The immunosuppressant and narrow therapeutic index drug tacrolimus is metabolized mainly via cytochrome P450 (CYP) 3A4 and CYP3A5. For its pharmacokinetics (PK), high inter‐ and intra‐individual variability can be observed. Underlying causes include the effect of food intake on tacrolimus absorption as well as genetic polymorphism in the CYP3A5 gene. Furthermore, tacrolimus is highly susceptible to drug–drug interactions, acting as a victim drug when coadministered with CYP3A perpetrators. This work describes the development of a whole‐body physiologically based pharmacokinetic model for tacrolimus as well as its application for investigation and prediction of (i) the impact of food intake on tacrolimus PK (food–drug interactions [FDIs]) and (ii) drug–drug(−gene) interactions (DD[G]Is) involving the CYP3A perpetrator drugs voriconazole, itraconazole, and rifampicin. The model was built in PK‐Sim® Version 10 using a total of 37 whole blood concentration–time profiles of tacrolimus (training and test) compiled from 911 healthy individuals covering the administration of tacrolimus as intravenous infusions as well as immediate‐release and extended‐release capsules. Metabolism was incorporated via CYP3A4 and CYP3A5, with varying activities implemented for different CYP3A5 genotypes and study populations. The good predictive model performance is demonstrated for the examined food effect studies with 6/6 predicted FDI area under the curve determined between first and last concentration measurements (AUC_last) and 6/6 predicted FDI maximum whole blood concentration (C_max) ratios within twofold of the respective observed ratios. In addition, 7/7 predicted DD(G)I AUC_last and 6/7 predicted DD(G)I C_max ratios were within twofold of their observed values. Potential applications of the final model include model‐informed drug discovery and development or the support of model‐informed precision dosing.

The beta-blocker metoprolol (the sixth most commonly prescribed drug in the USA in 2017) is subject to considerable drug–gene interaction (DGI) effects caused by genetic variations of the CYP2D6 gene. CYP2D6 poor metabolizers (5.7% of US population) show approximately five-fold higher metoprolol exposure compared to CYP2D6 normal metabolizers. This study aimed to develop a whole-body physiologically based pharmacokinetic (PBPK) model to predict CYP2D6 DGIs with metoprolol. The metoprolol (R)- and (S)-enantiomers as well as the active metabolite α-hydroxymetoprolol were implemented as model compounds, employing data of 48 different clinical studies (dosing range 5–200 mg). To mechanistically describe the effect of CYP2D6 polymorphisms, two separate metabolic CYP2D6 pathways (α-hydroxylation and O-demethylation) were incorporated for both metoprolol enantiomers. The good model performance is demonstrated in predicted plasma concentration–time profiles compared to observed data, goodness-of-fit plots, and low geometric mean fold errors of the predicted AUC_last (1.27) and C_max values (1.23) over all studies. For DGI predictions, 18 out of 18 DGI AUC_last ratios and 18 out of 18 DGI C_max ratios were within two-fold of the observed ratios. The newly developed and carefully validated model was applied to calculate dose recommendations for CYP2D6 polymorphic patients and will be freely available in the Open Systems Pharmacology repository.

The cytochrome P450 2D6 (CYP2D6) genotype is the single most important determinant of CYP2D6 activity as well as interindividual and interpopulation variability in CYP2D6 activity. Here, the CYP2D6 activity score provides an established tool to categorize the large number of CYP2D6 alleles by activity and facilitates the process of genotype-to-phenotype translation. Compared to the broad traditional phenotype categories, the CYP2D6 activity score additionally serves as a superior scale of CYP2D6 activity due to its finer graduation. Physiologically based pharmacokinetic (PBPK) models have been successfully used to describe and predict the activity score-dependent metabolism of CYP2D6 substrates. This study aimed to describe CYP2D6 drug–gene interactions (DGIs) of important CYP2D6 substrates paroxetine, atomoxetine and risperidone by developing a substrate-independent approach to model their activity score-dependent metabolism. The models were developed in PK-Sim^®, using a total of 57 plasma concentration–time profiles, and showed good performance, especially in DGI scenarios where 10/12, 5/5 and 7/7 of DGI AUC_last ratios and 9/12, 5/5 and 7/7 of DGI C_max ratios were within the prediction success limits. Finally, the models were used to predict their compound’s exposure for different CYP2D6 activity scores during steady state. Here, predicted DGI AUC_ss ratios were 3.4, 13.6 and 2.0 (poor metabolizers; activity score = 0) and 0.2, 0.5 and 0.95 (ultrarapid metabolizers; activity score = 3) for paroxetine, atomoxetine and risperidone active moiety (risperidone + 9-hydroxyrisperidone), respectively.

