (e.g., BCRP, P-gp, and MRP2) have a more profound impact in determining the extent of absorption of low permeability compounds (Tachibana et al., 2010). These observations are in concordance with pharmacogenomics and DDI data, when available. For example, rosuvastatin (ECCS class 3B) shows low fa and is also a substrate for BCRP, expressed on the apical membrane of enterocytes (El-Kattan et al., 2016). Keskitalo et al. (2009) investigated the impact of ABCG2 polymorphism (encoding BCRP transporter) on the pharmacokinetics of rosuvastatin in healthy volunteers following oral dosing, and demonstrated that the carriers of the c.421AA genotype have 100% greater exposure than those with the c.421CA genotype, and 144% greater exposure than those with the c.421CC genotype. Similar changes were observed with the peak plasma concentrations (Cmax), implying change in presystemic disposition as the major cause for altered pharmacokinetics of rosuvastatin in genetic variants (Keskitalo et al., 2009). Oral absorption of class 4 drugs tends to be impacted by intestinal P-gp. Clearly, inhibiting P-gp of digoxin is associated with major changes in its oral exposure but with minimal changes in plasma half-life, indicating the critical role of P-gp in reducing oral absorption (Igel et al., 2007). Oral absorption of P-gp substrates is determined by key variables, namely, effective intestinal permeability, solubility, oral dose, and affinity to P-gp (Km) (Tachibana et al., 2012). Sensitivity analysis suggested that compounds with low permeability, low solubility/slow dissolution, and low oral dose rate would not saturate the efflux transporter, e.g., P-gp, at therapeutically relevant oral doses. Under these conditions, P-gp would play a key role in limiting the absorption of low permeability molecules. These variables should be investigated to define the potential impact of P-gp DDIs and/or pharmacogenomics on the absorption of NMEs. These principles are also applicable to other intestinal efflux transporters and their potential impact on oral absorption, e.g., BCRP and MRP2.

Fig. 4.
  • Download figure
  • Open in new tab
  • Download powerpoint
Fig. 4.

Oral absorption characteristics per ECCS class.

Intestinal uptake transporters such as OATP2B1, system L, monocarboxylate transporter 1, and peptide transporter 1 (PEPT1) likely contribute to the drug absorption for compounds with low permeability, i.e., ECCS class 3A, 3B, and 4 drug molecules (Fig. 4). These transporters can be divided into high affinity/low capacity transporters (e.g., system L and OATP2B1) and low affinity/high capacity transporters (e.g., monocarboxylate and PEPT1) (Varma et al., 2010a; Estudante et al., 2013; Filipski et al., 2013; Yang and Smith, 2013). High affinity/low capacity intestinal uptake transporters would improve the oral absorption of low permeability and low oral dose drug molecules (<100 mg). For example, gabapentin is an ECCS class 3A molecule that is a substrate for the system L transporter (a high affinity/low capacity transporter). Increasing the oral dose of gabapentin is associated with a lower than proportional increase in systemic exposure in humans due to saturation in the intestinal absorption process (Stewart et al., 1993). On the other hand, penicillin and cephalosporin drugs are usually PEPT1 substrates (low affinity/high capacity transporters) (Ganapathy et al., 1995). This transporter enabled a moderate fa of these low permeability/high oral dose molecules (oral dose > 1 gm/d). From the drug molecules investigated, the average fa value for PEPT1 substrates is 70% with an average passive membrane permeability of 0.7 × 10−6 cm/s (El-Kattan et al., 2016). The potential impact of the pharmacogenomics and DDIs involving uptake transporters is critical for low permeability ECCS class 3A, 3B, and 4 molecules. For example, grapefruit juice, a known inhibitor of OATP2B1, reduced the plasma exposure of oral rosuvastatin (OATP2B1 substrate) to 70% of control, suggesting the role of OATP2B1 in the absorption of rosuvastatin (Kashihara et al., 2017). Overall, the uptake intestinal transporter contribution is profound for compounds with low permeability.

Small and hydrophilic molecules (e.g., mol. wt. < 250 Da and clog P < 0) with low permeability are likely absorbed via the paracellular pathway (Fig. 4). This is particularly prominent for compounds in classes 3A and 4, e.g., gabapentin, acyclovir, and cimetidine. This pathway accounts for <0.01% of the intestinal membrane total surface area, and it offers a limited window for drug absorption (Lennernäs, 1995). In addition, the tight junctions between cells become tighter traveling from the jejunum toward the colon. Therefore, compounds that are absorbed via this pathway are not amenable for traditional controlled release formulation targeting the colon. Therefore, gastric retentive controlled release formulation technology has been shown to be effective in extending the apparent half-life for these molecules (Berner and Cowles, 2006; Gordi et al., 2008).

Nonetheless, solubility is a key parameter that should be duly investigated to ensure maximum oral bioavailable (Amidon et al., 1995; Wu and Benet, 2005). Previously, we recommended the measurement of the equilibrium solubility of NMEs in either pH 1.2 medium for acidic molecules or fasted state simulated intestinal fluid medium (pH 6.5) for nonacidic molecules (Varma et al., 2012b). Using a cutoff value of 200 μg/ml, the data set suggested 93% sensitivity and 86% specificity in predicting high and low solubility classifications (Varma et al., 2012b). Therefore, NMEs with solubility in relevant matrices higher than 200 μg/ml are considered high solubility molecules and are of low likelihood for solubility-limited absorption. As the compounds progress into the advanced stages of preclinical/clinical development a more thorough characterization of solubility and dissolution rate in physiologically relevant conditions is warranted to implement quantitative predictions via physiologically based pharmacokinetic (PBPK) modeling and simulations.

Road Map to Integrated Transporter Sciences for Pharmacokinetics Characterization

Identifying ADCE attributes of compounds early in drug discovery is important in building strategies around clearance and dose optimization, decreasing the risk of pharmacokinetic variability due to intrinsic and extrinsic factors (e.g., DDIs and genetic mutations), and designing efficient clinical studies. Membrane transporters have a pivotal role in drug absorption, tissue distribution, and regulating drug exposure at the site of metabolism and elimination from the organs, and eventually from the body. As discussed, the ECCS is effective in predicting the role of clinically relevant transporters in the clearance of drugs. In a nutshell, OATP-mediated uptake is often the rate-determining step for the hepatic clearance of class 1B and 3B drugs, while renal transporters, OAT1, and OAT3, are involved in the renal secretion of class 3A, 3B, and 4 drugs, and OCT2 and MATE proteins drive renal secretion of class 4 drugs (Fig. 1). Additionally, intestinal efflux pumps, P-gp and BCRP, could be of relevance in clinical pharmacokinetics of class 3A, 3B, and 4 drugs.

