Literature DB >> 17324247

Population pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic models of remifentanil in healthy volunteers using artificial neural network analysis.

S H Kang1, M R Poynton, K M Kim, H Lee, D H Kim, S H Lee, K S Bae, O Linares, S E Kern, G J Noh.   

Abstract

AIMS: An ordinary sigmoid E(max) model could not predict overshoot of electroencephalographic approximate entropy (ApEn) during recovery from remifentanil effect in our previous study. The aim of this study was to evaluate the ability of an artificial neural network (ANN) to predict ApEn overshoot and to evaluate the predictive performance of the pharmacokinetic model, and pharmacodynamic models of ANN with respect to data used.
METHODS: Using a reduced number of ApEn instances (n = 1581) to make NONMEM modelling feasible and complete ApEn data (n = 24 509), the presence of overshoot was assessed. A total of 1077 measured remifentanil concentrations and ApEn data, and a total of 24 509 predicted concentrations and ApEn data were used in the pharmacodynamic model A and B of ANN, respectively. The testing subset of model B (n = 7352) was used to evaluate the ability of ANN to predict overshoot of ApEn. Mean squared error (MSE) was calculated to evaluate the predictive performance of the ANN models.
RESULTS: With complete ApEn data, ApEn overshoot was observed in 66.7% of subjects, but only in 37% with a reduced number of ApEn instances. The ANN model B predicted 77.8% of ApEn overshoot. MSE (95% confidence interval) was 57.1 (3.22, 71.03) for the pharmacokinetic model, 0.148 (0.004, 0.007) for model A and 0.0018 (0.0017, 0.0019) for model B.
CONCLUSIONS: The reduced ApEn instances interfered with the approximation of true electroencephalographic response. ANN predicted 77.8% of ApEn overshoot. The predictive performance of model B was significantly better than that of model A.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2007        PMID: 17324247      PMCID: PMC2000605          DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2125.2007.02845.x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Br J Clin Pharmacol        ISSN: 0306-5251            Impact factor:   4.335


  21 in total

1.  Validation procedures in radiologic diagnostic models. Neural network and logistic regression.

Authors:  E Arana; P Delicado; L Martí-Bonmatí
Journal:  Invest Radiol       Date:  1999-10       Impact factor: 6.016

2.  Prediction of plasma levels of aminoglycoside antibiotic in patients with severe illness by means of an artificial neural network simulator.

Authors:  S Yamamura; K Nishizawa; M Hirano; Y Momose; A Kimura
Journal:  J Pharm Pharm Sci       Date:  1998 Sep-Dec       Impact factor: 2.327

3.  Approximate entropy (ApEn) as a complexity measure.

Authors:  Steve Pincus
Journal:  Chaos       Date:  1995-03       Impact factor: 3.642

4.  Electroencephalographic approximate entropy changes in healthy volunteers during remifentanil infusion.

Authors:  Gyu-Jeong Noh; Kye-Min Kim; Yong-Bo Jeong; Seong-Wook Jeong; Hee-Suk Yoon; Sung-Moon Jeong; Sung-Hong Kang; Olinto Linares; Steven E Kern
Journal:  Anesthesiology       Date:  2006-05       Impact factor: 7.892

5.  The electroencephalogram in man anesthetized with forane.

Authors:  E I Eger; W C Stevens; T H Cromwell
Journal:  Anesthesiology       Date:  1971-11       Impact factor: 7.892

6.  Empirical versus mechanistic modelling: comparison of an artificial neural network to a mechanistically based model for quantitative structure pharmacokinetic relationships of a homologous series of barbiturates.

Authors:  I S Nestorov; S T Hadjitodorov; I Petrov; M Rowland
Journal:  AAPS PharmSci       Date:  1999

7.  Influence of age and gender on the pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of remifentanil. I. Model development.

Authors:  C F Minto; T W Schnider; T D Egan; E Youngs; H J Lemmens; P L Gambus; V Billard; J F Hoke; K H Moore; D J Hermann; K T Muir; J W Mandema; S L Shafer
Journal:  Anesthesiology       Date:  1997-01       Impact factor: 7.892

8.  The pharmacokinetics of propofol in children using three different data analysis approaches.

Authors:  B K Kataria; S A Ved; H F Nicodemus; G R Hoy; D Lea; M Y Dubois; J W Mandema; S L Shafer
Journal:  Anesthesiology       Date:  1994-01       Impact factor: 7.892

9.  Neural network predicted peak and trough gentamicin concentrations.

Authors:  M E Brier; J M Zurada; G R Aronoff
Journal:  Pharm Res       Date:  1995-03       Impact factor: 4.200

10.  Remifentanil versus alfentanil: comparative pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics in healthy adult male volunteers.

Authors:  T D Egan; C F Minto; D J Hermann; J Barr; K T Muir; S L Shafer
Journal:  Anesthesiology       Date:  1996-04       Impact factor: 7.892

View more
  3 in total

1.  Pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of a new reformulated microemulsion and the long-chain triglyceride emulsion of propofol in beagle dogs.

Authors:  S-H Lee; J-L Ghim; M-H Song; H-G Choi; B-M Choi; H-M Lee; E-K Lee; Y-J Roh; G-J Noh
Journal:  Br J Pharmacol       Date:  2009-12       Impact factor: 8.739

2.  Temporal linear mode complexity as a surrogate measure of the effect of remifentanil on the central nervous system in healthy volunteers.

Authors:  Byung-Moon Choi; Da-Huin Shin; Moon-Ho Noh; Young-Hac Kim; Yong-Bo Jeong; Soo-Han Lee; Eun-Kyung Lee; Gyu-Jeong Noh
Journal:  Br J Clin Pharmacol       Date:  2011-06       Impact factor: 4.335

Review 3.  Electroencephalogram-based pharmacodynamic measures: a review.

Authors:  Michael Bewernitz; Hartmut Derendorf
Journal:  Int J Clin Pharmacol Ther       Date:  2012-03       Impact factor: 1.366

  3 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.