Literature DB >> 10533698

Comparison of different methods to evaluate population dose-response and relative potency: importance of interoccasion variability.

R L Lalonde1, D Ouellet, E K Kimanani, D Potvin, L M Vaughan, M R Hill.   

Abstract

Different mixed-effects models were compared to evaluate the population dose-response and relative potency of two albuterol inhalers. Bronchodilator response was measured after ascending doses of each inhaler in 37 asthmatic patients. A linear mixed-effects model was developed based on the approach proposed by Finney for the evaluation of bioassay data. A nonlinear mixed-effects (Emax) model with interindividual and interoccasion variability (IOV) in the different pharmacodynamic parameters was also fit to the data. Both methods produced a similar estimate of relative potency. However, the estimate of relative potency was 22% lower with the nonlinear mixed-effects model if IOV was not taken into account. Monte Carlo simulations based on a similar study design demonstrated that more biased and variable estimates of ED50 and relative potency were obtained when the nonlinear mixed-effects model ignored the presence of IOV in the data. Furthermore, the linear mixed-effects model that did not account for IOV produced confidence intervals for relative potency that were too narrow and thus could lead to erroneous conclusions. These problems were avoided when the estimation model could account for IOV. Results of the simulations were consistent with those of the experimental data. Although the linear or the nonlinear mixed-effects model may be used to evaluate population dose-response and relative potency, there are important differences in the assumptions made by each method.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  1999        PMID: 10533698     DOI: 10.1023/a:1020682729226

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Pharmacokinet Biopharm        ISSN: 0090-466X


  7 in total

Review 1.  Learning versus confirming in clinical drug development.

Authors:  L B Sheiner
Journal:  Clin Pharmacol Ther       Date:  1997-03       Impact factor: 6.875

2.  A comparison of the two one-sided tests procedure and the power approach for assessing the equivalence of average bioavailability.

Authors:  D J Schuirmann
Journal:  J Pharmacokinet Biopharm       Date:  1987-12

3.  Use of bronchial provocation with histamine to compare the pharmacodynamics of inhaled albuterol and metaproterenol in patients with asthma.

Authors:  R C Ahrens; J B Harris; G Milavetz; L Annis; R Ries
Journal:  J Allergy Clin Immunol       Date:  1987-06       Impact factor: 10.793

4.  Dose-response curves to inhaled beta-adrenoceptor agonists in normal and asthmatic subjects.

Authors:  P J Barnes; N B Pride
Journal:  Br J Clin Pharmacol       Date:  1983-06       Impact factor: 4.335

5.  The importance of modeling interoccasion variability in population pharmacokinetic analyses.

Authors:  M O Karlsson; L B Sheiner
Journal:  J Pharmacokinet Biopharm       Date:  1993-12

6.  Estimating bioavailability when clearance varies with time.

Authors:  M O Karlsson; L B Sheiner
Journal:  Clin Pharmacol Ther       Date:  1994-06       Impact factor: 6.875

7.  Study designs for dose-ranging.

Authors:  L B Sheiner; S L Beal; N C Sambol
Journal:  Clin Pharmacol Ther       Date:  1989-07       Impact factor: 6.875

  7 in total
  2 in total

1.  Population pharmacodynamic model of the longitudinal FEV1 response to an inhaled long-acting anti-muscarinic in COPD patients.

Authors:  Kai Wu; Michael Looby; Goonaseelan Pillai; Gregory Pinault; Anton Franz Drollman; Steve Pascoe
Journal:  J Pharmacokinet Pharmacodyn       Date:  2010-11-20       Impact factor: 2.745

2.  Effect of Study Design on Sample Size in Studies Intended to Evaluate Bioequivalence of Inhaled Short-Acting β-Agonist Formulations.

Authors:  Yaohui Zeng; Sachinkumar Singh; Kai Wang; Richard C Ahrens
Journal:  J Clin Pharmacol       Date:  2017-12-27       Impact factor: 3.126

  2 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.