Building a screening funnel for a chemical series in the lead optimization stage based on the ECCS could be beneficial to bring forward candidates with optimum ADCE and pharmacokinetic attributes for clinical development (Fig. 5). The goal here would be to use the ECCS framework to identify the clearance mechanism (rate-determining step) and other key disposition characteristics of the chemical series and build structural-activity relationships to reduce or eliminate the contributors to poor pharmacokinetics (i.e., absorption and/or high intestinal/hepatic extraction). For instance, a chemical series with low permeability and high molecular weight acids (class 3B) likely has limited absorption and is cleared via OATP-mediated active hepatic uptake and/or OAT3-mediated renal secretion, and once in the liver is eliminated in the bile. Therefore, the priorities of ADCE screening for this chemical series would involve screening compounds in relevant transfected cell lines and primary human hepatocytes to investigate and quantify the uptake kinetics. Medicinal design rank-ordering efforts should target driving down uptake clearance and renal secretion, if the goal is to maximize plasma exposure. However, programs approaching pharmacological targets in the liver (hepato-selective) could benefit from increasing uptake clearance and reducing biliary efflux (Pfefferkorn et al., 2012). Clinical evidence suggests that alteration in metabolic or biliary efflux activity due to genetic polymorphism leads to a change in the pharmacodynamic response of statins, in which the pharmacological target resides in the liver (Varma and El‐Kattan, 2016). Understanding absorption liability and the potential role of intestinal uptake and efflux transporters is also valuable at this stage. Crystal structures for most of the drug transporters are currently not available, but ligand-based quantitative structure-activity relationships using the structure and molecular properties of the ligands can be developed to guide medicinal chemistry design and identify molecules that achieve the required systemic and target exposures (Varma et al., 2017c). Drug design applications can be further improved through uncovering transporter protein crystal structures and generation of quality data to refine and develop viable quantitative structure-activity relationship models.

Fig. 5.
  • Download figure
  • Open in new tab
  • Download powerpoint
Fig. 5.

Schematic depiction of ECCS-informed approach for ADCE and pharmacokinetics characterization during various stages of drug discovery and development.

During the candidate selection stage, quantitative pharmacokinetic predictions are of utmost importance to inform the study design of first-in-human dose-ranging studies, and more importantly, to avoid unexpected suboptimal exposure in clinic. Middle-out PBPK modeling integrating mechanistic in vitro data has been suggested as an effective approach to pharmacokinetics predictions for OATP1B1/1B3 substrate drugs (Jones et al., 2012; Li et al., 2014a,b). However, when early clinical data are available such models may be verified and refined before application for the purpose of predicting DDIs, food-drug interactions, and impact of transporter/enzyme pharmacogenomics, as well as disease state on pharmacokinetics in humans. Our group and others have presented several examples of DDI predictions involving OATPs via mechanistic static and PBPK models (Varma et al., 2012c, 2013, 2014; Gertz et al., 2013; Yoshikado et al., 2016). Such mechanistic translational approaches for capturing disposition via renal and intestinal transporters are less evolved, and further work is warranted in these areas (Tachibana et al., 2012; Posada et al., 2015; Feng and Varma, 2016; Mathialagan et al., 2017; Scotcher et al., 2017).

It should be emphasized that the utility of the ECCS is not limited to early drug discovery. Indeed, it allows us to revisit our understanding of ADCE characteristics of drug molecules in clinical development or the marketplace and refine our knowledge where needed. For instance, montelukast (class 1B drug) has been routinely recommended as a potential in vivo CYP2C8 probe substrate (VandenBrink et al., 2011). However, being a class 1B drug, we hypothesized that hepatic uptake via OATPs is the major clearance mechanism, and we investigated the quantitative role of hepatic uptake in its pharmacokinetics and DDIs (Varma et al., 2017b). Based on in vitro transport studies, in vivo DDI studies in preclinical animal models (e.g., rat and monkey), and PBPK modeling and simulations of available clinical DDI data, OATPs-CYP2C8 interplay was noted as the major determinant of montelukast pharmacokinetics. This provides a case example for rationalizing the conduct of in vitro mechanistic studies and follow-up clinical studies, such that clinical risk assessment is rationally made to support drug development. Transporter assays have inherent challenges and limitations that need to be considered in their application. For example, nonspecific binding to the cell surface, compound back-diffusion from cells during washing cycles, and general variability of the cell systems used may pose issues when attempting to evoke the role of transporters in drug disposition or reliably measure in vitro permeability. This may lead to misclassification of compounds, which should be carefully evaluated when designing in vitro ADCE screening strategies. Our initial validation set (Varma et al., 2015b) yielded about 8% misclassification; therefore, we suggest additional diligence, particularly for compounds with values close to the cutoff values for the three parameters (i.e., ionization, permeability, and molecular weight) defining the ECCS class. Furthermore, if in vitro studies do not provide appropriate guidance for compounds due to technical challenges as discussed previously, which would otherwise be assumed based on the ECCS class, preclinical in vivo studies should be considered to support the qualitative assessment of the contribution of transport mechanism to overall clearance. These studies, in turn, may provide the impetus for early dedicated DDI studies using probe inhibitors and/or prioritized genotyping of subjects.

Finally, as with any categorical framework, exceptions are seen with the ECCS. For example, apixaban is binned in ECCS class 4 based on its poor in vitro permeability and neutral charge, which implies that renal clearance is the major pathway. However, interestingly, renal excretion accounts for only ∼27% of total clearance, while biliary and direct intestinal secretion contributes to elimination of apixaban in the feces (Eliquis label). This prominent biliary/intestinal secretion can be explained by high P-gp and BCRP efflux of apixaban. Similar examples in class 4 (azithromycin and erythromycin) are apparent, wherein biliary/intestinal secretion rather than renal excretion of parent was shown to be the major clearance mechanism for efflux substrates (internal Pfizer data). Further work is needed to better understand the molecular properties associated with such lesser known pathways.

In conclusion, we present ECCS as a useful framework that has been extensively validated and can be implemented with ease at various stages of drug discovery and development. Such a tool can outline the mechanistic in vitro and in vivo studies needed to best characterize ADCE attributes and pharmacokinetics.

Authorship Contributions

Participated in research design: El-Kattan, Varma.

