Literature DB >> 26209956

A pharmacometric case study regarding the sensitivity of structural model parameter estimation to error in patient reported dosing times.

Jonathan Knights1, Shashank Rohatagi2.   

Abstract

Although there is a body of literature focused on minimizing the effect of dosing inaccuracies on pharmacokinetic (PK) parameter estimation, most of the work centers on missing doses. No attempt has been made to specifically characterize the effect of error in reported dosing times. Additionally, existing work has largely dealt with cases in which the compound of interest is dosed at an interval no less than its terminal half-life. This work provides a case study investigating how error in patient reported dosing times might affect the accuracy of structural model parameter estimation under sparse sampling conditions when the dosing interval is less than the terminal half-life of the compound, and the underlying kinetics are monoexponential. Additional effects due to noncompliance with dosing events are not explored and it is assumed that the structural model and reasonable initial estimates of the model parameters are known. Under the conditions of our simulations, with structural model CV % ranging from ~20 to 60 %, parameter estimation inaccuracy derived from error in reported dosing times was largely controlled around 10 % on average. Given that no observed dosing was included in the design and sparse sampling was utilized, we believe these error results represent a practical ceiling given the variability and parameter estimates for the one-compartment model. The findings suggest additional investigations may be of interest and are noteworthy given the inability of current PK software platforms to accommodate error in dosing times.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Dosing inaccuracies; Parameter Estimation; Population pharmacokinetics; Reporting error; Simulation

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2015        PMID: 26209956     DOI: 10.1007/s10928-015-9428-y

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


  9 in total

1.  Population one-compartment pharmacokinetic analysis with missing dosage data.

Authors:  Dolors Soy; Stuart L Beal; Lewis B Sheiner
Journal:  Clin Pharmacol Ther       Date:  2004-11       Impact factor: 6.875

2.  A pharmacokinetic formalism explicitly integrating the patient drug compliance.

Authors:  Jun Li; Fahima Nekka
Journal:  J Pharmacokinet Pharmacodyn       Date:  2006-10-12       Impact factor: 2.745

3.  Methods to detect non-compliance and reduce its impact on population PK parameter estimates.

Authors:  Leonid Gibiansky; Ekaterina Gibiansky; Valerie Cosson; Nicolas Frey; Franziska Schaedeli Stark
Journal:  J Pharmacokinet Pharmacodyn       Date:  2014-06-21       Impact factor: 2.745

4.  Use of the Medication Event Monitoring System to estimate medication compliance in patients with schizophrenia.

Authors:  E Diaz; H B Levine; M C Sullivan; M J Sernyak; K A Hawkins; J A Cramer; S W Woods
Journal:  J Psychiatry Neurosci       Date:  2001-09       Impact factor: 6.186

5.  Selecting reliable pharmacokinetic data for explanatory analyses of clinical trials in the presence of possible noncompliance.

Authors:  J Lu; J M Gries; D Verotta; L B Sheiner
Journal:  J Pharmacokinet Pharmacodyn       Date:  2001-08       Impact factor: 2.745

6.  Effect of adherence as measured by MEMS, ritonavir boosting, and CYP3A5 genotype on atazanavir pharmacokinetics in treatment-naive HIV-infected patients.

Authors:  R M Savic; A Barrail-Tran; X Duval; G Nembot; X Panhard; D Descamps; C Verstuyft; B Vrijens; A-M Taburet; C Goujard; F Mentré
Journal:  Clin Pharmacol Ther       Date:  2012-10-03       Impact factor: 6.875

7.  An alternative method for population pharmacokinetic data analysis under noncompliance.

Authors:  Pankaj Gupta; Matthew M Hutmacher; Bill Frame; Raymond Miller
Journal:  J Pharmacokinet Pharmacodyn       Date:  2008-02-26       Impact factor: 2.745

8.  Adherence to warfarin assessed by electronic pill caps, clinician assessment, and patient reports: results from the IN-RANGE study.

Authors:  Catherine S Parker; Zhen Chen; Maureen Price; Robert Gross; Joshua P Metlay; Jason D Christie; Colleen M Brensinger; Craig W Newcomb; Frederick F Samaha; Stephen E Kimmel
Journal:  J Gen Intern Med       Date:  2007-06-22       Impact factor: 5.128

9.  Estimation of population pharmacokinetic parameters in the presence of non-compliance.

Authors:  Song Mu; Thomas M Ludden
Journal:  J Pharmacokinet Pharmacodyn       Date:  2003-02       Impact factor: 2.745

  9 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.