Literature DB >> 32323049

Use of normalized prediction distribution errors for assessing population physiologically-based pharmacokinetic model adequacy.

Anil R Maharaj1, Huali Wu1, Christoph P Hornik1,2, Antonio Arrieta3, Laura James4,5, Varsha Bhatt-Mehta6, John Bradley7, William J Muller8, Amira Al-Uzri9, Kevin J Downes10,11, Michael Cohen-Wolkowiez12,13.   

Abstract

Currently employed methods for qualifying population physiologically-based pharmacokinetic (Pop-PBPK) model predictions of continuous outcomes (e.g., concentration-time data) fail to account for within-subject correlations and the presence of residual error. In this study, we propose a new method for evaluating Pop-PBPK model predictions that account for such features. The approach focuses on deriving Pop-PBPK-specific normalized prediction distribution errors (NPDE), a metric that is commonly used for population pharmacokinetic model validation. We describe specific methodological steps for computing NPDE for Pop-PBPK models and define three measures for evaluating model performance: mean of NPDE, goodness-of-fit plots, and the magnitude of residual error. Utility of the proposed evaluation approach was demonstrated using two simulation-based study designs (positive and negative control studies) as well as pharmacokinetic data from a real-world clinical trial. For the positive-control simulation study, where observations and model simulations were generated under the same Pop-PBPK model, the NPDE-based approach denoted a congruency between model predictions and observed data (mean of NPDE =  - 0.01). In contrast, for the negative-control simulation study, where model simulations and observed data were generated under different Pop-PBPK models, the NPDE-based method asserted that model simulations and observed data were incongruent (mean of NPDE =  - 0.29). When employed to evaluate a previously developed clindamycin PBPK model against prospectively collected plasma concentration data from 29 children, the NPDE-based method qualified the model predictions as successful (mean of NPDE = 0). However, when pediatric subpopulations (e.g., infants) were evaluated, the approach revealed potential biases that should be explored.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Normalized prediction distribution errors; Pediatric subpopulations; Population physiologically-based pharmacokinetic modeling; Potential biases

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2020        PMID: 32323049      PMCID: PMC7293575          DOI: 10.1007/s10928-020-09684-2

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Pharmacokinet Pharmacodyn        ISSN: 1567-567X            Impact factor:   2.410


  32 in total

1.  Prediction-corrected visual predictive checks for diagnosing nonlinear mixed-effects models.

Authors:  Martin Bergstrand; Andrew C Hooker; Johan E Wallin; Mats O Karlsson
Journal:  AAPS J       Date:  2011-02-08       Impact factor: 4.009

2.  Physiologically Based Pharmacokinetic Modeling in Regulatory Science: An Update From the U.S. Food and Drug Administration's Office of Clinical Pharmacology.

Authors:  Manuela Grimstein; Yuching Yang; Xinyuan Zhang; Joseph Grillo; Shiew-Mei Huang; Issam Zineh; Yaning Wang
Journal:  J Pharm Sci       Date:  2018-10-29       Impact factor: 3.534

Review 3.  Innovative clinical trial design for pediatric therapeutics.

Authors:  Matthew M Laughon; Daniel K Benjamin; Edmund V Capparelli; Gregory L Kearns; Katherine Berezny; Ian M Paul; Kelly Wade; Jeff Barrett; Phillip Brian Smith; Michael Cohen-Wolkowiez
Journal:  Expert Rev Clin Pharmacol       Date:  2011-09       Impact factor: 5.045

4.  External Evaluation of Population Pharmacokinetic Models of Vancomycin in Neonates: The transferability of published models to different clinical settings.

Authors:  Wei Zhao; Florentia Kaguelidou; Valérie Biran; Daolun Zhang; Karel Allegaert; Edmund V Capparelli; Nick Holford; Toshimi Kimura; Yoke-Lin Lo; José-Esteban Peris; Alison Thomson; John N van den Anker; May Fakhoury; Evelyne Jacqz-Aigrain
Journal:  Br J Clin Pharmacol       Date:  2013-04       Impact factor: 4.335

5.  Tissue distribution of basic drugs: accounting for enantiomeric, compound and regional differences amongst beta-blocking drugs in rat.

Authors:  Trudy Rodgers; David Leahy; Malcolm Rowland
Journal:  J Pharm Sci       Date:  2005-06       Impact factor: 3.534

6.  A workflow example of PBPK modeling to support pediatric research and development: case study with lorazepam.

Authors:  A R Maharaj; J S Barrett; A N Edginton
Journal:  AAPS J       Date:  2013-01-24       Impact factor: 4.009

7.  Basic concepts in population modeling, simulation, and model-based drug development-part 2: introduction to pharmacokinetic modeling methods.

Authors:  D R Mould; R N Upton
Journal:  CPT Pharmacometrics Syst Pharmacol       Date:  2013-04-17

8.  Development of a physiology-based whole-body population model for assessing the influence of individual variability on the pharmacokinetics of drugs.

Authors:  Stefan Willmann; Karsten Höhn; Andrea Edginton; Michael Sevestre; Juri Solodenko; Wolfgang Weiss; Jörg Lippert; Walter Schmitt
Journal:  J Pharmacokinet Pharmacodyn       Date:  2007-03-13       Impact factor: 2.410

9.  Predictive Performance of Physiologically Based Pharmacokinetic and Population Pharmacokinetic Modeling of Renally Cleared Drugs in Children.

Authors:  W Zhou; T N Johnson; H Xu; Sya Cheung; K H Bui; J Li; N Al-Huniti; D Zhou
Journal:  CPT Pharmacometrics Syst Pharmacol       Date:  2016-08-27

10.  Use of opportunistic clinical data and a population pharmacokinetic model to support dosing of clindamycin for premature infants to adolescents.

Authors:  D Gonzalez; C Melloni; R Yogev; B B Poindexter; S R Mendley; P Delmore; J E Sullivan; J Autmizguine; A Lewandowski; B Harper; K M Watt; K C Lewis; E V Capparelli; D K Benjamin; M Cohen-Wolkowiez
Journal:  Clin Pharmacol Ther       Date:  2014-06-20       Impact factor: 6.903

View more
  1 in total

1.  Physiologically Based Pharmacokinetic (PBPK) Model of Gold Nanoparticle-Based Drug Delivery System for Stavudine Biodistribution.

Authors:  Hinojal Zazo; Clara I Colino; Carmen Gutiérrez-Millán; Andres A Cordero; Matthias Bartneck; José M Lanao
Journal:  Pharmaceutics       Date:  2022-02-13       Impact factor: 6.321

  1 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.