Performed data analysis: Varma.

Wrote or contributed to the writing of the manuscript: El-Kattan, Varma.

Footnotes

    • Received December 17, 2017.
    • Accepted February 22, 2018.
  • The authors are full-time employees of Pfizer Inc. The authors declare no conflict of interest directly relevant to this study.

  • https://doi.org/10.1124/dmd.117.080044.

Abbreviations

ABC
ATP-binding cassette
ADCE
absorption, distribution, clearance, and elimination
AUC
area under the plasma concentration-time curve
BCRP
breast cancer resistance protein
DDI
drug-drug interaction
ECCS
extended clearance classification system
MATE
multidrug and toxin extrusion
MRP
multidrug resistance protein
NME
new molecular entity
OAT
organic anion transporter
OATP
organic anion-transporting polypeptide
OCT
organic cation transporter
PBPK
physiologically based pharmacokinetic
PEPT1
peptide transporter 1
P-gp
P-glycoprotein
SLC
solute carrier
UGT
UDP glucuronosyltransferase
  • Copyright © 2018 by The American Society for Pharmacology and Experimental Therapeutics

References

  1. ↵
    1. Amidon GL,
    2. Lennernäs H,
    3. Shah VP, and
    4. Crison JR
    (1995) A theoretical basis for a biopharmaceutic drug classification: the correlation of in vitro drug product dissolution and in vivo bioavailability. Pharm Res 12:413–420.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  2. ↵
    1. Aslamkhan AG,
    2. Han YH,
    3. Yang XP,
    4. Zalups RK, and
    5. Pritchard JB
    (2003) Human renal organic anion transporter 1-dependent uptake and toxicity of mercuric-thiol conjugates in Madin-Darby canine kidney cells. Mol Pharmacol 63:590–596.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  3. ↵
    1. Berner B and
    2. Cowles VE
    (2006) Case studies in swelling polymeric gastric retentive tablets. Expert Opin Drug Deliv 3:541–548.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  4. ↵
    1. Bi YA,
    2. Scialis RJ,
    3. Lazzaro S,
    4. Mathialagan S,
    5. Kimoto E,
    6. Keefer J,
    7. Zhang H,
    8. Vildhede AM,
    9. Costales C,
    10. Rodrigues AD, et al.
    (2017) Reliable rate measurements for active and passive hepatic uptake using plated human hepatocytes. AAPS J 19:787–796.
    OpenUrl
  5. ↵
    1. Brown CD,
    2. Sayer R,
    3. Windass AS,
    4. Haslam IS,
    5. De Broe ME,
    6. D’Haese PC, and
    7. Verhulst A
    (2008) Characterisation of human tubular cell monolayers as a model of proximal tubular xenobiotic handling. Toxicol Appl Pharmacol 233:428–438.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  6. ↵
    1. Chandra P and
    2. Brouwer KL
    (2004) The complexities of hepatic drug transport: current knowledge and emerging concepts. Pharm Res 21:719–735.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  7. ↵
    1. Chu X,
    2. Bleasby K, and
    3. Evers R
    (2013) Species differences in drug transporters and implications for translating preclinical findings to humans. Expert Opin Drug Metab Toxicol 9:237–252.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  8. ↵
    1. Davies B and
    2. Morris T
    (1993) Physiological parameters in laboratory animals and humans. Pharm Res 10:1093–1095.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  9. ↵
    1. Di L,
    2. Feng B,
    3. Goosen TC,
    4. Lai Y,
    5. Steyn SJ,
    6. Varma MV, and
    7. Obach RS
    (2013) A perspective on the prediction of drug pharmacokinetics and disposition in drug research and development. Drug Metab Dispos 41:1975–1993.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  10. ↵
    1. Di L,
    2. Whitney-Pickett C,
    3. Umland JP,
    4. Zhang H,
    5. Zhang X,
    6. Gebhard DF,
    7. Lai Y,
    8. Federico JJ III.,
    9. Davidson RE,
    10. Smith R, et al.
    (2011) Development of a new permeability assay using low-efflux MDCKII cells. J Pharm Sci 100:4974–4985.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  11. ↵
    1. El-Kattan AF,
    2. Varma MV,
    3. Steyn SJ,
    4. Scott DO,
    5. Maurer TS, and
    6. Bergman A
    (2016) Projecting ADME behavior and drug-drug interactions in early discovery and development: application of the extended clearance classification system. Pharm Res 33:3021–3030.
    OpenUrl
  12. ↵
    1. Elsby R,
    2. Hilgendorf C, and
    3. Fenner K
    (2012) Understanding the critical disposition pathways of statins to assess drug-drug interaction risk during drug development: it’s not just about OATP1B1. Clin Pharmacol Ther 92:584–598.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  13. ↵
    1. Estudante M,
    2. Morais JG,
    3. Soveral G, and
    4. Benet LZ
    (2013) Intestinal drug transporters: an overview. Adv Drug Deliv Rev 65:1340–1356.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  14. ↵
    1. Feng B,
    2. LaPerle JL,
    3. Chang G, and
    4. Varma MV
    (2010) Renal clearance in drug discovery and development: molecular descriptors, drug transporters and disease state. Expert Opin Drug Metab Toxicol 6:939–952.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  15. ↵
    1. Feng B and
    2. Varma MV
    (2016) Evaluation and quantitative prediction of renal transporter-mediated drug-drug interactions. J Clin Pharmacol 56 (Suppl 7):S110–S121.
    OpenUrl
  16. ↵
    1. Filipski KJ,
    2. Varma MV,
    3. El-Kattan AF,
    4. Ambler CM,
    5. Ruggeri RB,
    6. Goosen TC, and
    7. Cameron KO
    (2013) Intestinal targeting of drugs: rational design approaches and challenges. Curr Top Med Chem 13:776–802.
    OpenUrl
  17. ↵
    1. Fredlund L,
    2. Winiwarter S, and
    3. Hilgendorf C
    (2017) In vitro intrinsic permeability: a transporter-independent measure of Caco-2 cell permeability in drug design and development. Mol Pharm 14:1601–1609.
    OpenUrl
  18. ↵
    1. Ganapathy ME,
    2. Brandsch M,
    3. Prasad PD,
    4. Ganapathy V, and
    5. Leibach FH
    (1995) Differential recognition of β-lactam antibiotics by intestinal and renal peptide transporters, PEPT 1 and PEPT 2. J Biol Chem 270:25672–25677.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  19. ↵
    1. Gertz M,
    2. Cartwright CM,
    3. Hobbs MJ,
    4. Kenworthy KE,
    5. Rowland M,
    6. Houston JB, and
    7. Galetin A
    (2013) Cyclosporine inhibition of hepatic and intestinal CYP3A4, uptake and efflux transporters: application of PBPK modeling in the assessment of drug-drug interaction potential. Pharm Res 30:761–780.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  20. ↵
    1. Giacomini KM,
    2. Huang SM,
    3. Tweedie DJ,
    4. Benet LZ,
    5. Brouwer KL,
    6. Chu X,
    7. Dahlin A,
    8. Evers R,
    9. Fischer V,
    10. Hillgren KM, et al., and International Transporter Consortium
