Skip to contents

Obiltoxaximab animal-to-human dose translation (Nagy 2017)

Source: vignettes/articles/Nagy_2017_obiltoxaximab.Rmd
Nagy_2017_obiltoxaximab.Rmd
library(nlmixr2lib)
library(PKNCA)
#> 
#> Attaching package: 'PKNCA'
#> The following object is masked from 'package:stats':
#> 
#>     filter
library(rxode2)
#> rxode2 5.1.6 using 2 threads (see ?getRxThreads)
#>   no cache: create with `rxCreateCache()`
library(dplyr)
#> 
#> Attaching package: 'dplyr'
#> The following objects are masked from 'package:stats':
#> 
#>     filter, lag
#> The following objects are masked from 'package:base':
#> 
#>     intersect, setdiff, setequal, union
library(ggplot2)

Overview

Obiltoxaximab is a chimeric IgG1(kappa) monoclonal antibody against anthrax protective antigen (PA). Because human efficacy trials for inhalational anthrax are neither ethical nor feasible, it was approved under the US FDA Animal Rule: efficacy is established in animals and the human dose is justified by comparing exposures. Nagy et al. (2017) is that justification.

Two models come out of the paper and both are extracted here.

  • Nagy_2017_obiltoxaximab – a joint two-compartment population PK model carrying the NZW rabbit, cynomolgus macaque and human parameter sets from Supplementary Table S1 in one file, with first-order intramuscular absorption in animals and a parallel Michaelis-Menten elimination arm approximating PA-mediated target-mediated drug disposition (TMDD) in infected subjects.
  • Nagy_2017_obiltoxaximab_survival – the Weibull cure-rate survival model (Supplementary Table S2) that established 16 mg/kg as the efficacious animal dose.
mod <- readModelDb("Nagy_2017_obiltoxaximab")
surv <- readModelDb("Nagy_2017_obiltoxaximab_survival")

# readModelDb() returns the model function; the file-level metadata lives on the
# compiled rxode2 user-interface object.
mod_meta <- rxode2::rxode(mod)$meta

Population

PK data came from ten studies: two in NZW rabbits (one healthy, one infected), five in cynomolgus macaques (one healthy, four infected) and three in healthy human volunteers, giving 791, 929 and 2,830 observations respectively. Healthy and infected animal data were fit simultaneously within each species so the disease effect on PK could be estimated. Animals were challenged with a target 200 LD50 of Bacillus anthracis (Ames strain) spores and treated on a trigger (body-temperature rise in rabbits, positive serum PA signal in macaques). No human anthrax patients were studied: infected-human exposure is a model projection, which is the crux of the Animal Rule argument.

str(mod_meta$population)
#> List of 7
#>  $ species      : chr "human + rabbit (New Zealand White) + cynomolgus macaque"
#>  $ n_subjects   : int 758
#>  $ n_studies    : int 10
#>  $ weight_range : chr "rabbits 2.9-4.0 kg; macaques 2.7-7.3 kg; humans 50-125 kg"
#>  $ disease_state: chr "Pooled healthy and Bacillus anthracis (Ames) aerosol-challenged NZW rabbits and cynomolgus macaques, plus healt"| __truncated__
#>  $ dose_range   : chr "Rabbits: 3, 10, 30 mg/kg i.v. and 10 mg/kg i.m. (healthy); 1, 4, 8, 16 mg/kg i.v. (infected). Macaques: 3, 10, "| __truncated__
#>  $ notes        : chr "n_studies = 10 per Nagy 2017 Methods ('PK data from 10 studies (two studies in rabbits, five studies in macaque"| __truncated__

Source trace

Every equation and every ini() value, with its location in the source.

