Literature DB >> 20033477

Evaluation of different tests based on observations for external model evaluation of population analyses.

Karl Brendel1, Emmanuelle Comets, Céline Laffont, France Mentré.   

Abstract

To evaluate by simulation the statistical properties of normalized prediction distribution errors (NPDE), prediction discrepancies (pd), standardized prediction errors (SPE), numerical predictive check (NPC) and decorrelated NPC (NPC(dec)) for the external evaluation of a population pharmacokinetic analysis, and to illustrate the use of NPDE for the evaluation of covariate models. We assume that a model M(B) has been built using a building dataset B, and that a separate validation dataset, V is available. Our null hypothesis H(0) is that the data in V can be described by M(B). We use several methods to test this hypothesis: NPDE, pd, SPE, NPC and NPC(dec). First, we evaluated by simulation the type I error under H(0) of different tests applied to the four methods. We also propose and evaluate a single global test combining normality, mean and variance tests applied to NPDE, pd and SPE. We perform tests on NPC and NPC(dec), after a decorrelation. M(B) was a one compartment model with first order absorption (without covariate), previously developed from two phase II and one phase III studies of the antidiabetic drug, gliclazide. We simulated 500 external datasets according to the design of a phase III study. Second, we investigated the application of NPDE to covariate models. We propose two approaches: the first approach uses correlation tests or mean comparisons to test the relationship between NPDE and covariates; the second evaluates NPDE split by category for discrete covariates or quantiles for continuous covariates. We generated several validation datasets under H(0) and under alternative assumptions with a model without covariate, with one continuous covariate (weight), or one categorical covariate (sex). We calculated the powers of the different tests using simulations, where the covariates of the phase III study were used. The simulations under H(0) show a high type I error for the different tests applied to SPE and an increased type I error for pd. The different tests present a type I error close to 5% for the global test appied to NPDE. We find a type I error higher than 5% for the test applied to classical NPC but this test becomes close to 5% for NPC(dec). For covariate models, when model and validation dataset are consistent, type I error of the tests are close to 5% for both effects. When validation datasets and models are not consistent, the tests detect the correlation between NPDE and the covariate. We recommend to use NPDE over SPE for external model evaluation, since they do not depend on an approximation of the model and have good statistical properties. NPDE represent a better approach than NPC, since in order to perform tests on NPC, a decorrelation step must be applied before. NPDE, in this illustration, is also a good tool to evaluate model with or without covariates.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2009        PMID: 20033477      PMCID: PMC2874574          DOI: 10.1007/s10928-009-9143-7

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


  11 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.  Population PKPD modelling of the long-term hypoglycaemic effect of gliclazide given as a once-a-day modified release (MR) formulation.

Authors:  N Frey; C Laveille; M Paraire; M Francillard; N H G Holford; Roeline Jochemsen
Journal:  Br J Clin Pharmacol       Date:  2003-02       Impact factor: 4.335

3.  Prediction discrepancies for the evaluation of nonlinear mixed-effects models.

Authors:  France Mentré; Sylvie Escolano
Journal:  J Pharmacokinet Pharmacodyn       Date:  2005-11-13       Impact factor: 2.745

Review 4.  A guide for reporting the results of population pharmacokinetic analyses: a Swedish perspective.

Authors:  Janet R Wade; Monica Edholm; Tomas Salmonson
Journal:  AAPS J       Date:  2005-10-05       Impact factor: 4.009

5.  Metrics for external model evaluation with an application to the population pharmacokinetics of gliclazide.

Authors:  Karl Brendel; Emmanuelle Comets; Céline Laffont; Christian Laveille; France Mentré
Journal:  Pharm Res       Date:  2006-08-12       Impact factor: 4.200

Review 6.  Diagnosing model diagnostics.

Authors:  M O Karlsson; R M Savic
Journal:  Clin Pharmacol Ther       Date:  2007-07       Impact factor: 6.875

Review 7.  Pharmacometrics at FDA: evolution and impact on decisions.