    (2010) Membrane transporters in drug development. Nat Rev Drug Discov 9:215–236.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  21. ↵
    1. Gordi T,
    2. Hou E,
    3. Kasichayanula S, and
    4. Berner B
    (2008) Pharmacokinetics of gabapentin after a single day and at steady state following the administration of gastric-retentive- extended-release and immediate-release tablets: a randomized, open-label, multiple-dose, three-way crossover, exploratory study in healthy subjects. Clin Ther 30:909–916.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  22. ↵
    1. Harrison B,
    2. Magee MH,
    3. Mandagere A,
    4. Walker G,
    5. Dufton C,
    6. Henderson LS, and
    7. Boinpally R
    (2010) Effects of rifampicin (rifampin) on the pharmacokinetics and safety of ambrisentan in healthy subjects: a single-sequence, open-label study. Clin Drug Investig 30:875–885.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  23. ↵
    1. Hosea NA,
    2. Collard WT,
    3. Cole S,
    4. Maurer TS,
    5. Fang RX,
    6. Jones H,
    7. Kakar SM,
    8. Nakai Y,
    9. Smith BJ,
    10. Webster R, et al.
    (2009) Prediction of human pharmacokinetics from preclinical information: comparative accuracy of quantitative prediction approaches. J Clin Pharmacol 49:513–533.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  24. ↵
    1. Houston JB
    (1994) Utility of in vitro drug metabolism data in predicting in vivo metabolic clearance. Biochem Pharmacol 47:1469–1479.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  25. ↵
    1. Hurst S,
    2. Loi CM,
    3. Brodfuehrer J, and
    4. El-Kattan A
    (2007) Impact of physiological, physicochemical and biopharmaceutical factors in absorption and metabolism mechanisms on the drug oral bioavailability of rats and humans. Expert Opin Drug Metab Toxicol 3:469–489.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  26. ↵
    1. Ieiri I,
    2. Higuchi S, and
    3. Sugiyama Y
    (2009) Genetic polymorphisms of uptake (OATP1B1, 1B3) and efflux (MRP2, BCRP) transporters: implications for inter-individual differences in the pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of statins and other clinically relevant drugs. Expert Opin Drug Metab Toxicol 5:703–729.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  27. ↵
    1. Igel S,
    2. Drescher S,
    3. Mürdter T,
    4. Hofmann U,
    5. Heinkele G,
    6. Tegude H,
    7. Glaeser H,
    8. Brenner SS,
    9. Somogyi AA,
    10. Omari T, et al.
    (2007) Increased absorption of digoxin from the human jejunum due to inhibition of intestinal transporter-mediated efflux. Clin Pharmacokinet 46:777–785.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  28. ↵
    1. Jamei M,
    2. Bajot F,
    3. Neuhoff S,
    4. Barter Z,
    5. Yang J,
    6. Rostami-Hodjegan A, and
    7. Rowland-Yeo K
    (2014) A mechanistic framework for in vitro-in vivo extrapolation of liver membrane transporters: prediction of drug-drug interaction between rosuvastatin and cyclosporine. Clin Pharmacokinet 53:73–87.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  29. ↵
    1. Jones HM,
    2. Barton HA,
    3. Lai Y,
    4. Bi YA,
    5. Kimoto E,
    6. Kempshall S,
    7. Tate SC,
    8. El-Kattan A,
    9. Houston JB,
    10. Galetin A, et al.
    (2012) Mechanistic pharmacokinetic modeling for the prediction of transporter-mediated disposition in humans from sandwich culture human hepatocyte data. Drug Metab Dispos 40:1007–1017.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  30. ↵
    1. Kashihara Y,
    2. Ieiri I,
    3. Yoshikado T,
    4. Maeda K,
    5. Fukae M,
    6. Kimura M,
    7. Hirota T,
    8. Matsuki S,
    9. Irie S,
    10. Izumi N, et al.
    (2017) Small-dosing clinical study: pharmacokinetic, pharmacogenomic (SLCO2B1 and ABCG2), and interaction (atorvastatin and grapefruit juice) profiles of 5 probes for OATP2B1 and BCRP. J Pharm Sci 106:2688–2694.
    OpenUrl
  31. ↵
    1. Keskitalo JE,
    2. Zolk O,
    3. Fromm MF,
    4. Kurkinen KJ,
    5. Neuvonen PJ, and
    6. Niemi M
    (2009) ABCG2 polymorphism markedly affects the pharmacokinetics of atorvastatin and rosuvastatin. Clin Pharmacol Ther 86:197–203.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  32. ↵
    1. Kim RB,
    2. Fromm MF,
    3. Wandel C,
    4. Leake B,
    5. Wood AJ,
    6. Roden DM, and
    7. Wilkinson GR
    (1998) The drug transporter P-glycoprotein limits oral absorption and brain entry of HIV-1 protease inhibitors. J Clin Invest 101:289–294.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  33. ↵
    1. Kimoto E,
    2. Bi YA,
    3. Kosa RE,
    4. Tremaine LM, and
    5. Varma MVS
    (2017) Hepatobiliary clearance prediction: species scaling from monkey, dog and rat, and in vitro-in vivo extrapolation of sandwich cultured human hepatocytes using 17 drugs. J Pharm Sci 106:2795–2804.
    OpenUrl
  34. ↵
    1. Kola I and
    2. Landis J
    (2004) Can the pharmaceutical industry reduce attrition rates? Nat Rev Drug Discov 3:711–715.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  35. ↵
    1. Kunta JR and
    2. Sinko PJ
    (2004) Intestinal drug transporters: in vivo function and clinical importance. Curr Drug Metab 5:109–124.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  36. ↵
    1. Kusuhara H,
    2. Ito S,
    3. Kumagai Y,
    4. Jiang M,
    5. Shiroshita T,
    6. Moriyama Y,
    7. Inoue K,
    8. Yuasa H, and
    9. Sugiyama Y
    (2011) Effects of a MATE protein inhibitor, pyrimethamine, on the renal elimination of metformin at oral microdose and at therapeutic dose in healthy subjects. Clin Pharmacol Ther 89:837–844.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  37. ↵
    1. Lai Y,
    2. Varma M,
    3. Feng B,
    4. Stephens JC,
    5. Kimoto E,
    6. El-Kattan A,
    7. Ichikawa K,
    8. Kikkawa H,
    9. Ono C,
    10. Suzuki A, et al.
    (2012) Impact of drug transporter pharmacogenomics on pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic variability—considerations for drug development. Expert Opin Drug Metab Toxicol 8:723–743.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  38. ↵
    1. Lee W and
    2. Kim RB
    (2004) Transporters and renal drug elimination. Annu Rev Pharmacol Toxicol 44:137–166.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  39. ↵
    1. Lennernäs H
    (1995) Does fluid flow across the intestinal mucosa affect quantitative oral drug absorption? Is it time for a reevaluation? Pharm Res 12:1573–1582.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  40. ↵
    1. Lennernäs H
    (1998) Human intestinal permeability. J Pharm Sci 87:403–410.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  41. ↵