Conducting clinical studies on drug–drug‐gene interactions (DDGIs) and extrapolating the findings into clinical dose recommendations is challenging due to the high complexity of these interactions. Here, physiologically‐based pharmacokinetic (PBPK) modeling networks present a new avenue for exploring such complex scenarios, potentially informing clinical guidelines and handling patient‐specific DDGIs at the bedside. Moreover, they provide an established framework for drug–drug interaction (DDI) submissions to regulatory agencies. The cytochrome P450 (CYP) 2D6 enzyme is particularly prone to DDGIs due to the high prevalence of genetic variation and common use of CYP2D6 inhibiting drugs. In this study, we present a comprehensive PBPK network covering CYP2D6 drug–gene interactions (DGIs), DDIs, and DDGIs. The network covers sensitive and moderate sensitive substrates, and strong and weak inhibitors of CYP2D6 according to the United States Food and Drug Administration (FDA) guidance. For the analyzed CYP2D6 substrates and inhibitors, DD(G)Is mediated by CYP3A4 and P‐glycoprotein were included. Overall, the network comprises 23 compounds and was developed based on 30 DGI, 45 DDI, and seven DDGI studies, covering 32 unique drug combinations. Good predictive performance was demonstrated for all interaction types, as reflected in mean geometric mean fold errors of 1.40, 1.38, and 1.56 for the DD(G)I area under the curve ratios as well as 1.29, 1.43, and 1.60 for DD(G)I maximum plasma concentration ratios. Finally, the presented network was utilized to calculate dose adaptations for CYP2D6 substrates atomoxetine (sensitive) and metoprolol (moderate sensitive) for clinically untested DDGI scenarios, showcasing a potential clinical application of DDGI model networks in the field of model‐informed precision dosing.

The antiarrhythmic agent quinidine is a potent inhibitor of cytochrome P450 (CYP) 2D6 and P‐glycoprotein (P‐gp) and is therefore recommended for use in clinical drug–drug interaction (DDI) studies. However, as quinidine is also a substrate of CYP3A4 and P‐gp, it is susceptible to DDIs involving these proteins. Physiologically‐based pharmacokinetic (PBPK) modeling can help to mechanistically assess the absorption, distribution, metabolism, and excretion processes of a drug and has proven its usefulness in predicting even complex interaction scenarios. The objectives of the presented work were to develop a PBPK model of quinidine and to integrate the model into a comprehensive drug–drug(–gene) interaction (DD(G)I) network with a diverse set of CYP3A4 and P‐gp perpetrators as well as CYP2D6 and P‐gp victims. The quinidine parent‐metabolite model including 3‐hydroxyquinidine was developed using pharmacokinetic profiles from clinical studies after intravenous and oral administration covering a broad dosing range (0.1–600 mg). The model covers efflux transport via P‐gp and metabolic transformation to either 3‐hydroxyquinidine or unspecified metabolites via CYP3A4. The 3‐hydroxyquinidine model includes further metabolism by CYP3A4 as well as an unspecific hepatic clearance. Model performance was assessed graphically and quantitatively with greater than 90% of predicted pharmacokinetic parameters within two‐fold of corresponding observed values. The model was successfully used to simulate various DD(G)I scenarios with greater than 90% of predicted DD(G)I pharmacokinetic parameter ratios within two‐fold prediction success limits. The presented network will be provided to the research community and can be extended to include further perpetrators, victims, and targets, to support investigations of DD(G)Is.

The first‐generation tyrosine kinase inhibitor imatinib has revolutionized the development of targeted cancer therapy and remains among the frontline treatments, for example, against chronic myeloid leukemia. As a substrate of cytochrome P450 (CYP) 2C8, CYP3A4, and various transporters, imatinib is highly susceptible to drug–drug interactions (DDIs) when co‐administered with corresponding perpetrator drugs. Additionally, imatinib and its main metabolite N‐desmethyl imatinib (NDMI) act as inhibitors of CYP2C8, CYP2D6, and CYP3A4 affecting their own metabolism as well as the exposure of co‐medications. This work presents the development of a parent–metabolite whole‐body physiologically based pharmacokinetic (PBPK) model for imatinib and NDMI used for the investigation and prediction of different DDI scenarios centered around imatinib as both a victim and perpetrator drug. Model development was performed in PK‐Sim® using a total of 60 plasma concentration–time profiles of imatinib and NDMI in healthy subjects and cancer patients. Metabolism of both compounds was integrated via CYP2C8 and CYP3A4, with imatinib additionally transported via P‐glycoprotein. The subsequently developed DDI network demonstrated good predictive performance. DDIs involving imatinib and NDMI were simulated with perpetrator drugs rifampicin, ketoconazole, and gemfibrozil as well as victim drugs simvastatin and metoprolol. Overall, 12/12 predicted DDI area under the curve determined between first and last plasma concentration measurements (AUC_last) ratios and 12/12 predicted DDI maximum plasma concentration (C_max) ratios were within twofold of the respective observed ratios. Potential applications of the final model include model‐informed drug development or the support of model‐informed precision dosing.