Literature DB >> 11677931

Selecting reliable pharmacokinetic data for explanatory analyses of clinical trials in the presence of possible noncompliance.

J Lu1, J M Gries, D Verotta, L B Sheiner.   

Abstract

For single-dose concentration-time data collected in clinical trials to be useful for explanatory pharmacokinetic (PK) or pharmacokinetic-pharmacodynamic (PK-PD) analyses, the following two assumptions on the data must hold: (i) the times of the concentration (PK) observations are known, and (ii) the patient's recent past dosing history (times and amounts) is known. If either (or both) of these assumptions does not hold, and data analysis proceeds as if it did, biased estimates may result. Assumption (i) usually does hold as study personnel observe and record PK sampling times. Assumption (ii) is a problem when, as is often the case of outpatient studies, one must rely on patient recall for past dosing history. This paper presents a technique to avoid assumption (ii) by identifying for deletion those PK observation occasions likely exhibiting unreliable preceding dose histories. To so identify occasions, a Bayes objective function (posterior density) for the data is maximized in its parameters for each individual. The likelihood factor of this function is a mixture pharmacostatistical model expressing the likelihood of the observed concentration(s) under three mutually exclusive events: the prescribed dose preceding the occasion was not taken at all (NT), the prescribed dose was taken at the specified time (T), or the prescribed dose was taken at an unspecified time (U). Suspect observations are identified as those whose maximum corresponding likelihood component is other than T. The approach as defined here relies on the following assumptions in addition to (i): (ii) population PK (i.e., the distribution of PK parameters in the population being sampled) is known, at least approximately. (iii) PK samples (at least 1 or 2 per occasion) are available, (iv) doses taken are of the stated magnitude, and (v) the drug has a short half-life. Simulations reveal that especially when more than one PK sample is available per study occasion, the methodology chooses a set of PK observations that should perform better in subsequent explanatory analyses, or as a basis for estimating individual PK parameters, than do other simpler methods.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2001        PMID: 11677931     DOI: 10.1023/a:1011582713692

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Pharmacokinet Pharmacodyn        ISSN: 1567-567X            Impact factor:   2.745


  10 in total

Review 1.  Pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic modeling in drug development.

Authors:  L B Sheiner; J L Steimer
Journal:  Annu Rev Pharmacol Toxicol       Date:  2000       Impact factor: 13.820

Review 2.  Population pharmacokinetics/dynamics.

Authors:  L B Sheiner; T M Ludden
Journal:  Annu Rev Pharmacol Toxicol       Date:  1992       Impact factor: 13.820

3.  Estimating the causal effect of compliance on binary outcome in randomized controlled trials.

Authors:  E Goetghebeur; G Molenberghs; J Katz
Journal:  Stat Med       Date:  1998-02-15       Impact factor: 2.373

4.  Discrimination between rival dosing histories.

Authors:  E N Jonsson; J R Wade; G Almqvist; M O Karlsson
Journal:  Pharm Res       Date:  1997-08       Impact factor: 4.200

5.  Forecasting individual pharmacokinetics.

Authors:  L B Sheiner; S Beal; B Rosenberg; V V Marathe
Journal:  Clin Pharmacol Ther       Date:  1979-09       Impact factor: 6.875

6.  Bayesian individualization of pharmacokinetics: simple implementation and comparison with non-Bayesian methods.

Authors:  L B Sheiner; S L Beal
Journal:  J Pharm Sci       Date:  1982-12       Impact factor: 3.534

7.  Estimating compliance to study medication from serum drug levels: application to an AIDS clinical trial of zidovudine.

Authors:  L L Lim
Journal:  Biometrics       Date:  1992-06       Impact factor: 2.571

8.  A trial comparing nucleoside monotherapy with combination therapy in HIV-infected adults with CD4 cell counts from 200 to 500 per cubic millimeter. AIDS Clinical Trials Group Study 175 Study Team.

Authors:  S M Hammer; D A Katzenstein; M D Hughes; H Gundacker; R T Schooley; R H Haubrich; W K Henry; M M Lederman; J P Phair; M Niu; M S Hirsch; T C Merigan
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  1996-10-10       Impact factor: 91.245

Review 9.  Role of patient compliance in clinical pharmacokinetics. A review of recent research.

Authors:  J Urquhart
Journal:  Clin Pharmacokinet       Date:  1994-09       Impact factor: 6.447

Review 10.  Clinical pharmacokinetics of nucleoside antiretroviral agents.

Authors:  M N Dudley
Journal:  J Infect Dis       Date:  1995-03       Impact factor: 5.226

  10 in total
  13 in total

1.  Ways to fit a PK model with some data below the quantification limit.

Authors:  S L Beal
Journal:  J Pharmacokinet Pharmacodyn       Date:  2001-10       Impact factor: 2.745

2.  The population pharmacokinetics of citalopram after deliberate self-poisoning: a Bayesian approach.

Authors:  Lena E Friberg; Geoffrey K Isbister; L Peter Hackett; Stephen B Duffull
Journal:  J Pharmacokinet Pharmacodyn       Date:  2005-08       Impact factor: 2.745

Review 3.  On some "disadvantages" of the population approach.

Authors:  Jerry R Nedelman
Journal:  AAPS J       Date:  2005-10-05       Impact factor: 4.009

Review 4.  Modeling and simulation of adherence: approaches and applications in therapeutics.

Authors:  Leslie A Kenna; Line Labbé; Jeffrey S Barrett; Marc Pfister
Journal:  AAPS J       Date:  2005-10-05       Impact factor: 4.009

5.  Estimation of tenofovir's population pharmacokinetic parameters without reliable dosing histories and application to tracing dosing history using simulation strategies.

Authors:  Ayyappa Chaturvedula; Michael J Fossler; Craig W Hendrix
Journal:  J Clin Pharmacol       Date:  2013-11-30       Impact factor: 3.126

6.  Pharmacokinetically based estimation of patient compliance with oral anticancer chemotherapies: in silico evaluation.

Authors:  Emilie Hénin; Michel Tod; Véronique Trillet-Lenoir; Catherine Rioufol; Brigitte Tranchand; Pascal Girard
Journal:  Clin Pharmacokinet       Date:  2009       Impact factor: 6.447

7.  A pharmacometric case study regarding the sensitivity of structural model parameter estimation to error in patient reported dosing times.

Authors:  Jonathan Knights; Shashank Rohatagi
Journal:  J Pharmacokinet Pharmacodyn       Date:  2015-07-26       Impact factor: 2.745

8.  Methods to detect non-compliance and reduce its impact on population PK parameter estimates.

Authors:  Leonid Gibiansky; Ekaterina Gibiansky; Valerie Cosson; Nicolas Frey; Franziska Schaedeli Stark
Journal:  J Pharmacokinet Pharmacodyn       Date:  2014-06-21       Impact factor: 2.745

9.  Improving data reliability using a non-compliance detection method versus using pharmacokinetic criteria.

Authors:  Smita A Kshirsagar; Terrence F Blaschke; Lewis B Sheiner; M Krygowski; Edward P Acosta; Davide Verotta
Journal:  J Pharmacokinet Pharmacodyn       Date:  2006-09-27       Impact factor: 2.745

10.  An alternative method for population pharmacokinetic data analysis under noncompliance.

Authors:  Pankaj Gupta; Matthew M Hutmacher; Bill Frame; Raymond Miller
Journal:  J Pharmacokinet Pharmacodyn       Date:  2008-02-26       Impact factor: 2.745

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.