Literature DB >> 14571690

Evaluation of mixture modeling with count data using NONMEM.

Bill Frame1, Raymond Miller, Richard L Lalonde.   

Abstract

Mixture modeling within the context of pharmacokinetic (PK)/pharmacodynamic (PD) mixed effects modeling is a useful tool to explore a population for the presence of two or more subpopulations, not explained by evaluated covariates. At present, statistical tests for the existence of mixed populations have not been developed. Therefore, a simulation study was undertaken to evaluate mixture modeling with NONMEM and explore the following questions. First, what is the probability of concluding that a mixed population exists when there truly is not a mixture (false positive significance level)? Second, what is the probability of concluding that a mixed population (two subpopulations) exists when there is truly a mixed population (power), and how well can the mixture be estimated, both in terms of the population parameters and the individual subjects classification. Seizure count data were simulated using a Poisson distribution such that each subject's count could decrease from its baseline value, as a function of dose via an Emax model. The dosing design for the simulation was based on a trial with the investigational anti-epileptic drug pregabalin. Four hundred and forty seven subjects received pregabalin as add on therapy for partial seizures, each with a baseline seizure count and up to three subsequent seizure counts. For the mixtures, the two subpopulations were simulated to differ in their Emax values and relative proportions. One subpopulation always had its Emax set to unity (Emax hi), allowing the count to approach zero with increasing dose. The other subpopulation was allowed to vary in its Emax value (Emax lo = 0.75, 0.5, 0.25, and 0) and in its relative proportion (pr) of the population (pr = 0.05, 0.10, 0.25, and 0.50) giving a total of 4.4 = 16 different mixtures explored. Three hundred data sets were simulated for each scenario and estimations performed using NONMEM. Metrics used information about the parameter estimates, their standard errors (SE), the difference between minimum objective function (MOF) values for mixture and non-mixture models (MOF (delta)), the proportion of subjects classified correctly, and the estimated conditional probabilities of a subject being simulated as having Emax lo (Emax hi) given that they were estimated as having Emax lo (Emax hi) and being estimated as having Emax lo (Emax hi) given that they were simulated as having Emax lo (Emax hi). The false positive significance level was approximately 0.04 (using all 300 runs) or 0.078 (using only those runs with a successful covariance step), when there was no mixture. When simulating mixed data and for those characterizations with successful estimation and covariance steps, the median (range) percentage of 95% confidence intervals containing the true values for the parameters defining the mixture were 94% (89-96%), 89.5% (58-96%), and 95% (92-97%) for pr, Emax lo, and Emax hi, respectively. The median value of the estimated parameters pr, Emax lo (excluding the case when Emax lo was simulated to equal 0) and Emax hi within a scenario were within +/- 28% of the true values. The median proportion of subjects classified correctly ranged from 0.59 to 0.96. In conclusion, when no mixture was present the false positive probability was less than 0.078 and when mixtures were present they were characterized with varying degrees of success, depending on the nature of the mixture. When the difference between subpopulations was greater (as Emax lo approached zero or pr approached 0.5) the mixtures became easier to characterize.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2003        PMID: 14571690     DOI: 10.1023/a:1025564409649

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


  8 in total

1.  Population pharmacokinetics of perhexiline from very sparse, routine monitoring data.

Authors:  R Hussein; B G Charles; R G Morris; R L Rasiah
Journal:  Ther Drug Monit       Date:  2001-12       Impact factor: 3.681

2.  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

3.  Simulation for population pharmacodynamic analysis of dose-ranging trials: usefulness of the mixture model analysis for detecting nonresponders.

Authors:  Takeshi Shiiki; Yukiya Hashimoto; Ken-ichi Inui
Journal:  Pharm Res       Date:  2002-06       Impact factor: 4.200

4.  Evaluation of hypothesis testing for comparing two populations using NONMEM analysis.

Authors:  D B White; C A Walawander; D Y Liu; T H Grasela
Journal:  J Pharmacokinet Biopharm       Date:  1992-06

5.  Population pharmacokinetic modeling: the importance of informative graphics.

Authors:  E I Ette; T M Ludden
Journal:  Pharm Res       Date:  1995-12       Impact factor: 4.200

6.  Quantitative characterization of therapeutic index: application of mixed-effects modeling to evaluate oxybutynin dose-efficacy and dose-side effect relationships.

