Abstract
Early stage chemical development presents numerous challenges, and achieving a functional balance is a major hurdle, with many early compounds not meeting the clinical requirements for advancement benchmarks due to issues like poor oral bioavailability. There is a need to develop strategies for achieving the desired systemic concentration for these compounds. This will enable further evaluation of the biological response upon a compound-target interaction, providing deeper insight into the postulated biological pathways. Our study elucidates alternative drug delivery paradigms by comparing formulation strategies across oral (PO), intraperitoneal (IP), subcutaneous (SC), and intravenous (IV) routes. While each modality boasts its own set of merits and constraints, it is the drug's formulation that crucially influences its pharmacokinetic (PK) trajectory and the maintenance of its therapeutic levels. Our examination of model compounds G7883 and G6893 highlighted their distinct physio-chemical attributes. By harnessing varied formulation methods, we sought to fine-tune their PK profiles. PK studies showcased G7883's extended half-life using an SC oil formulation, resulting in a 4.5-fold and 2.5-fold enhancement compared with the IP and PO routes, respectively. In contrast, with G6893, we achieved a prolonged systemic coverage time above the desired target concentration through a different approach using an IV infusion pump. These outcomes underscore the need for tailored formulation strategies, which are dictated by the compound's innate properties, to reach the optimal in vivo systemic concentrations. Prioritizing formulation and delivery optimization early on is pivotal for effective systemic uptake, thereby facilitating a deeper understanding of biological pathways and expediting the overall clinical drug development timeline.