Literature DB >> 23386200

Dose finding by concentration-response versus dose-response: a simulation-based comparison.

Alienor Berges1, Chao Chen.   

Abstract

AIM: The investigations reported here aimed to evaluate the incremental benefit for dose finding by concentration-response analysis versus dose-response analysis.
METHODS: Trials were simulated using an Emax model for a range of scenarios of drug properties, trial design options and target response levels. The simulated data were analysed by concentration-response and dose-response modelling; a dose was then chosen to target a specific response level in a confirmatory trial. The two approaches were compared in terms of the quality of model parameter estimation and the success rate for the confirmatory trial.
RESULTS: While the accuracy for ED50 estimation was comparably good with both approaches, the precision was up to 90 % higher with concentration-response approach. The difference was most notable when clearance was highly variable between subjects and the top dose was relatively low. The higher precision by the concentration-response analysis lead to better dose selection and up to 20 % higher success rate for the subsequent confirmatory trial. The relatively small difference in success rate translated into a remarkable difference in sample size requirement.
CONCLUSION: By customising these parameters, the approach and the findings can be applied to assessing the value of pharmacokinetic sampling in particular trial situations.

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2013        PMID: 23386200     DOI: 10.1007/s00228-013-1474-z

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Eur J Clin Pharmacol        ISSN: 0031-6970            Impact factor:   2.953


  15 in total

Review 1.  Pharmacodynamic modeling of time-dependent transduction systems.

Authors:  D E Mager; W J Jusko
Journal:  Clin Pharmacol Ther       Date:  2001-09       Impact factor: 6.875

Review 2.  The FDA critical path initiative and its influence on new drug development.

Authors:  Janet Woodcock; Raymond Woosley
Journal:  Annu Rev Med       Date:  2008       Impact factor: 13.739

3.  Approaches to handling pharmacodynamic baseline responses.

Authors:  Chantaratsamon Dansirikul; Hanna E Silber; Mats O Karlsson
Journal:  J Pharmacokinet Pharmacodyn       Date:  2008-04-30       Impact factor: 2.745

4.  Characterization of four basic models of indirect pharmacodynamic responses.

Authors:  A Sharma; W J Jusko
Journal:  J Pharmacokinet Biopharm       Date:  1996-12

5.  The importance of modeling interoccasion variability in population pharmacokinetic analyses.

Authors:  M O Karlsson; L B Sheiner
Journal:  J Pharmacokinet Biopharm       Date:  1993-12

6.  Modeling the efficacy of trastuzumab-DM1, an antibody drug conjugate, in mice.

Authors:  Nelson L Jumbe; Yan Xin; Douglas D Leipold; Lisa Crocker; Debra Dugger; Elaine Mai; Mark X Sliwkowski; Paul J Fielder; Jay Tibbitts
Journal:  J Pharmacokinet Pharmacodyn       Date:  2010-04-28       Impact factor: 2.745

7.  Application of clinical trial simulation to compare proof-of-concept study designs for drugs with a slow onset of effect; an example in Alzheimer's disease.

Authors:  Peter Lockwood; Wayne Ewy; David Hermann; Nick Holford
Journal:  Pharm Res       Date:  2006-08-12       Impact factor: 4.200

8.  Pharmacodynamic modeling of chemotherapeutic effects: application of a transit compartment model to characterize methotrexate effects in vitro.

Authors:  Evelyn D Lobo; Joseph P Balthasar
Journal:  AAPS PharmSci       Date:  2002

9.  Simultaneous modeling of pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics: application to d-tubocurarine.

Authors:  L B Sheiner; D R Stanski; S Vozeh; R D Miller; J Ham
Journal:  Clin Pharmacol Ther       Date:  1979-03       Impact factor: 6.875

10.  Predictive pharmacokinetic-pharmacodynamic modeling of tumor growth kinetics in xenograft models after administration of anticancer agents.

Authors:  Monica Simeoni; Paolo Magni; Cristiano Cammia; Giuseppe De Nicolao; Valter Croci; Enrico Pesenti; Massimiliano Germani; Italo Poggesi; Maurizio Rocchetti
Journal:  Cancer Res       Date:  2004-02-01       Impact factor: 12.701

View more
  1 in total

1.  Exposure-response modelling approaches for determining optimal dosing rules in children.

Authors:  Ian Wadsworth; Lisa V Hampson; Björn Bornkamp; Thomas Jaki
Journal:  Stat Methods Med Res       Date:  2020-02-13       Impact factor: 3.021

  1 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.