Authors:  S K Gupta; G Sathyan; E A Lindemulder; P L Ho; L B Sheiner; L Aarons
Journal:  Clin Pharmacol Ther       Date:  1999-06       Impact factor: 6.875

7.  Exposure-response analysis of pregabalin add-on treatment of patients with refractory partial seizures.

Authors:  Raymond Miller; Bill Frame; Brian Corrigan; Paula Burger; Howard Bockbrader; Elizabeth Garofalo; Richard Lalonde
Journal:  Clin Pharmacol Ther       Date:  2003-06       Impact factor: 6.875

8.  Population pharmacokinetics of ceftizoxime administered by continuous infusion in clinically ill adult patients.

Authors:  B Facca; B Frame; S Triesenberg
Journal:  Antimicrob Agents Chemother       Date:  1998-07       Impact factor: 5.191

  8 in total
  15 in total

1.  Mixture modeling for the detection of subpopulations in a pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic analysis.

Authors:  Annabelle Lemenuel-Diot; Christian Laveille; Nicolas Frey; Roeline Jochemsen; Alain Mallet
Journal:  J Pharmacokinet Pharmacodyn       Date:  2006-12-07       Impact factor: 2.745

2.  Mixture models and subpopulation classification: a pharmacokinetic simulation study and application to metoprolol CYP2D6 phenotype.

Authors:  Nitin Kaila; Robert J Straka; Richard C Brundage
Journal:  J Pharmacokinet Pharmacodyn       Date:  2006-10-12       Impact factor: 2.745

3.  Population pharmacokinetic model and Bayesian estimator for two tacrolimus formulations--twice daily Prograf and once daily Advagraf.

Authors:  Jean-Baptiste Woillard; Brenda C M de Winter; Nassim Kamar; Pierre Marquet; Lionel Rostaing; Annick Rousseau
Journal:  Br J Clin Pharmacol       Date:  2011-03       Impact factor: 4.335

4.  Performance in population models for count data, part I: maximum likelihood approximations.

Authors:  Elodie L Plan; Alan Maloney; Iñaki F Trocóniz; Mats O Karlsson
Journal:  J Pharmacokinet Pharmacodyn       Date:  2009-08-04       Impact factor: 2.745

5.  Performance in population models for count data, part II: a new SAEM algorithm.

Authors:  Radojka Savic; Marc Lavielle
Journal:  J Pharmacokinet Pharmacodyn       Date:  2009-08-13       Impact factor: 2.745

Review 6.  Pharmacodynamic models for discrete data.

Authors:  Ines Paule; Pascal Girard; Gilles Freyer; Michel Tod
Journal:  Clin Pharmacokinet       Date:  2012-12       Impact factor: 6.447

7.  Bayesian estimation of mycophenolate mofetil in lung transplantation, using a population pharmacokinetic model developed in kidney and lung transplant recipients.

Authors:  Brenda C M de Winter; Caroline Monchaud; Aurélie Prémaud; Christophe Pison; Romain Kessler; Martine Reynaud-Gaubert; Claire Dromer; Marc Stern; Romain Guillemain; Christiane Knoop; Marc Estenne; Pierre Marquet; Annick Rousseau
Journal:  Clin Pharmacokinet       Date:  2012-01-01       Impact factor: 6.447

8.  Pharmacodynamic differentiation of lorazepam sleepiness and dizziness using an ordered categorical measure.

Authors:  Mohamed A Kamal; David E Smith; Jack Cook; Douglas Feltner; Allen Moton; Daniele Ouellet
Journal:  J Pharm Sci       Date:  2010-08       Impact factor: 3.534

9.  Population pharmacokinetic meta-analysis of trabectedin (ET-743, Yondelis) in cancer patients.

Authors:  Juan Jose Perez-Ruixo; Peter Zannikos; Sarapee Hirankarn; Kim Stuyckens; Elizabeth A Ludwig; Arturo Soto-Matos; Luis Lopez-Lazaro; Joel S Owen
Journal:  Clin Pharmacokinet       Date:  2007       Impact factor: 6.447

10.  Population Pharmacokinetic Modelling for Estimation of Remifentanil Metabolic-Ratio Using Non-steady-State Concentrations under Rapidly Adaptive Dosing.

Authors:  Monica Simeoni; Chao Chen
Journal:  Pharm Res       Date:  2018-09-25       Impact factor: 4.200

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.