Source trace for the Nagy 2017 models.
Item Value Source
Two-compartment structure (CL, Vc, Vp, Q), all species structural Results, ‘Animal and human population pharmacokinetic modeling’
First-order i.m. absorption (Ka, F1), animals only structural Results, same paragraph
Parallel Michaelis-Menten arm, infected animals only structural Results, same paragraph
Macaque nonlinear arm carried to infected humans, allometrically scaled structural Methods, ‘Population pharmacokinetic modeling and simulation’
Allometric reference weight, NZW rabbit 3.165 kg Results, same paragraph
Allometric reference weight, cynomolgus macaque 2.88 kg Results, same paragraph
Body weight used for all human simulations 75 kg Methods, ‘Population pharmacokinetic modeling and simulation’
CL / Vc / Vp / Q, human 0.233 / 3.21 / 2.73 / 0.473 Supplementary Table S1, Humans column
CL / Vc / Vp / Q, NZW rabbit 0.0263 / 0.114 / 0.0744 / 0.119 Supplementary Table S1, NZW Rabbits column
CL / Vc / Vp / Q, cynomolgus macaque 0.0191 / 0.134 / 0.123 / 0.0890 Supplementary Table S1, Cynomolgus Macaques column
Ka / F1, NZW rabbit 0.961 / 0.899 Supplementary Table S1
Ka / F1, cynomolgus macaque 3.89 / 0.895 Supplementary Table S1
Vmax / Km, NZW rabbit 0.912 / 10.4 Supplementary Table S1
Vmax / Km, cynomolgus macaque 0.275 / 3.21 Supplementary Table S1
Allometric exponents on CL/Q and Vc/Vp 0.75 / 1 assumed not reported; see Assumptions below
Survivor function P(T>t) = psurv + (1-psurv)exp(-(lambda t)^alpha) equation Results, ‘Animal survival modeling’
logit(psurv) = theta0 - (theta1 log10 PTT)^theta2 + Emax dose/(ED50+dose) equation Results, ‘Animal survival modeling’
log(lambda) = lambda0 + lambda1 log10 PTT equation Results, ‘Animal survival modeling’
theta0 / Emax / ED50 / theta1 0.105 / 4.060 / 1.640 / 0.296 Supplementary Table S2
theta2 / lambda0 / lambda1 / alpha 1.320 / -2.240 / 0.171 / 2.830 Supplementary Table S2

The three equation blocks render as formula-not-decoded in the automated PDF conversion; they were recovered verbatim from the on-disk PDF with pdftotext -layout (page 4, right column).

Population PK simulation

The paper’s central comparison is a single 16 mg/kg i.v. dose given to each species, healthy and infected. Human doses were infused over 90 minutes; animals received an i.v. bolus.

Supplementary Table S1 reports typical (fixed-effect) values only – no IIV variances and no residual-error magnitudes are published anywhere in the paper or its supplements. The model therefore carries fixed(0) for the residual error and no eta terms, and every simulation below is a typical-value (deterministic) profile. Each arm is one subject; there is nothing to average over.

# Observation windows follow the paper's own sampling (Table 1): animals were
# followed to Day 28 post-challenge, humans to Day 71.
arm_spec <- tibble::tribble(
  ~treatment,           ~id, ~wt,   ~rabbit, ~macaque, ~infected, ~dur,     ~tend,
  "Rabbit healthy",     1L,  3.165, 1,       0,        0,         0,        28,
  "Rabbit infected",    2L,  3.165, 1,       0,        1,         0,        28,
  "Macaque healthy",    3L,  2.88,  0,       1,        0,         0,        28,
  "Macaque infected",   4L,  2.88,  0,       1,        1,         0,        28,
  "Human healthy",      5L,  75,    0,       0,        0,         1.5 / 24, 71,
  "Human infected",     6L,  75,    0,       0,        1,         1.5 / 24, 71
)

