Skip to main content
. 2015 Nov 28;4(12):701–710. doi: 10.1002/psp4.12047

Table 3.

Comparison of clinical study outcomes to physiologically based pharmacokinetic model predictions

Observed Predicted (Berkeley Madonna) Predicted (SimCYP)
Geometric mean (CV%) Geometric mean Geometric mean
Outcome Control Treatment Treatment/control ratio (90% CI) P‐value[Link] Control Treatment Treatment/control ratio Control Treatment Treatment/control ratio (90% CI)
Raloxifene
t1/2 (h) 32.6 (32) 30.2 (47) 0.93 (0.90–1.3) 55.5 57.0 1.03 58.5 (17) 56.0 (19) 0.96 (0.94–0.99)
Cmax (nM) 0.40 (58) 0.40 (77) 0.99 (0.81–1.2) 0.96 0.45 0.58 1.29 0.33 (38) 0.34 (38) 1.04 (1.02–1.07)
AUC0‐inf (nM[Link]h) 16.3 (63) 17.9 (75) 1.09 (0.92–1.3) 0.35 20.7 27.9 1.31 18.6 (40) 19.6 (41) 1.05 (1.03–1.08)
R4G
t1/2 (h) 15.4 (48) 16.8 (75) 1.09 (0.65–1.3)
Cmax (nM) 106 (61) 114 (76) 1.08 (0.75–1.5) 0.63
AUC0‐inf (nM[Link]h) 1380 (68) 1290 (66) 0.93 (0.65–1.3) 0.58
R6G
t1/2 (h) 15.6 (75) 15.8 (77) 1.01 (0.70–1.4)
Cmax (nM) 15.8 (69) 14.5 (58) 0.92 (0.77–1.1) 0.45
AUC0‐inf (nM[Link]h) 324 (91) 317 (80) 0.97 (0.78–1.2) 0.87
Silybin A
Cmax (nM) 319 (118) 243   252 (53)    –
t1/2 (h) 1.52 (50) 6.3   2.8 (48)    –
Silybin B
Cmax (nM) 210 (136) 231   218 (40)    –
t1/2 (h) 1.23 (50) 5.3   1.7 (48)    –

R4G, raloxifene‐4′‐glucuronide; R6G, raloxifene‐6‐glucuronide; t1/2, terminal elimination half‐life; Cmax, maximal concentration; AUC0‐inf, area under the concentration‐time curve from time zero to infinity.

*Paired two‐tailed Student's t‐test on log‐transformed data (control vs. treatment).