Modeling the Effect of Mucin Binding in the Gut on Drug Delivery

Special Issue: Mathematics to Support Drug Discovery and Development
  • 16 Downloads

Abstract

An important part the absorption, distribution, metabolism and excretion of an oral therapeutic is the flux rate of drug compound crossing the mucus lining of the gut. To understand this part of the absorption process, we develop a mathematical model of advection, diffusion and binding of drug compounds within the mucus layer of the intestines. Analysis of this model yields simple, measurable criteria for the successful mucin layer traversal of drug compound.

Keywords

Protein binding ADME Intestinal mucus layer Mathematical model 

Mathematics Subject Classification

62P10 35Q99 65M99 

Notes

Acknowledgements

We are pleased to acknowledge the support of AstraZeneca Discovery Sciences in Cambridge, UK and Shanghai, China, in exploring these relevant transport processes. We thank all the referees for their helpful and useful comments.

References

  1. Agoram B, Woltosz WS, Bolger MB (2001) Predicting the impact of physiological and biochemical processes on oral drug bioavailability. Adv Drug Deliv Rev 50:S41–S67CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Aksoy N, Thornton DJ, Corfield A, Paraskeva C, Sheehan JK (1999) A study of the intracellular and secreted forms of the muc2 mucin from the pc/aa intestinal cell line. Glycobiology 9(7):739–746CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Blagodatski A, Poteryaev D, Katanaev VL (2014) Targeting the wnt pathways for therapies. Mol Cell Ther 2(1):28CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Coddington A, Levinson N (1955) Theory of ordinary differential equations. International series in pure and applied mathematics. McGraw-Hill. https://books.google.com/books?id=LvNQAAAAMAAJ
  5. Jin BJ, Thiagarajah JR, Verkman A (2013) Convective washout reduces the antidiarrheal efficacy of enterocyte surfacetargeted antisecretory drugs. J Gen Physiol 141(2):261–272CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Johansson ME, Ambort D, Pelaseyed T, Schütte A, Gustafsson JK, Ermund A, Subramani DB, Holmén-Larsson JM, Thomsson KA, Bergström JH et al (2011) Composition and functional role of the mucus layers in the intestine. Cell Mol Life Sci 68(22):3635–3641CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. John F (1978) Parital differential equations. Applied mathematical sciences, vol 1, 3rd edn. Springer, BerlinGoogle Scholar
  8. Johnson KA, Goody RS (2011) The original Michaelis constant: translation of the 1913 Michaelis–Menten paper. Biochemistry 50(39):8264–8269CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Kearney P, Marriott C (1987) The effects of mucus glycoproteins on the bioavailability of tetracycline. iii. Everted gut studies. Int J Pharm 38(1–3):211–220Google Scholar
  10. MacAdam A (1993) The effect of gastro-intestinal mucus on drug absorption. Adv Drug Deliv Rev 11(3):201–220CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Michaelis L, Menten ML (1913) Die kinetik der invertinwirkung. Biochem Z 49:333–369Google Scholar
  12. Peters SA (2012) Physiologically-based pharmacokinetic (PBPK) modeling and simulations: principles, methods, and applications in the pharmaceutical industry. Wiley, HobokenCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Taylor A, Anderson J (1972) Scanning electron microscope observations of mammalian intestinal villi, intervillus floor and crypt tubules. Micron (1969) 3(4):430–453CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Williams FA (1985) Combustion theory (combustion science and engineering series). Addison-Wesley, ReadingGoogle Scholar
  15. Winne D, Verheyen W (1990) Diffusion coefficient in native mucus gel of rat small intestine. J Pharm Pharmacol 42(7):517–519CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Wolfram Research Inc.: Mathematica, Version 11.1. Champaign, IL (2017)Google Scholar
  17. Zhuang X, Lu C (2016) Pbpk modeling and simulation in drug research and development. Acta Pharm Sin B 6(5):430–440CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Society for Mathematical Biology 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Cottonwood Applied MathematicsNorthamptonUSA
  2. 2.IMED Biotech Unit, AstraZenecaCambridgeUK

Personalised recommendations