    1. Li R,
    2. Barton HA, and
    3. Varma MV
    (2014a) Prediction of pharmacokinetics and drug-drug interactions when hepatic transporters are involved. Clin Pharmacokinet 53:659–678.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  42. ↵
    1. Li R,
    2. Barton HA,
    3. Yates PD,
    4. Ghosh A,
    5. Wolford AC,
    6. Riccardi KA, and
    7. Maurer TS
    (2014b) A “middle-out” approach to human pharmacokinetic predictions for OATP substrates using physiologically-based pharmacokinetic modeling. J Pharmacokinet Pharmacodyn 41:197–209.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  43. ↵
    1. Link E,
    2. Parish S,
    3. Armitage J,
    4. Bowman L,
    5. Heath S,
    6. Matsuda F,
    7. Gut I,
    8. Lathrop M,
    9. Collins R, and SEARCH Collaborative Group
    (2008) SLCO1B1 variants and statin-induced myopathy—a genomewide study. N Engl J Med 359:789–799.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  44. ↵
    1. Lipinski CA
    (2000) Drug-like properties and the causes of poor solubility and poor permeability. J Pharmacol Toxicol Methods 44:235–249.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  45. ↵
    1. Liu L and
    2. Pang KS
    (2005) The roles of transporters and enzymes in hepatic drug processing. Drug Metab Dispos 33:1–9.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  46. ↵
    1. Maeda K,
    2. Ikeda Y,
    3. Fujita T,
    4. Yoshida K,
    5. Azuma Y,
    6. Haruyama Y,
    7. Yamane N,
    8. Kumagai Y, and
    9. Sugiyama Y
    (2011) Identification of the rate-determining process in the hepatic clearance of atorvastatin in a clinical cassette microdosing study. Clin Pharmacol Ther 90:575–581.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  47. ↵
    1. Masereeuw R and
    2. Russel FG
    (2001) Mechanisms and clinical implications of renal drug excretion. Drug Metab Rev 33:299–351.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  48. ↵
    1. Mathialagan S,
    2. Piotrowski MA,
    3. Tess DA,
    4. Feng B,
    5. Litchfield J, and
    6. Varma MV
    (2017) Quantitative prediction of human renal clearance and drug-drug interactions of organic anion transporter substrates using in vitro transport data: a relative activity factor approach. Drug Metab Dispos 45:409–417.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  49. ↵
    1. Ménochet K,
    2. Kenworthy KE,
    3. Houston JB, and
    4. Galetin A
    (2012) Use of mechanistic modeling to assess interindividual variability and interspecies differences in active uptake in human and rat hepatocytes. Drug Metab Dispos 40:1744–1756.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  50. ↵
    1. Morrissey KM,
    2. Stocker SL,
    3. Wittwer MB,
    4. Xu L, and
    5. Giacomini KM
    (2013) Renal transporters in drug development. Annu Rev Pharmacol Toxicol 53:503–529.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  51. ↵
    1. Müller M and
    2. Jansen PL
    (1997) Molecular aspects of hepatobiliary transport. Am J Physiol 272:G1285–G1303.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  52. ↵
    1. Niemi M,
    2. Neuvonen PJ,
    3. Hofmann U,
    4. Backman JT,
    5. Schwab M,
    6. Lütjohann D,
    7. von Bergmann K,
    8. Eichelbaum M, and
    9. Kivistö KT
    (2005) Acute effects of pravastatin on cholesterol synthesis are associated with SLCO1B1 (encoding OATP1B1) haplotype *17. Pharmacogenet Genomics 15:303–309.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  53. ↵
    1. Niemi M,
    2. Pasanen MK, and
    3. Neuvonen PJ
    (2011) Organic anion transporting polypeptide 1B1: a genetically polymorphic transporter of major importance for hepatic drug uptake. Pharmacol Rev 63:157–181.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  54. ↵
    1. Nishizato Y,
    2. Ieiri I,
    3. Suzuki H,
    4. Kimura M,
    5. Kawabata K,
    6. Hirota T,
    7. Takane H,
    8. Irie S,
    9. Kusuhara H,
    10. Urasaki Y, et al.
    (2003) Polymorphisms of OATP-C (SLC21A6) and OAT3 (SLC22A8) genes: consequences for pravastatin pharmacokinetics. Clin Pharmacol Ther 73:554–565.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  55. ↵
    1. Nozaki Y,
    2. Kusuhara H,
    3. Kondo T,
    4. Hasegawa M,
    5. Shiroyanagi Y,
    6. Nakazawa H,
    7. Okano T, and
    8. Sugiyama Y
    (2007) Characterization of the uptake of organic anion transporter (OAT) 1 and OAT3 substrates by human kidney slices. J Pharmacol Exp Ther 321:362–369.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  56. ↵
    1. Obach RS
    (1999) Prediction of human clearance of twenty-nine drugs from hepatic microsomal intrinsic clearance data: an examination of in vitro half-life approach and nonspecific binding to microsomes. Drug Metab Dispos 27:1350–1359.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  57. ↵
    1. Paine SW,
    2. Ménochet K,
    3. Denton R,
    4. McGinnity DF, and
    5. Riley RJ
    (2011) Prediction of human renal clearance from preclinical species for a diverse set of drugs that exhibit both active secretion and net reabsorption. Drug Metab Dispos 39:1008–1013.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  58. ↵
    1. Patilea-Vrana G and
    2. Unadkat JD
    (2016) Transport vs. metabolism: what determines the pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of drugs? Insights from the extended clearance model. Clin Pharmacol Ther 100:413–418.
    OpenUrl
  59. ↵
    1. Pfefferkorn JA,
    2. Guzman-Perez A,
    3. Litchfield J,
    4. Aiello R,
    5. Treadway JL,
    6. Pettersen J,
    7. Minich ML,
    8. Filipski KJ,
    9. Jones CS,
    10. Tu M, et al.
    (2012) Discovery of (S)-6-(3-cyclopentyl-2-(4-(trifluoromethyl)-1H-imidazol-1-yl)propanamido)nicotinic acid as a hepatoselective glucokinase activator clinical candidate for treating type 2 diabetes mellitus. J Med Chem 55:1318–1333.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  60. ↵
    1. Pfeifer ND,
    2. Hardwick RN, and
    3. Brouwer KL
    (2014) Role of hepatic efflux transporters in regulating systemic and hepatocyte exposure to xenobiotics. Annu Rev Pharmacol Toxicol 54:509–535.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  61. ↵
    1. Pfeifer ND,
    2. Yang K, and
    3. Brouwer KL
    (2013) Hepatic basolateral efflux contributes significantly to rosuvastatin disposition I: characterization of basolateral versus biliary clearance using a novel protocol in sandwich-cultured hepatocytes. J Pharmacol Exp Ther 347:727–736.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  62. ↵
    1. Poirier A,
    2. Cascais AC,
    3. Funk C, and
    4. Lavé T
