Article

Whole-body physiologically based pharmacokinetic modelling of theophylline evaluated against open concentration–time data and applied to a 2022 age-standardised Saudi BMI scenario using evidence published by 2025

Authors

  • Fatema Alawad
    • College of Medicine, King Faisal University, Al-Ahsa, Saudi Arabia
  • Abdullah Adel Bouzaid
    • Imam Abdulrahman bin Faisal University, Saudi Arabia
  • Abdullah Yousef
    • Abdulrahman bin Faisal University, Dammam, Saudi Arabia
  • Mohammad Dairi
    • College of Medicine, Umm Al-Qura University, Makkah, Saudi Arabia
  • Nadia Sharif
    • Hera General Hospital Mecca, Makkah, Saudi Arabia
  • Ragdah Arif
    • King Abdulaziz University Faculty of Medicine, Jeddah, Saudi Arabia
  • Renas Haitham Barmandah
    • King Saud bin Abdulaziz University for Health Sciences, Saudi Arabia

Multidisciplinary Healthcare Journal Vol. 1 No. 6 (2025) Published

Open access CC BY 4.0
Article language: العربية
Download PDF · العربية View original
View full text
Cite

Cite this article

Alawad, F., Bouzaid, A. A., Yousef, A., Dairi, M., Sharif, N., Arif, R., & Barmandah, R. H. (2025). Whole-body physiologically based pharmacokinetic modelling of theophylline evaluated against open concentration–time data and applied to a 2022 age-standardised Saudi BMI scenario using evidence published by 2025. Multidisciplinary Healthcare Journal, 1(6). https://doi.org/10.68608/k5vhgd64
Share

Abstract

Background: Weight-based dosing scalars may give different theophylline exposures in obesity. We evaluated a whole-body PBPK model and compared dosing scalars in an explicitly hypothetical population scenario informed by Saudi BMI estimates published before 2026.

Methods: A 14-compartment model was estimated from Theoph data in 12 adults and evaluated against independent published group means. The former 2026-updated WHO inputs were replaced by the archived NCD-RisC 2024 publication dataset describing 2022 age-standardised BMI categories for Saudi Arabia. Sex-specific log-normal distributions and published height means generated 3,000 virtual adults. A 5 mg/kg intravenous loading infusion and 0.4 mg/kg/h maintenance infusion were simulated under four dosing scalars, with 200 bootstrap uncertainty replicates. These age-standardised inputs define a comparison scenario, not the crude distribution of current Saudi patients.

Results: Held-out concentrations had an absolute average fold error of 1.304. Eight of 14 external metrics met the prespecified 0.8–1.25 criterion; all seven distribution-volume metrics met it, but clearance was underpredicted. In the revised population scenario, 42.7% had obesity and 8.5% had BMI ≥40 kg/m². In that highest class, 74.4% were within 10–20 mg/L at 72 h under TBW dosing (95% parameter uncertainty interval 49.0–98.0), with 22.8% above 20 mg/L. AdjBW gave 61.8% in range (43.9–81.4), 0.4% above and 37.8% below. IBW gave 13.4% in range. Loading with TBW or AdjBW placed all simulated adults in range under the model assumptions.

Conclusions: Changing the weight scalar materially changed simulated exposure. Distribution-volume agreement supports exploratory loading comparisons, while failed clearance qualification prevents reliable maintenance-dose recommendations. Apparent 100% attainment is conditional on the model and incomplete variability representation, not a probability of success in patients. Prospective clinical evaluation and therapeutic drug monitoring remain necessary.

Declarations

Ethics approval
NA
Consent to participate
NA
Consent for publication
NA
Funding
NA
Competing interests
NA
Author contributions
NA
Data availability
NA
Registration
NA
Acknowledgements
NA

Comments

Commenting requires an account and sign-in.