make_arm <- function(r) {
  # Dense early grid to resolve Cmax, coarser later.
  obs <- unique(c(
    seq(0, 2, by = 0.01),
    seq(2, 10, by = 0.05),
    seq(10, r$tend, by = 0.25)
  ))
  ev <- rxode2::et(amt = 16 * r$wt, dur = r$dur, cmt = "central")
  ev <- rxode2::et(ev, obs)
  d <- as.data.frame(ev)
  # Covariates must be added AFTER materialising to a data frame; assigning
  # onto an rxEt object silently drops them.
  d$id <- r$id
  d$WT <- r$wt
  d$SPECIES_RABBIT <- r$rabbit
  d$SPECIES_MACAQUE <- r$macaque
  d$DIS_ANTHRAX <- r$infected
  d$treatment <- r$treatment
  d
}

events <- dplyr::bind_rows(lapply(seq_len(nrow(arm_spec)), function(i) {
  make_arm(arm_spec[i, ])
}))

sim <- as.data.frame(rxode2::rxSolve(mod, events = events, keep = "treatment"))
#> Warning: multi-subject simulation without without 'omega'

Concentration-time profiles across species

Replicates the comparison in Figure 3 of Nagy 2017 (infected animals versus simulated healthy and infected humans at 16 mg/kg) on the semilogarithmic scale the paper uses in Figure 4.

sim |>
  dplyr::filter(Cc > 1e-3) |>
  ggplot(aes(time, Cc, colour = treatment)) +
  geom_line(linewidth = 0.7) +
  geom_hline(yintercept = c(4.8, 48), linetype = "dashed", colour = "grey40") +
  annotate("text", x = 60, y = 48 * 1.4, label = "99.9% PA neutralization (48 ug/mL)",
           size = 3, colour = "grey30") +
  annotate("text", x = 60, y = 4.8 * 1.4, label = "99% PA neutralization (4.8 ug/mL)",
           size = 3, colour = "grey30") +
  scale_y_log10() +
  labs(x = "Time (days)", y = "Obiltoxaximab concentration (ug/mL)",
       colour = NULL) +
  theme_bw()
Typical-value obiltoxaximab profiles after a single 16 mg/kg i.v. dose. Replicates the comparison shown in Figures 3 and 4 of Nagy 2017.

Typical-value obiltoxaximab profiles after a single 16 mg/kg i.v. dose. Replicates the comparison shown in Figures 3 and 4 of Nagy 2017.

The two dashed lines are the concentrations the paper derives for 99% and 99.9% PA neutralization (4.8 and 48 ug/mL) from %Bound = 100 * (Kd^-1 * Conc) / (1 + Kd^-1 * Conc) with Kd = 0.33 nM and MW = 148 kDa (Methods, ‘Neutralization of protective antigen’). Human concentrations stay above the 99.9% level for roughly three weeks, which is the paper’s core dose-justification claim.

Noncompartmental analysis 

sim_nca <- sim |>
  dplyr::filter(!is.na(Cc)) |>
  dplyr::select(id, time, Cc, treatment)

# Guarantee a time-zero record so PKNCA's AUC interval starts at a measurement.
sim_nca <- dplyr::bind_rows(
  sim_nca,
  sim_nca |> dplyr::distinct(id, treatment) |> dplyr::mutate(time = 0, Cc = 0)
) |>
  dplyr::distinct(id, treatment, time, .keep_all = TRUE) |>
  dplyr::arrange(id, treatment, time)

dose_df <- arm_spec |>
  dplyr::transmute(id, time = 0, amt = 16 * wt, treatment,
                   duration = ifelse(dur == 0, 0, dur))

conc_obj <- PKNCA::PKNCAconc(sim_nca, Cc ~ time | treatment + id,
                             concu = "ug/mL", timeu = "day")
# duration= is required for the infused human arms; without it PKNCA treats the
# dose as an instantaneous bolus and inflates the steady-state volume.
dose_obj <- PKNCA::PKNCAdose(dose_df, amt ~ time | treatment + id,
                             doseu = "mg", duration = "duration")

intervals <- data.frame(
  start = 0, end = Inf,
  cmax = TRUE, tmax = TRUE, aucinf.obs = TRUE,
  half.life = TRUE, cl.obs = TRUE, vss.obs = TRUE
)

nca_res <- PKNCA::pk.nca(PKNCA::PKNCAdata(conc_obj, dose_obj,
                                          intervals = intervals))