    (2009) Prediction of pharmacokinetic profile of valsartan in human based on in vitro uptake transport data. J Pharmacokinet Pharmacodyn 36:585–611.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  63. ↵
    1. Posada MM,
    2. Bacon JA,
    3. Schneck KB,
    4. Tirona RG,
    5. Kim RB,
    6. Higgins JW,
    7. Pak YA,
    8. Hall SD, and
    9. Hillgren KM
    (2015) Prediction of renal transporter mediated drug-drug interactions for pemetrexed using physiologically based pharmacokinetic modeling. Drug Metab Dispos 43:325–334.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  64. ↵
    1. Prueksaritanont T,
    2. Chu X,
    3. Evers R,
    4. Klopfer SO,
    5. Caro L,
    6. Kothare PA,
    7. Dempsey C,
    8. Rasmussen S,
    9. Houle R,
    10. Chan G, et al.
    (2014) Pitavastatin is a more sensitive and selective anion-transporting protein 1B clinical probe than rosuvastatin. Br J Clin Pharmacol 78:587–598.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  65. ↵
    1. Rebello S,
    2. Compain S,
    3. Feng A,
    4. Hariry S,
    5. Dieterich HA, and
    6. Jarugula V
    (2011) Effect of cyclosporine on the pharmacokinetics of aliskiren in healthy subjects. J Clin Pharmacol 51:1549–1560.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  66. ↵
    1. Ring BJ,
    2. Chien JY,
    3. Adkison KK,
    4. Jones HM,
    5. Rowland M,
    6. Jones RD,
    7. Yates JW,
    8. Ku MS,
    9. Gibson CR,
    10. He H, et al.
    (2011) PhRMA CPCDC initiative on predictive models of human pharmacokinetics, part 3: comparative assessement of prediction methods of human clearance. J Pharm Sci 100:4090–4110.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  67. ↵
    1. Russel FG,
    2. Masereeuw R, and
    3. van Aubel RA
    (2002) Molecular aspects of renal anionic drug transport. Annu Rev Physiol 64:563–594.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  68. ↵
    1. Scotcher D,
    2. Jones C,
    3. Rostami-Hodjegan A, and
    4. Galetin A
    (2016) Novel minimal physiologically-based model for the prediction of passive tubular reabsorption and renal excretion clearance. Eur J Pharm Sci 94:59–71.
    OpenUrl
  69. ↵
    1. Scotcher D,
    2. Jones CR,
    3. Galetin A, and
    4. Rostami-Hodjegan A
    (2017) Delineating the role of various factors in renal disposition of digoxin through application of physiologically based kidney model to renal impairment populations. J Pharmacol Exp Ther 360:484–495.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  70. ↵
    1. Shitara Y,
    2. Horie T, and
    3. Sugiyama Y
    (2006) Transporters as a determinant of drug clearance and tissue distribution. Eur J Pharm Sci 27:425–446.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  71. ↵
    1. Shitara Y,
    2. Maeda K,
    3. Ikejiri K,
    4. Yoshida K,
    5. Horie T, and
    6. Sugiyama Y
    (2013) Clinical significance of organic anion transporting polypeptides (OATPs) in drug disposition: their roles in hepatic clearance and intestinal absorption. Biopharm Drug Dispos 34:45–78.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  72. ↵
    1. Shitara Y and
    2. Sugiyama Y
    (2006) Pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic alterations of 3-hydroxy-3-methylglutaryl coenzyme A (HMG-CoA) reductase inhibitors: drug-drug interactions and interindividual differences in transporter and metabolic enzyme functions. Pharmacol Ther 112:71–105.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  73. ↵
    1. Sirianni GL and
    2. Pang KS
    (1997) Organ clearance concepts: new perspectives on old principles. J Pharmacokinet Biopharm 25:449–470.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  74. ↵
    1. Snoeys J,
    2. Beumont M,
    3. Monshouwer M, and
    4. Ouwerkerk-Mahadevan S
    (2016) Mechanistic understanding of the nonlinear pharmacokinetics and intersubject variability of simeprevir: a PBPK-guided drug development approach. Clin Pharmacol Ther 99:224–234.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  75. ↵
    1. Stewart BH,
    2. Kugler AR,
    3. Thompson PR, and
    4. Bockbrader HN
    (1993) A saturable transport mechanism in the intestinal absorption of gabapentin is the underlying cause of the lack of proportionality between increasing dose and drug levels in plasma. Pharm Res 10:276–281.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  76. ↵
    1. Tachibana T,
    2. Kato M, and
    3. Sugiyama Y
    (2012) Prediction of nonlinear intestinal absorption of CYP3A4 and P-glycoprotein substrates from their in vitro Km values. Pharm Res 29:651–668.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  77. ↵
    1. Tachibana T,
    2. Kato M,
    3. Takano J, and
    4. Sugiyama Y
    (2010) Predicting drug-drug interactions involving the inhibition of intestinal CYP3A4 and P-glycoprotein. Curr Drug Metab 11:762–777.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  78. ↵
    1. Terkeltaub RA,
    2. Furst DE,
    3. Digiacinto JL,
    4. Kook KA, and
    5. Davis MW
    (2011) Novel evidence-based colchicine dose-reduction algorithm to predict and prevent colchicine toxicity in the presence of cytochrome P450 3A4/P-glycoprotein inhibitors [published correction appears in Arthritis Rheum (2011) 63:3521]. Arthritis Rheum 63:2226–2237.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  79. ↵
    1. VandenBrink BM,
    2. Foti RS,
    3. Rock DA,
    4. Wienkers LC, and
    5. Wahlstrom JL
    (2011) Evaluation of CYP2C8 inhibition in vitro: utility of montelukast as a selective CYP2C8 probe substrate. Drug Metab Dispos 39:1546–1554.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  80. ↵
    1. Varma MV,
    2. Ambler CM,
    3. Ullah M,
    4. Rotter CJ,
    5. Sun H,
    6. Litchfield J,
    7. Fenner KS, and
    8. El-Kattan AF
    (2010a) Targeting intestinal transporters for optimizing oral drug absorption. Curr Drug Metab 11:730–742.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  81. ↵
    1. Varma MV,
    2. Ashokraj Y,
    3. Dey CS, and
    4. Panchagnula R
    (2003) P-glycoprotein inhibitors and their screening: a perspective from bioavailability enhancement. Pharmacol Res 48:347–359.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  82. ↵
    1. Varma MV,
    2. Bi YA,
    3. Kimoto E, and
    4. Lin J
    (2014) Quantitative prediction of transporter- and enzyme-mediated clinical drug-drug interactions of organic anion-transporting polypeptide 1B1 substrates using a mechanistic net-effect model. J Pharmacol Exp Ther 351:214–223.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  83. ↵
    1. Varma MV,
    2. Chang G,
    3. Lai Y,
    4. Feng B,
    5. El-Kattan AF,
    6. Litchfield J, and
    7. Goosen TC
