Literature DB >> 11841044

Application of resampling techniques to estimate exact significance levels for covariate selection during nonlinear mixed effects model building: some inferences.

Jogarao V S Gobburu1, John Lawrence.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: One of the main objectives of the nonlinear mixed effects modeling is to provide rational individualized dosing strategies by explaining the interindividual variability using intrinsic and/or extrinsic factors (covariates). The aim of the current study was to evaluate, using computer simulations and real data, methods for estimating the exact significance level for including or excluding a covariate during model building.
METHODS: Original data were simulated using a simple one-compartment pharmacokinetic model with (full model) or without (null model) covariates (one or two). The covariate values in the original data were resampled (using either permutations or parametric bootstrap methods) to generate data under the null hypothesis that there is no covariate effect. The original and permuted data were fitted to null and full models, using first-order and first-order condition estimation (with or without interaction) methods in NONMEM, to compare the asymptotic and conditional p-value. Target log-likelihood ratio cutoffs for assessing covariate effects were derived.
RESULTS: The simulations showed that for sparse as well as dense data, the first-order condition estimation methods yielded the best results while the first-order method performs somewhat better for sparse data. Depending on the modeling objective, the appropriate asymptotic p-value can be substituted for the conditional significance level. Target log-likelihood ratio cutoffs should be determined separately for each covariate when exact p-values are important.
CONCLUSIONS: Resampling methods can be employed to estimate the exact significance level for including a covariate during nonlinear mixed effects model building. Some reasonable inferences can be drawn for potential application to design future population analyses.

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2002        PMID: 11841044     DOI: 10.1023/a:1013615701857

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Pharm Res        ISSN: 0724-8741            Impact factor:   4.200


  3 in total

1.  Assessment of actual significance levels for covariate effects in NONMEM.

Authors:  U Wählby; E N Jonsson; M O Karlsson
Journal:  J Pharmacokinet Pharmacodyn       Date:  2001-06       Impact factor: 2.745

Review 2.  Utilisation of pharmacokinetic-pharmacodynamic modelling and simulation in regulatory decision-making.

Authors:  J V Gobburu; P J Marroum
Journal:  Clin Pharmacokinet       Date:  2001       Impact factor: 6.447

Review 3.  Role of population pharmacokinetics in drug development. A pharmaceutical industry perspective.

Authors:  E Samara; R Granneman
Journal:  Clin Pharmacokinet       Date:  1997-04       Impact factor: 6.447

  3 in total
  13 in total

1.  Assessment of type I error rates for the statistical sub-model in NONMEM.

Authors:  Ulrika Wählby; M René Bouw; E Niclas Jonsson; Mats O Karlsson
Journal:  J Pharmacokinet Pharmacodyn       Date:  2002-06       Impact factor: 2.745

2.  Importance of within subject variation in levodopa pharmacokinetics: a 4 year cohort study in Parkinson's disease.

Authors:  Phylinda L S Chan; John G Nutt; Nicholas H G Holford
Journal:  J Pharmacokinet Pharmacodyn       Date:  2005-08       Impact factor: 2.745

3.  A new approach to modeling covariate effects and individualization in population pharmacokinetics-pharmacodynamics.

Authors:  Tze Leung Lai; Mei-Chiung Shih; Samuel P Wong
Journal:  J Pharmacokinet Pharmacodyn       Date:  2006-01-10       Impact factor: 2.745

4.  Pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic changes during the first four years of levodopa treatment in Parkinson's disease.

Authors:  Phylinda L S Chan; John G Nutt; Nicholas H G Holford
Journal:  J Pharmacokinet Pharmacodyn       Date:  2005-08       Impact factor: 2.745

5.  Pharmacogenetics and population pharmacokinetics: impact of the design on three tests using the SAEM algorithm.

Authors:  Julie Bertrand; Emmanuelle Comets; Céline M Laffont; Marylore Chenel; France Mentré
Journal:  J Pharmacokinet Pharmacodyn       Date:  2009-06-27       Impact factor: 2.745

6.  Multicenter-Based Population Pharmacokinetic Analysis of Ciclosporin in Hematopoietic Stem Cell Transplantation Patients.

Authors:  Ling Xue; Wen-Juan Zhang; Ji-Xin Tian; Lin-Na Liu; Hai-Hong Yan; Wen-Wen Zhang; Xiao-Liang Ding; Jing-Jing Zhang; Li-Yan Miao
Journal:  Pharm Res       Date:  2019-12-23       Impact factor: 4.200

7.  Evaluation of Approaches to Deal with Low-Frequency Nuisance Covariates in Population Pharmacokinetic Analyses.

Authors:  Chakradhar V Lagishetty; Stephen B Duffull
Journal:  AAPS J       Date:  2015-06-26       Impact factor: 4.009

8.  Population pharmacokinetic analysis of carboxyhaemoglobin concentrations in adult cigarette smokers.

Authors:  Carol Cronenberger; Diane R Mould; Hans-Juergen Roethig; Mohamadi Sarkar
Journal:  Br J Clin Pharmacol       Date:  2007-08-31       Impact factor: 4.335

9.  Population pharmacokinetics of amodiaquine and desethylamodiaquine in pediatric patients with uncomplicated falciparum malaria.

Authors:  Sofia Friberg Hietala; Achuyt Bhattarai; Mwinyi Msellem; Daniel Röshammar; Abdullah S Ali; Johan Strömberg; Francis W Hombhanje; Akira Kaneko; Anders Björkman; Michael Ashton
Journal:  J Pharmacokinet Pharmacodyn       Date:  2007-07-10       Impact factor: 2.745

10.  Pharmacokinetics of sapropterin in patients with phenylketonuria.

Authors:  François Feillet; Lorne Clarke; Concetta Meli; Mark Lipson; Andrew A Morris; Paul Harmatz; Diane R Mould; Bruce Green; Alex Dorenbaum; Marcello Giovannini; Erik Foehr
Journal:  Clin Pharmacokinet       Date:  2008       Impact factor: 6.447

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.