Simulated human exposure versus the published simulation (Table 2)

Nagy 2017 Table 2 reports Cmax and AUC0-inf for simulated populations of 500 healthy and 500 infected humans at 16 mg/kg, alongside observed values in infected animals.

published_t2 <- tibble::tribble(
  ~treatment,          ~cmax, ~aucinf.obs,
  "Human healthy",     363,   4980,
  "Human infected",    357,   4070,
  "Macaque infected",  408,   1870,
  "Rabbit infected",   402,   958
)

cmp_t2 <- nlmixr2lib::ncaComparisonTable(
  simulated = nca_res,
  reference = published_t2,
  by = "treatment",
  units = c(cmax = "ug/mL", aucinf.obs = "ug*day/mL"),
  tolerance_pct = 20
)

knitr::kable(
  cmp_t2,
  caption = "Simulated vs. Nagy 2017 Table 2. * differs from reference by >20%.",
  align = c("l", "l", "r", "r", "r")
)
Simulated vs. Nagy 2017 Table 2. * differs from reference by >20%.
NCA parameter treatment Reference Simulated % diff
Cmax (ug/mL) Human healthy 363 371 +2.1%
Cmax (ug/mL) Human infected 357 371 +3.8%
Cmax (ug/mL) Macaque infected 408 344 -15.7%
Cmax (ug/mL) Rabbit infected 402 444 +10.5%
AUC0-∞ (obs) (ug*day/mL) Human healthy 4980 5150 +3.4%
AUC0-∞ (obs) (ug*day/mL) Human infected 4070 4220 +3.7%
AUC0-∞ (obs) (ug*day/mL) Macaque infected 1870 1960 +4.6%
AUC0-∞ (obs) (ug*day/mL) Rabbit infected 958 1440 +50.1%*

Cmax reproduces closely in every arm. The two human AUC values sit about 3-4% above the published means, which is expected: the paper’s Table 2 values are means over 500 subjects carrying inter-individual variability, while these are typical-value profiles with IIV fixed to zero (the variances are not published).

One row is starred: infected-rabbit AUC0-inf is 50% above the Table 2 reference of 958 ugday/mL. Infected-macaque AUC agrees to within 5%, so this is specific to the rabbit. The Table 2 animal columns are observed* noncompartmental results, not model predictions, and the infected-rabbit column in particular is a composite mean profile pooling survivors and non-survivors with sampling that stopped 3 days after dosing (Table S3 footnote b; Table 1). Its reported terminal half-life of 1.04 days against 4.17-4.34 days in healthy rabbits from the same table is not a disposition change the population PK model supports. The discrepancy is a property of the published noncompartmental summary rather than of the extracted model; nothing was tuned to close it. See Assumptions and deviations.

The TMDD effect on human exposure

The paper states: “human AUC0-inf is 18% lower when the effects of TMDD are included in the simulation.” This is the single most informative check on the infected-human construction, because it is a ratio and so is insensitive to the missing IIV.

auc_by_arm <- as.data.frame(nca_res$result) |>
  dplyr::filter(PPTESTCD == "aucinf.obs") |>
  dplyr::select(treatment, PPORRES)

auc_healthy <- auc_by_arm$PPORRES[auc_by_arm$treatment == "Human healthy"]
auc_infected <- auc_by_arm$PPORRES[auc_by_arm$treatment == "Human infected"]
pct_drop <- 100 * (1 - auc_infected / auc_healthy)

tibble::tibble(
  Quantity = c("AUC0-inf, healthy human (ug*day/mL)",
               "AUC0-inf, infected human (ug*day/mL)",
               "Reduction attributable to TMDD (%)"),
  Simulated = round(c(auc_healthy, auc_infected, pct_drop), 1),
  Published = c(4980, 4070, 18)
) |>
  knitr::kable(caption = "Reproduction of the paper's stated 18% TMDD effect.")
Reproduction of the paper’s stated 18% TMDD effect.
Quantity Simulated Published
AUC0-inf, healthy human (ug*day/mL) 5147.9 4980
AUC0-inf, infected human (ug*day/mL) 4220.8 4070
Reduction attributable to TMDD (%) 18.0 18 

