Literature DB >> 3176107

The accuracy and stability of Bayesian theophylline predictions.

H Chrystyn1, J W Ellis, B A Mulley, M D Peake.   

Abstract

Pharmacokinetic parameters for theophylline were determined in 33 patients (3 women), mean age 61.2 years and weight 74.6 kg using the following three methods: (a) standard one-compartmental model calculations, assuming 100% bioavailability, after a single dose of theophylline syrup (mean dose 413 mg); (b) drug nomogram; and (c) Bayesian analysis. Patients entered a randomised study of three two-monthly dosage regimens using low, medium, and high theophylline twice daily doses. These doses produced mean (+/- SE) steady-state serum theophylline concentrations of 6.3 (+/- 0.4), 12.1 (+/- 0.3) and 18.3 (+/- 0.5) mg/L, respectively. A fourth period of placebo (2-month duration) was also included. At the end of each treatment period the measured serum theophylline concentration of each patient was compared with those predicted by each of the above three methods. The revised estimates derived from Bayesian analysis produced the least biased [mean prediction error (ME)] and most precise (mean squared prediction error) predictions for all three dosage periods. Statistical analysis of relative performance demonstrated that the difference in precision between the revised estimates and those of the other two methods was significant (p less than 0.05) with the magnitude of the difference increasing with dose. The revised estimates were also found to be less biased (p less than 0.05) than those of the nomogram. The ME (+/- SE) of the revised estimates for the low, medium, and high dosage periods was 0.34 (+/- 0.30), -0.02 (+/- 0.22) and -0.48 (+/- 0.31) mg/L, respectively.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  1988        PMID: 3176107     DOI: 10.1097/00007691-198803000-00011

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Ther Drug Monit        ISSN: 0163-4356            Impact factor:   3.681


  7 in total

Review 1.  Bayesian parameter estimation and population pharmacokinetics.

Authors:  A H Thomson; B Whiting
Journal:  Clin Pharmacokinet       Date:  1992-06       Impact factor: 6.447

2.  The prediction of steady-state plasma phenobarbitone concentrations (following low-dose phenobarbitone) to refine its use as an indicator of compliance.

Authors:  T Pullar; S Kumar; H Chrystyn; P Rice; S Peaker; M Feely
Journal:  Br J Clin Pharmacol       Date:  1991-09       Impact factor: 4.335

Review 3.  Clinical pharmacokinetics 1990.

Authors:  G R Matzke; W L St Peter
Journal:  Clin Pharmacokinet       Date:  1990-01       Impact factor: 6.447

4.  Bayesian derived predictions for twice daily theophylline under outpatient conditions and an assessment of optimal sampling times.

Authors:  H Chrystyn; J W Ellis; B A Mulley; M D Peake
Journal:  Br J Clin Pharmacol       Date:  1989-02       Impact factor: 4.335

Review 5.  An updated comparison of drug dosing methods. Part II: Theophylline.

Authors:  S M Erdman; K A Rodvold; R D Pryka
Journal:  Clin Pharmacokinet       Date:  1991-04       Impact factor: 6.447

6.  Use of low-dose oral theophylline as an adjunct to inhaled corticosteroids in preventing exacerbations of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: study protocol for a randomised controlled trial.

Authors:  Graham Devereux; Seonaidh Cotton; Peter Barnes; Andrew Briggs; Graham Burns; Rekha Chaudhuri; Henry Chrystyn; Lisa Davies; Anthony De Soyza; Shona Fielding; Simon Gompertz; John Haughney; Amanda J Lee; Kirsty McCormack; Gladys McPherson; Alyn Morice; John Norrie; Anita Sullivan; Andrew Wilson; David Price
Journal:  Trials       Date:  2015-06-10       Impact factor: 2.279

Review 7.  Bayesian estimation of pharmacokinetic parameters: an important component to include in the teaching of clinical pharmacokinetics and therapeutic drug monitoring.

Authors:  Dion R Brocks; Dalia A Hamdy
Journal:  Res Pharm Sci       Date:  2020-11-27
  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.