    (2012a) Physicochemical property space of hepatobiliary transport and computational models for predicting rat biliary excretion. Drug Metab Dispos 40:1527–1537.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  84. ↵
    1. Varma MV and
    2. El-Kattan AF
    (2016) Transporter-enzyme interplay: deconvoluting effects of hepatic transporters and enzymes on drug disposition using static and dynamic mechanistic models. J Clin Pharmacol 56 (Suppl 7):S99–S109.
    OpenUrl
  85. ↵
    1. Varma MV,
    2. El-Kattan AF,
    3. Feng B,
    4. Steyn SJ,
    5. Maurer TS,
    6. Scott DO,
    7. Rodrigues AD, and
    8. Tremaine LM
    (2017a) Extended clearance classification system (ECCS) informed approach for evaluating investigational drugs as substrates of drug transporters. Clin Pharmacol Ther 102:33–36.
    OpenUrl
  86. ↵
    1. Varma MV,
    2. Feng B,
    3. Obach RS,
    4. Troutman MD,
    5. Chupka J,
    6. Miller HR, and
    7. El-Kattan A
    (2009) Physicochemical determinants of human renal clearance. J Med Chem 52:4844–4852.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  87. ↵
    1. Varma MV,
    2. Gardner I,
    3. Steyn SJ,
    4. Nkansah P,
    5. Rotter CJ,
    6. Whitney-Pickett C,
    7. Zhang H,
    8. Di L,
    9. Cram M,
    10. Fenner KS, et al.
    (2012b) pH-Dependent solubility and permeability criteria for provisional biopharmaceutics classification (BCS and BDDCS) in early drug discovery. Mol Pharm 9:1199–1212.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  88. ↵
    1. Varma MV,
    2. Kimoto E,
    3. Scialis R,
    4. Bi Y,
    5. Lin J,
    6. Eng H,
    7. Kalgutkar AS,
    8. El-Kattan AF,
    9. Rodrigues AD, and
    10. Tremaine LM
    (2017b) Transporter-mediated hepatic uptake plays an important role in the pharmacokinetics and drug-drug interactions of Montelukast. Clin Pharmacol Ther 101:406–415.
    OpenUrl
  89. ↵
    1. Varma MV,
    2. Lai Y, and
    3. El-Kattan AF
    (2017c) Molecular properties associated with transporter-mediated drug disposition. Adv Drug Deliv Rev 116:92–99.
    OpenUrl
  90. ↵
    1. Varma MV,
    2. Lai Y,
    3. Feng B,
    4. Litchfield J,
    5. Goosen TC, and
    6. Bergman A
    (2012c) Physiologically based modeling of pravastatin transporter-mediated hepatobiliary disposition and drug-drug interactions. Pharm Res 29:2860–2873.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  91. ↵
    1. Varma MV,
    2. Lai Y,
    3. Kimoto E,
    4. Goosen TC,
    5. El-Kattan AF, and
    6. Kumar V
    (2013) Mechanistic modeling to predict the transporter- and enzyme-mediated drug-drug interactions of repaglinide. Pharm Res 30:1188–1199.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  92. ↵
    1. Varma MV,
    2. Lin J,
    3. Bi YA,
    4. Kimoto E, and
    5. Rodrigues AD
    (2015a) Quantitative rationalization of gemfibrozil drug interactions: consideration of transporters-enzyme interplay and the role of circulating metabolite gemfibrozil 1-O-β-glucuronide. Drug Metab Dispos 43:1108–1118.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  93. ↵
    1. Varma MV,
    2. Obach RS,
    3. Rotter C,
    4. Miller HR,
    5. Chang G,
    6. Steyn SJ,
    7. El-Kattan A, and
    8. Troutman MD
    (2010b) Physicochemical space for optimum oral bioavailability: contribution of human intestinal absorption and first-pass elimination. J Med Chem 53:1098–1108.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  94. ↵
    1. Varma MV,
    2. Steyn SJ,
    3. Allerton C, and
    4. El-Kattan AF
    (2015b) Predicting clearance mechanism in drug discovery: Extended clearance classification system (ECCS). Pharm Res 32:3785–3802.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  95. ↵
    1. Watanabe T,
    2. Kusuhara H,
    3. Maeda K,
    4. Kanamaru H,
    5. Saito Y,
    6. Hu Z, and
    7. Sugiyama Y
    (2010) Investigation of the rate-determining process in the hepatic elimination of HMG-CoA reductase inhibitors in rats and humans. Drug Metab Dispos 38:215–222.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  96. ↵
    1. Watanabe T,
    2. Kusuhara H,
    3. Maeda K,
    4. Shitara Y, and
    5. Sugiyama Y
    (2009) Physiologically based pharmacokinetic modeling to predict transporter-mediated clearance and distribution of pravastatin in humans. J Pharmacol Exp Ther 328:652–662.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  97. ↵
    1. Williams JA,
    2. Hyland R,
    3. Jones BC,
    4. Smith DA,
    5. Hurst S,
    6. Goosen TC,
    7. Peterkin V,
    8. Koup JR, and
    9. Ball SE
    (2004) Drug-drug interactions for UDP-glucuronosyltransferase substrates: a pharmacokinetic explanation for typically observed low exposure (AUCI/AUC) ratios. Drug Metab Dispos 32:1201–1208.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  98. ↵
    1. Wu CY and
    2. Benet LZ
    (2005) Predicting drug disposition via application of BCS: transport/absorption/ elimination interplay and development of a biopharmaceutics drug disposition classification system. Pharm Res 22:11–23.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  99. ↵
    1. Yang B and
    2. Smith DE
    (2013) Significance of peptide transporter 1 in the intestinal permeability of valacyclovir in wild-type and PepT1 knockout mice. Drug Metab Dispos 41:608–614.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  100. ↵
    1. Yoshikado T,
    2. Maeda K,
    3. Furihata S,
    4. Terashima H,
    5. Nakayama T,
    6. Ishigame K,
    7. Tsunemoto K,
    8. Kusuhara H,
    9. Furihata KI, and
    10. Sugiyama Y
    (2017a) A clinical cassette dosing study for evaluating the contribution of hepatic OATPs and CYP3A to drug-drug interactions. Pharm Res 34:1570–1583.
    OpenUrl
  101. ↵
    1. Yoshikado T,
    2. Maeda K,
    3. Kusuhara H,
    4. Furihata KI, and
    5. Sugiyama Y
    (2017b) Quantitative analyses of the influence of parameters governing rate-determining process of hepatic elimination of drugs on the magnitudes of drug-drug interactions via hepatic OATPs and CYP3A using physiologically based pharmacokinetic models. J Pharm Sci 106:2739–2750.
    OpenUrl
  102. ↵
    1. Yoshikado T,
    2. Yoshida K,
    3. Kotani N,
    4. Nakada T,
    5. Asaumi R,
    6. Toshimoto K,
    7. Maeda K,
    8. Kusuhara H, and
    9. Sugiyama Y
    (2016) Quantitative analyses of hepatic OATP-mediated interactions between statins and inhibitors using PBPK modeling with a parameter optimization method. Clin Pharmacol Ther 100:513–523.
    OpenUrl
  103. ↵
    1. Yu H,
    2. Wang Q,
    3. Sun Y,
    4. Shen M,
    5. Li H, and
    6. Duan Y
    (2015) A new PAMPA model proposed on the basis of a synthetic phospholipid membrane. PLoS One 10:e0116502.
PreviousNext
Back to top