Authors:  J R Powell; J V S Gobburu
Journal:  Clin Pharmacol Ther       Date:  2007-05-30       Impact factor: 6.875

8.  Conditional weighted residuals (CWRES): a model diagnostic for the FOCE method.

Authors:  Andrew C Hooker; Christine E Staatz; Mats O Karlsson
Journal:  Pharm Res       Date:  2007-07-06       Impact factor: 4.200

9.  Computing normalised prediction distribution errors to evaluate nonlinear mixed-effect models: the npde add-on package for R.

Authors:  Emmanuelle Comets; Karl Brendel; France Mentré
Journal:  Comput Methods Programs Biomed       Date:  2008-01-22       Impact factor: 5.428

10.  Extensions to the visual predictive check to facilitate model performance evaluation.

Authors:  Teun M Post; Jan I Freijer; Bart A Ploeger; Meindert Danhof
Journal:  J Pharmacokinet Pharmacodyn       Date:  2008-01-16       Impact factor: 2.745

View more
  43 in total

1.  A pharmacokinetic-pharmacodynamic model for predicting the impact of CYP2C9 and VKORC1 polymorphisms on fluindione and acenocoumarol during induction therapy.

Authors:  Céline Verstuyft; Xavier Delavenne; Alexandra Rousseau; Annie Robert; Michel Tod; Bertrand Diquet; Martine Lebot; Patrice Jaillon; Laurent Becquemont
Journal:  Clin Pharmacokinet       Date:  2012-01-01       Impact factor: 6.447

2.  A new exact test for the evaluation of population pharmacokinetic and/or pharmacodynamic models using random projections.

Authors:  Celine Marielle Laffont; Didier Concordet
Journal:  Pharm Res       Date:  2011-04-14       Impact factor: 4.200

3.  Why should prediction discrepancies be renamed standardized visual predictive check?

Authors:  Emmanuelle Comets; Karl Brendel; France Mentré
Journal:  J Clin Pharmacol       Date:  2011-09-10       Impact factor: 3.126

4.  Development of a complex parent-metabolite joint population pharmacokinetic model.

Authors:  Julie Bertrand; Céline M Laffont; France Mentré; Marylore Chenel; Emmanuelle Comets
Journal:  AAPS J       Date:  2011-05-27       Impact factor: 4.009

5.  Extension of NPDE for evaluation of nonlinear mixed effect models in presence of data below the quantification limit with applications to HIV dynamic model.

Authors:  Thi Huyen Tram Nguyen; Emmanuelle Comets; France Mentré
Journal:  J Pharmacokinet Pharmacodyn       Date:  2012-08-11       Impact factor: 2.745

6.  Claiming desmopressin therapeutic equivalence in children requires pediatric data: a population PKPD analysis.

Authors:  Robin Michelet; Lien Dossche; Charlotte Van Herzeele; Jan Van Bocxlaer; An Vermeulen; Johan Vande Walle
Journal:  Eur J Clin Pharmacol       Date:  2017-12-03       Impact factor: 2.953

7.  Evident bias in a paracetamol metabolite population pharmacokinetic model applied to an external dataset.

Authors:  Jessica K Roberts; Matthew W Linakis; Xiaoxi Liu; Catherine M T Sherwin; John N van den Anker
Journal:  Br J Clin Pharmacol       Date:  2018-04-17       Impact factor: 4.335

8.  Development and performance of npde for the evaluation of time-to-event models.

Authors:  M Cerou; M Lavielle; K Brendel; M Chenel; E Comets
Journal:  Pharm Res       Date:  2018-01-09       Impact factor: 4.200

9.  Population pharmacokinetics of losmapimod in healthy subjects and patients with rheumatoid arthritis and chronic obstructive pulmonary diseases.

Authors:  Shuying Yang; Pauline Lukey; Misba Beerahee; Frank Hoke
Journal:  Clin Pharmacokinet       Date:  2013-03       Impact factor: 6.447

10.  A semi-mechanistic absorption model to evaluate drug-drug interaction with dabigatran: application with clarithromycin.

Authors:  Xavier Delavenne; Edouard Ollier; Thierry Basset; Laurent Bertoletti; Sandrine Accassat; Arnauld Garcin; Silvy Laporte; Paul Zufferey; Patrick Mismetti
Journal:  Br J Clin Pharmacol       Date:  2013-07       Impact factor: 4.335

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.