# The reduction is the paper's own headline number; hold it to 1 percentage point.
stopifnot(abs(pct_drop - 18) < 1)

Animal and human NCA versus the observed data (Tables S3 and S4)

The healthy-animal and human arms can be compared directly against observed noncompartmental results, because those studies had sampling adequate to characterise the terminal phase.

nca_tbl <- as.data.frame(nca_res$result) |>
  dplyr::filter(PPTESTCD %in% c("cl.obs", "vss.obs", "half.life")) |>
  dplyr::select(treatment, PPTESTCD, PPORRES) |>
  tidyr::pivot_wider(names_from = PPTESTCD, values_from = PPORRES)

# Report both absolute and weight-normalised units: Table S4 (human) reports
# CL in L/day and Vss in L, while Table S3 (animals) reports them per kg.
nca_tbl <- nca_tbl |>
  dplyr::left_join(dplyr::select(arm_spec, treatment, wt), by = "treatment") |>
  dplyr::mutate(
    `CL (L/day)` = signif(cl.obs, 3),
    `Vss (L)` = signif(vss.obs, 3),
    `CL (mL/day/kg)` = round(1000 * cl.obs / wt, 2),
    `Vss (mL/kg)` = round(1000 * vss.obs / wt, 1),
    `t1/2 (day)` = round(half.life, 2)
  ) |>
  dplyr::select(Arm = treatment, `CL (L/day)`, `Vss (L)`,
                `CL (mL/day/kg)`, `Vss (mL/kg)`, `t1/2 (day)`)

knitr::kable(
  nca_tbl,
  caption = "Simulated typical-value NCA, in both absolute and weight-normalised units. Observed comparators for the healthy arms -- animals (Table S3, per kg): rabbit CL 8.41-9.22 mL/day/kg, Vss 53.0-58.2 mL/kg, t1/2 4.17-4.34 day; macaque CL 4.18-6.36 mL/day/kg, Vss 67.0-79.4 mL/kg, t1/2 9.36-12.4 day. Human (Table S4, 16 mg/kg, absolute): CL 0.247-0.287 L/day, Vss 5.68-7.18 L, t1/2 19.0-20.4 day."
)
Simulated typical-value NCA, in both absolute and weight-normalised units. Observed comparators for the healthy arms – animals (Table S3, per kg): rabbit CL 8.41-9.22 mL/day/kg, Vss 53.0-58.2 mL/kg, t1/2 4.17-4.34 day; macaque CL 4.18-6.36 mL/day/kg, Vss 67.0-79.4 mL/kg, t1/2 9.36-12.4 day. Human (Table S4, 16 mg/kg, absolute): CL 0.247-0.287 L/day, Vss 5.68-7.18 L, t1/2 19.0-20.4 day.
Arm CL (L/day) Vss (L) CL (mL/day/kg) Vss (mL/kg) t1/2 (day)
Human healthy 0.2330 5.940 3.11 79.2 19.62
Human infected 0.2840 4.900 3.79 65.4 7.38
Macaque healthy 0.0191 0.257 6.64 89.1 9.77
Macaque infected 0.0236 0.220 8.18 76.5 5.12
Rabbit healthy 0.0263 0.188 8.31 59.5 5.12
Rabbit infected 0.0352 0.155 11.13 49.0 1.38

The healthy arms track the observed data closely. Simulated healthy-rabbit CL is 8.3 mL/day/kg against an observed 8.41-9.22, and healthy-macaque CL is 6.6 mL/day/kg just above an observed 4.18-6.36. For humans the model gives 0.233 L/day and 5.94 L against an observed 0.247-0.287 L/day and 5.68-7.18 L, with a terminal half-life of 19.6 days against an observed 19.0-20.4 days.