In this issue

Drug Metabolism and Disposition: 46 (5)
Drug Metabolism and Disposition
Vol. 46, Issue 5
1 May 2018
  • Table of Contents
  • Table of Contents (PDF)
  • About the Cover
  • Index by author
  • Editorial Board (PDF)
  • Front Matter (PDF)
Download PDF
Article Alerts
Sign In to Email Alerts with your Email Address
Email Article

Thank you for sharing this Drug Metabolism & Disposition article.

NOTE: We request your email address only to inform the recipient that it was you who recommended this article, and that it is not junk mail. We do not retain these email addresses.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
Navigating Transporter Sciences in Pharmacokinetics Characterization Using the Extended Clearance Classification System
(Your Name) has forwarded a page to you from Drug Metabolism & Disposition
(Your Name) thought you would be interested in this article in Drug Metabolism & Disposition.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
Citation Tools
Research ArticleSpecial Section on Transporters in Drug Disposition and Pharmacokinetic Prediction—Perspective

Drug Transporters and the ECCS

Ayman F. El-Kattan and Manthena V. S. Varma
Drug Metabolism and Disposition May 1, 2018, 46 (5) 729-739; DOI: https://doi.org/10.1124/dmd.117.080044

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero

Share
Research ArticleSpecial Section on Transporters in Drug Disposition and Pharmacokinetic Prediction—Perspective

Drug Transporters and the ECCS

Ayman F. El-Kattan and Manthena V. S. Varma
Drug Metabolism and Disposition May 1, 2018, 46 (5) 729-739; DOI: https://doi.org/10.1124/dmd.117.080044
del.icio.us logo Digg logo Reddit logo Twitter logo Facebook logo Google logo Mendeley logo
  • Tweet Widget
  • Facebook Like
  • Google Plus One

Jump to section

  • Article
    • Abstract
    • Introduction
    • Extended Clearance Classification System
    • Hepatic Clearance and Quantitative Role of Transport and Metabolism
    • Role of Transporters in Renal Drug Clearance
    • ECCS and Victim DDIs Involving Major Renal Transporters
    • Oral Absorption per ECCS Class and Impact of Drug Transporters
    • Road Map to Integrated Transporter Sciences for Pharmacokinetics Characterization
    • Authorship Contributions
    • Footnotes
    • Abbreviations
    • References
  • Figures & Data
  • Info & Metrics
  • eLetters
  • PDF

Related Articles

Cited By...

Similar Articles

Advertisement
  • Home
  • Alerts
Facebook   Twitter   LinkedIn   RSS

Navigate

  • Current Issue
  • Fast Forward by date
  • Fast Forward by section
  • Latest Articles
  • Archive
  • Search for Articles
  • Feedback
  • ASPET

More Information

  • About DMD
  • Editorial Board
  • Instructions to Authors
  • Submit a Manuscript
  • Customized Alerts
  • RSS Feeds
  • Subscriptions
  • Permissions
  • Terms & Conditions of Use

ASPET's Other Journals

  • Journal of Pharmacology and Experimental Therapeutics
  • Molecular Pharmacology
  • Pharmacological Reviews
  • Pharmacology Research & Perspectives
ISSN 1521-009X (Online)

Copyright © 2023 by the American Society for Pharmacology and Experimental Therapeutics