Literature DB >> 29785609

Evaluation of FOCEI and SAEM Estimation Methods in Population Pharmacokinetic Analysis Using NONMEM® Across Rich, Medium, and Sparse Sampling Data.

Waroonrat Sukarnjanaset1, Thitima Wattanavijitkul2, Sutep Jarurattanasirikul3.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: First-order conditional estimation with interaction (FOCEI) is one of the most commonly used estimation methods in nonlinear mixed effects modeling, while the stochastic approximation expectation maximization (SAEM) is the newer estimation algorithm. This work aimed to compare the performance of FOCEI and SAEM methods when using NONMEM® with the classical one- and two-compartment models across rich, medium, and sparse data.
METHODS: One- and two-compartment models of the previous studies were used to simulate data in three scenarios: rich, medium, and sparse data. For each scenario, there were 100 data sets, containing 100 individuals in each data set. Every data set was estimated with both FOCEI and SAEM methods. The simulation and estimation were performed using NONMEM®. The completion rates, percentage of relative estimation errors (%RERs), root mean square errors (RMSEs), and runtimes were considered to assess the completion, accuracy, precision, and speed of estimation, respectively.
RESULTS: Both FOCEI and SAEM methods provided comparable completion rates, median %RERs (ranged from - 9.03 to 3.27% for FOCEI and - 9.17 to 3.27% for SAEM) and RMSEs (ranged from 0.0004 to 1.244 for FOCEI and 0.0004 to 1.131 for SAEM) for most parameters in both models across three scenarios. The run times were much shorter with FOCEI (ranged from 0.18 to 0.98 min) compared to SAEM method (ranged from 4.64 to 12.03 min).
CONCLUSIONS: For the classical one- and two-compartment models, FOCEI method exhibited comparable performance similar to SAEM method but with significantly shorter runtimes across rich, medium, and sparse sampling scenarios.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2018        PMID: 29785609     DOI: 10.1007/s13318-018-0484-8

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Eur J Drug Metab Pharmacokinet        ISSN: 0378-7966            Impact factor:   2.441


  9 in total

1.  Comparison of Nonmem 7.2 estimation methods and parallel processing efficiency on a target-mediated drug disposition model.

Authors:  Leonid Gibiansky; Ekaterina Gibiansky; Robert Bauer
Journal:  J Pharmacokinet Pharmacodyn       Date:  2011-11-19       Impact factor: 2.745

2.  Performance comparison of various maximum likelihood nonlinear mixed-effects estimation methods for dose-response models.

Authors:  Elodie L Plan; Alan Maloney; France Mentré; Mats O Karlsson; Julie Bertrand
Journal:  AAPS J       Date:  2012-04-14       Impact factor: 4.009

Review 3.  A survey of population analysis methods and software for complex pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic models with examples.

Authors:  Robert J Bauer; Serge Guzy; Chee Ng
Journal:  AAPS J       Date:  2007-03-02       Impact factor: 4.009

4.  Derivation of various NONMEM estimation methods.

Authors:  Yaning Wang
Journal:  J Pharmacokinet Pharmacodyn       Date:  2007-07-10       Impact factor: 2.745

5.  Performance of different population pharmacokinetic algorithms.

Authors:  Philippe Colucci; Julie Grenier; Corinne Seng Yue; Jacques Turgeon; Murray P Ducharme
Journal:  Ther Drug Monit       Date:  2011-10       Impact factor: 3.681

6.  Evaluation of bias, precision, robustness and runtime for estimation methods in NONMEM 7.

Authors:  Åsa M Johansson; Sebastian Ueckert; Elodie L Plan; Andrew C Hooker; Mats O Karlsson
Journal:  J Pharmacokinet Pharmacodyn       Date:  2014-05-07       Impact factor: 2.745

7.  Comparing the performance of FOCE and different expectation-maximization methods in handling complex population physiologically-based pharmacokinetic models.

Authors:  Xiaoxi Liu; Yuhuan Wang
Journal:  J Pharmacokinet Pharmacodyn       Date:  2016-05-23       Impact factor: 2.745

8.  Population Pharmacokinetics and Pharmacodynamics of Piperacillin/Tazobactam in Patients with Nosocomial Infections.

Authors:  Rong Chen; Qing Qian; Meng-Ru Sun; Chun-Yan Qian; Su-Lan Zou; Ming-Li Wang; Li-Ying Wang
Journal:  Eur J Drug Metab Pharmacokinet       Date:  2016-08       Impact factor: 2.441

9.  Systematic comparison of the population pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of piperacillin in cystic fibrosis patients and healthy volunteers.

Authors:  J B Bulitta; S B Duffull; M Kinzig-Schippers; U Holzgrabe; U Stephan; G L Drusano; F Sörgel
Journal:  Antimicrob Agents Chemother       Date:  2007-05-07       Impact factor: 5.191

  9 in total
  5 in total

1.  Population pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of piperacillin in critically ill patients during the early phase of sepsis.

Authors:  Waroonrat Sukarnjanaset; Sutep Jaruratanasirikul; Thitima Wattanavijitkul
Journal:  J Pharmacokinet Pharmacodyn       Date:  2019-04-08       Impact factor: 2.745

2.  Population Pharmacokinetics and Pharmacodynamics of Vancomycin in Pediatric Patients With Various Degrees of Renal Function.

Authors:  Chanika Chuphan; Waroonrat Sukarnjanaset; Thanyawee Puthanakit; Thitima Wattanavijitkul
Journal:  J Pediatr Pharmacol Ther       Date:  2022-07-06

3.  Effect of CYP3A5 and CYP3A4 Genetic Variants on Fentanyl Pharmacokinetics in a Pediatric Population.

Authors:  Michael L Williams; Prince J Kannankeril; Joseph H Breeyear; Todd L Edwards; Sara L Van Driest; Leena Choi
Journal:  Clin Pharmacol Ther       Date:  2022-01-03       Impact factor: 6.903

4.  Population pharmacokinetic analysis of dexmedetomidine in children using real-world data from electronic health records and remnant specimens.

Authors:  Nathan T James; Joseph H Breeyear; Richard Caprioli; Todd Edwards; Brian Hachey; Prince J Kannankeril; Jacob M Keaton; Matthew D Marshall; Sara L Van Driest; Leena Choi
Journal:  Br J Clin Pharmacol       Date:  2022-01-28       Impact factor: 3.716

Review 5.  Population Pharmacokinetics of Clotting Factor Concentrates and Desmopressin in Hemophilia.

Authors:  Tim Preijers; Lisette M Schütte; Marieke J H A Kruip; Marjon H Cnossen; Frank W G Leebeek; Reinier M van Hest; Ron A A Mathôt
Journal:  Clin Pharmacokinet       Date:  2021-01       Impact factor: 6.447

  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.