The infected arms show the expected direction of the TMDD effect: apparent clearance rises and terminal half-life shortens relative to the healthy arm of the same species, which is the paper’s stated rationale for including the nonlinear arm when projecting infected-human exposure.

The infected-animal arms do not reproduce the observed Table S3 rows, and this is a property of the published NCA rather than of the model – see Assumptions and deviations.

Survival model

The Weibull cure-rate model was fit simultaneously to infected rabbit and macaque survival data. psurv is the cure fraction (probability of surviving to the Day-28 end of study) and lambda is the death rate among the non-cured.

Dose-response by prior-to-treatment bacteremia

Replicates Supplementary Figure S2 of Nagy 2017: predicted survival versus dose, panelled by quartiles of prior-to-treatment (PTT) bacteremia. The published quartile edges are [BLQ, 3.02], [3.03, 3.95], [3.96, 4.87] and (4.87, 8.56] log10 CFU; each curve is evaluated at its quartile midpoint.

quartiles <- tibble::tibble(
  panel = factor(c("[BLQ, 3.02]", "[3.03, 3.95]", "[3.96, 4.87]", "(4.87, 8.56]"),
                 levels = c("[BLQ, 3.02]", "[3.03, 3.95]", "[3.96, 4.87]", "(4.87, 8.56]")),
  ptt = c(2.06, 3.49, 4.42, 6.18)
)

surv_grid <- tidyr::expand_grid(quartiles, dose = seq(0, 32, by = 0.25)) |>
  dplyr::mutate(id = dplyr::row_number())

surv_ev <- surv_grid |>
  dplyr::transmute(id, time = 28,
                   BACT_PTT_LOG10CFU = ptt,
                   DOSE_OBILTOXAXIMAB_MGKG = dose)

surv_sim <- as.data.frame(rxode2::rxSolve(surv, events = surv_ev)) |>
  dplyr::left_join(surv_grid, by = "id")

ggplot(surv_sim, aes(dose, sur)) +
  geom_line(colour = "steelblue", linewidth = 0.8) +
  facet_wrap(~panel) +
  coord_cartesian(ylim = c(0, 1)) +
  labs(x = "Obiltoxaximab dose (mg/kg)",
       y = "Probability of surviving to Day 28") +
  theme_bw()
Predicted probability of surviving to Day 28 versus obiltoxaximab dose, by PTT-bacteremia quartile. Replicates Supplementary Figure S2 of Nagy 2017.

Predicted probability of surviving to Day 28 versus obiltoxaximab dose, by PTT-bacteremia quartile. Replicates Supplementary Figure S2 of Nagy 2017.

ED50, ED90 and the paper’s stated probabilities

Because the dose enters as a plain Emax term, the ED90 is exactly nine times the ED50 – a closed-form check on the extracted ed50 and emax.

ed50 <- 1.640
ed90 <- 9 * ed50

tibble::tibble(
  Quantity = c("ED50 (mg/kg)", "ED90 (mg/kg)"),
  Model = round(c(ed50, ed90), 2),
  Published = c(1.64, 14.8)
) |>
  knitr::kable(caption = "Dose-response summary against Nagy 2017 Results.")
Dose-response summary against Nagy 2017 Results.
Quantity Model Published
ED50 (mg/kg) 1.64 1.64
ED90 (mg/kg) 14.76 14.80 

stopifnot(abs(ed90 - 14.8) < 0.1)

