Ya-Qian Li1, Kai-Feng Chen1, Jun-Jie Ding2, Hong-Yi Tan3, Nan Yang1, Ya-Qi Lin1, Cui-Fang Wu1, Yue-Liang Xie1, Guo-Ping Yang3, Jing-Jing Liu4, Qi Pei5. 1. Department of Pharmacy, The Third Xiangya Hospital, Central South University, Changsha, 410013, Hunan, China. 2. Center for Tropical Medicine and Global Health, Nuffield Department of Clinical Medicine, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK. 3. Center for Clinical Pharmacology, The Third Xiangya Hospital, Central South University, Changsha, 410013, Hunan, China. 4. Department of Intensive Medicine, The Third Xiangya Hospital, Central South University, Changsha, 410013, Hunan, China. Liujj@126.com. 5. Department of Pharmacy, The Third Xiangya Hospital, Central South University, Changsha, 410013, Hunan, China. peiqi1028@126.com.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: Several population pharmacokinetics (popPK) models for polymyxin B have been constructed to optimize therapeutic regimens. However, their predictive performance remains unclear when extrapolated to different clinical centers. Therefore, this study aimed to evaluate the predictive ability of polymyxin B popPK models. METHODS: A literature search was conducted, and the predictive performance was determined for each selected model using an independent dataset of 20 patients (92 concentrations) from the Third Xiangya Hospital. Prediction- and simulation-based diagnostics were used to evaluate model predictability. The influence of prior information was assessed using Bayesian forecasting. RESULTS: Eight published studies were evaluated. In prediction-based diagnostics, the prediction error within ± 30% was over 50% in two models. In simulation-based diagnostics, the prediction- and variability-corrected visual predictive check (pvcVPC) showed satisfactory predictivity in three models, while the normalized prediction distribution error (NPDE) tests indicated model misspecification in all models. Bayesian forecasting demonstrated a substantially improvement in the model predictability even with one prior observation. CONCLUSION: Not all published models were satisfactory in prediction- and simulation-based diagnostics; however, Bayesian forecasting improved the predictability considerably with priors, which can be applied to guide polymyxin B dosing recommendations and adjustments for clinicians.
OBJECTIVES: Several population pharmacokinetics (popPK) models for polymyxin B have been constructed to optimize therapeutic regimens. However, their predictive performance remains unclear when extrapolated to different clinical centers. Therefore, this study aimed to evaluate the predictive ability of polymyxin B popPK models. METHODS: A literature search was conducted, and the predictive performance was determined for each selected model using an independent dataset of 20 patients (92 concentrations) from the Third Xiangya Hospital. Prediction- and simulation-based diagnostics were used to evaluate model predictability. The influence of prior information was assessed using Bayesian forecasting. RESULTS: Eight published studies were evaluated. In prediction-based diagnostics, the prediction error within ± 30% was over 50% in two models. In simulation-based diagnostics, the prediction- and variability-corrected visual predictive check (pvcVPC) showed satisfactory predictivity in three models, while the normalized prediction distribution error (NPDE) tests indicated model misspecification in all models. Bayesian forecasting demonstrated a substantially improvement in the model predictability even with one prior observation. CONCLUSION: Not all published models were satisfactory in prediction- and simulation-based diagnostics; however, Bayesian forecasting improved the predictability considerably with priors, which can be applied to guide polymyxin B dosing recommendations and adjustments for clinicians.
Authors: Ana M Sandri; Cornelia B Landersdorfer; Jovan Jacob; Márcio M Boniatti; Micheline G Dalarosa; Diego R Falci; Tainá F Behle; Rosaura C Bordinhão; Jiping Wang; Alan Forrest; Roger L Nation; Jian Li; Alexandre P Zavascki Journal: Clin Infect Dis Date: 2013-05-22 Impact factor: 9.079
Authors: Femke de Velde; Johan W Mouton; Brenda C M de Winter; Teun van Gelder; Birgit C P Koch Journal: Pharmacol Res Date: 2018-07-06 Impact factor: 7.658
Authors: Andrea L H Kwa; Tze-Peng Lim; Jenny G H Low; JingGuo Hou; Asok Kurup; Randall A Prince; Vincent H Tam Journal: Diagn Microbiol Infect Dis Date: 2007-10-04 Impact factor: 2.803
Authors: Alexandre P Zavascki; Luciano Z Goldani; Guoying Cao; Silvana V Superti; Larissa Lutz; Afonso L Barth; Fabiano Ramos; Márcio M Boniatti; Roger L Nation; Jian Li Journal: Clin Infect Dis Date: 2008-11-15 Impact factor: 9.079
Authors: Pooja Manchandani; Jian Zhou; Kimberly R Ledesma; Luan D Truong; Diana S-L Chow; Jason L Eriksen; Vincent H Tam Journal: Antimicrob Agents Chemother Date: 2015-12-07 Impact factor: 5.191
Authors: Sean N Avedissian; Cristina Miglis; Christine J Kubin; Nathaniel J Rhodes; Michael T Yin; Serge Cremers; Michelle Prickett; Marc H Scheetz Journal: Pharmacotherapy Date: 2018-07 Impact factor: 4.705
Authors: Brian T Tsuji; Jason M Pogue; Alexandre P Zavascki; Mical Paul; George L Daikos; Alan Forrest; Daniele R Giacobbe; Claudio Viscoli; Helen Giamarellou; Ilias Karaiskos; Donald Kaye; Johan W Mouton; Vincent H Tam; Visanu Thamlikitkul; Richard G Wunderink; Jian Li; Roger L Nation; Keith S Kaye Journal: Pharmacotherapy Date: 2019-01 Impact factor: 6.251