The paper also states three specific survival probabilities in the Discussion. Evaluating the extracted model at those inputs:

psurv_at <- function(dose, ptt) {
  logit <- 0.105 - (0.296 * ptt)^1.320 + 4.060 * dose / (1.640 + dose)
  1 / (1 + exp(-logit))
}

tibble::tibble(
  Scenario = c("16 mg/kg, no PTT bacteremia",
               "No treatment, PTT 3.5 log10 CFU/mL",
               "16 mg/kg, PTT 3.5 log10 CFU/mL"),
  `Model psurv` = round(c(psurv_at(16, 0), psurv_at(0, 3.5), psurv_at(16, 3.5)), 3),
  `Paper states` = c(0.98, 0.06, 0.73)
) |>
  knitr::kable(caption = "Extracted model vs. the probabilities stated in the Nagy 2017 Discussion.")
Extracted model vs. the probabilities stated in the Nagy 2017 Discussion.
Scenario Model psurv Paper states
16 mg/kg, no PTT bacteremia 0.978 0.98
No treatment, PTT 3.5 log10 CFU/mL 0.280 0.06
16 mg/kg, PTT 3.5 log10 CFU/mL 0.939 0.73

The first row reproduces the paper exactly (0.978 vs 0.98). The second and third do not, and the discrepancy is traced in Assumptions and deviations below: it is confined to the bacteremia term, and the dose term is confirmed by the very same rows.

The same gap appears in every panel of Supplementary Figure S2, and it widens as PTT bacteremia rises. The “digitised” columns below were read off the published figure by the extractor (they are not tabulated anywhere in the paper) and are recorded here only as evidence for the erratum:

Published Table S2 parameters vs. the extractor’s digitisation of Supplementary Figure S2, by PTT-bacteremia quartile.
Panel PTT midpoint Model, dose 0 Digitised, dose 0 Model, dose 32 Digitised, dose 32
[BLQ, 3.02] 2.06 0.398 0.200 0.969 0.910
[3.03, 3.95] 3.49 0.281 0.055 0.949 0.735
[3.96, 4.87] 4.42 0.211 0.020 0.927 0.470
(4.87, 8.56] 6.18 0.108 0.002 0.852 0.100

At the highest quartile the published parameters predict 0.85 survival at 32 mg/kg where the figure shows 0.10 and the Results text says there is “almost zero probability of survival” at a PTT bacteremia around 5 log10 CFU/mL. The figure and the text agree with each other and disagree with theta1.

Assumptions and deviations

Vmax is encoded as an amount rate (mg/day), not the concentration rate its Table S1 unit label states. Supplementary Table S1 labels Vmax “ug/mL/day”. As a concentration rate that value is inconsistent with the paper’s own results; as an amount rate it reproduces them. Three independent checks agree:

Check Amount rate (mg/day) Concentration rate (ug/mL/day) Source value
Infected-macaque apparent CL at 16 mg/kg 8.3 mL/day/kg 6.9 mL/day/kg 7.8-9.0 (Table S3)
Human AUC0-inf reduction from TMDD 18.1% 3.5% 18% (Results)
Infected-human AUC0-inf 4,220 ug*day/mL 4,970 ug*day/mL 4,070 (Table 2)

Only the unit interpretation is changed; the numeric values (0.912 rabbit, 0.275 macaque) are exactly as published.

Allometric exponents are assumed. The paper states that “volume and clearance parameters were allometrically scaled, normalized to a reference weight of 3.165 kg for NZW rabbits and 2.88 kg for cynomolgus macaques” but never reports the exponents. The standard 0.75 (CL, Q) and 1 (Vc, Vp) are used and marked fixed() with “assumed” in the label. At each species’ reference weight the exponents are inert, so every published typical value is reproduced exactly regardless of this choice.

The human allometric reference weight is taken as 75 kg. The paper gives reference weights for the two animal species but not for humans. 75 kg is the weight used for every published human simulation (Methods), and it is the value under which the Table S1 human parameters reproduce the Table 2 human exposures. The human population spanned 50-125 kg.

No IIV and no residual error are published. Table S1 reports typical values only. Visual predictive checks in Supplementary Figure S1 confirm both were estimated, but no variances appear anywhere in the paper or supplements. They are fixed to zero rather than invented, so this model reproduces typical-value profiles only and cannot generate prediction intervals. The 5th-95th percentile columns of Table 2 are therefore not reproducible from the published parameters.

Human Ka and F1 are carried over from the macaque. Only the animals were dosed intramuscularly, so Table S1 has no human Ka or F1. The macaque values are carried over purely so the depot compartment stays defined; intramuscular dosing in humans is not supported by this source and should not be simulated. All human dosing in the paper is intravenous and bypasses the depot.

The infected-animal NCA rows in Table S3 are not reproducible, by construction. Table S3 footnote (b) states that infected-animal PK parameters were “based on composite mean of concentrations from all animals per time point per dose group (male and female values combined, including both surviving and non-surviving animals) analyzed as one profile”, and Table 1 shows infected rabbits were sampled only to 3 days post-dose. The reported infected-rabbit t1/2 of 1.04 days against 4.17-4.34 days in healthy rabbits from the same table is not a disposition change the population model supports; it is what a composite profile truncated at 3 days, with non-survivors dropping out, produces. These rows are reported for completeness and are not used as model gates.

Supplementary Table S2’s theta1 does not reproduce the paper’s own survival figure. The model encodes theta1 = 0.296 exactly as published. That value predicts a 0.28 probability of survival for an untreated animal at PTT 3.5 log10 CFU/mL, where the Discussion states 0.06 and Supplementary Figure S2’s second panel shows roughly 0.05. Back-solving theta1 from four independent anchors – the dose-zero intercept of each of the four Figure S2 panels, evaluated at its quartile midpoint – gives a consistent 0.55 in the theta1 * (log10 PTT)^theta2 form (equivalently 0.65 in the printed (theta1 * log10 PTT)^theta2 form), against Table S2’s reported 95% CI of 0.206-0.386. The other survival parameters are corroborated: theta0 and the Emax dose term reproduce the “0.98 probability of cure at 16 mg/kg with no PTT bacteremia” statement exactly, the logit gap between the untreated and 16 mg/kg rows (3.68) matches the value the Discussion implies (3.75), and ed90 = 9 * ed50 returns the published 14.8 mg/kg. The discrepancy is therefore isolated to theta1. No value was tuned: the published estimate is what the model carries, and this note records the inconsistency for a reviewer rather than resolving it.

Table S1’s macaque CL confidence interval is printed as (0.0162, 0.223). The upper bound is an order of magnitude above the point estimate of 0.0191 and above the rabbit and macaque bounds either side of it; it is most likely a typo for 0.0223. Only the point estimate is used by the model, so nothing downstream depends on this.

Species was screened but not retained in the survival model. The Methods state that the effect of species (rabbit vs macaque) on the survival function was investigated, but no species term appears in Supplementary Table S2, so the final model pools both species.

The exposure-response survival model is not extracted. The paper mentions that an AUC-versus-survival model was developed during the initial analysis and “led to identical inferences”, but only the dose-response model is parameterised in the supplement.

Reference

  • Nagy CF, Mondick J, Serbina N, Casey LS, Carpenter SE, French J, Guttendorf R. Animal-to-human dose translation of obiltoxaximab for treatment of inhalational anthrax under the US FDA animal rule. Clin Transl Sci. 2017;10(1):12-19. doi:10.1111/cts.12433. Parameter estimates are from Supplementary Table S1 (file CTS-10-12-s002); noncompartmental comparators are from Supplementary Tables S3 (CTS-10-12-s006) and S4 (CTS-10-12-s007). The companion survival model from the same paper is available as modellib(‘Nagy_2017_obiltoxaximab_survival’).