Literature DB >> 4057058

Performance of Bayesian feedback to forecast lidocaine serum concentration: evaluation of the prediction error and the prediction interval.

S Vozeh, T Uematsu, G F Hauf, F Follath.   

Abstract

The prediction performance of the Bayesian feedback method was evaluated with respect to accuracy and precision, and efficacy and safety (width of the prediction interval) on the basis of 90 predictions in 30 patients treated with lidocaine. The mean of the prediction error (PE) and the root mean squared error (RMSE) served as a measure of accuracy and precision. The variance of the standardized prediction error (SPE) was used to evaluate the estimate of the standard deviation of the prediction error. SPE was defined as PE divided by the standard deviation of the predicted concentration. The standard error of RMSE and of the variance of SPE was determined by bootstrap. The results indicate that the lidocaine serum concentration at 12 hr (C2) after starting continuous infusion can be predicted with high accuracy and precision with a single feedback measurement obtained 2-4 hr (C1) after commencement of treatment: RMSE = 20.6%. Prediction at 24 hr (C3) was less accurate: RMSE = 31.4%. Using both C1 and C2 to predict C3 improved precision (RMSE = 23.4%). The evaluation of the prediction interval revealed that the current algorithm produces an upward biased estimate, probably due to a positive bias in the estimate of the covariance matrix of the parameter estimates. It is suggested that evaluation of prediction performance should include the estimate of the prediction interval.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  1985        PMID: 4057058     DOI: 10.1007/BF01059399

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Pharmacokinet Biopharm        ISSN: 0090-466X


  10 in total

1.  Pharmacokinetics of lidocaine after prolonged intravenous infusions in uncomplicated myocardial infarction.

Authors:  J LeLorier; D Grenon; Y Latour; G Caillé; G Dumont; A Brosseau; A Solignac
Journal:  Ann Intern Med       Date:  1977-12       Impact factor: 25.391

2.  Forecasting individual pharmacokinetics.

Authors:  L B Sheiner; S Beal; B Rosenberg; V V Marathe
Journal:  Clin Pharmacol Ther       Date:  1979-09       Impact factor: 6.875

3.  Modelling of individual pharmacokinetics for computer-aided drug dosage.

Authors:  L B Sheiner; B Rosenberg; K L Melmon
Journal:  Comput Biomed Res       Date:  1972-10

4.  Predicting phenytoin dosages using Bayesian feedback: a comparison with other methods.

Authors:  G J Yuen; J W Taylor; T M Ludden; M J Murphy
Journal:  Ther Drug Monit       Date:  1983       Impact factor: 3.681

5.  Experience with NONMEM: analysis of serum concentration data in patients treated with mexiletine and lidocaine.

Authors:  S Vozeh; M Wenk; F Follath
Journal:  Drug Metab Rev       Date:  1984       Impact factor: 4.518

6.  OPT: a package of computer programs for parameter optimisation in clinical pharmacokinetics.

Authors:  A W Kelman; B Whiting; S M Bryson
Journal:  Br J Clin Pharmacol       Date:  1982-08       Impact factor: 4.335

7.  Some suggestions for measuring predictive performance.

Authors:  L B Sheiner; S L Beal
Journal:  J Pharmacokinet Biopharm       Date:  1981-08

8.  Rapid prediction of individual dosage requirements for lignocaine.

Authors:  S Vozeh; M Berger; M Wenk; R Ritz; F Follath
Journal:  Clin Pharmacokinet       Date:  1984 Jul-Aug       Impact factor: 6.447

9.  Influence of long-term infusions on lidocaine kinetics.

Authors:  L A Bauer; T Brown; M Gibaldi; L Hudson; S Nelson; V Raisys; J P Shea
Journal:  Clin Pharmacol Ther       Date:  1982-04       Impact factor: 6.875

10.  Kinetic predictive techniques applied to lignocaine therapeutic drug monitoring.

Authors:  S E Joel; S M Bryson; M Small; W S Hillis; A W Kelman; B Whiting
Journal:  Ther Drug Monit       Date:  1983       Impact factor: 3.681

  10 in total
  10 in total

1.  Metrics for external model evaluation with an application to the population pharmacokinetics of gliclazide.

Authors:  Karl Brendel; Emmanuelle Comets; Céline Laffont; Christian Laveille; France Mentré
Journal:  Pharm Res       Date:  2006-08-12       Impact factor: 4.200

2.  A new exact test for the evaluation of population pharmacokinetic and/or pharmacodynamic models using random projections.

Authors:  Celine Marielle Laffont; Didier Concordet
Journal:  Pharm Res       Date:  2011-04-14       Impact factor: 4.200

3.  Bayesian forecasting of serum gentamicin concentrations in intensive care patients.

Authors:  K A Rodvold; R D Pryka; P G Kuehl; R A Blum; P Donahue
Journal:  Clin Pharmacokinet       Date:  1990-05       Impact factor: 6.447

4.  Evaluation of population (NONMEM) pharmacokinetic parameter estimates.

Authors:  S Vozeh; P O Maitre; D R Stanski
Journal:  J Pharmacokinet Biopharm       Date:  1990-04

5.  Estimates of the population pharmacokinetic parameters and performance of Bayesian feedback: a sensitivity analysis.

Authors:  S Vozeh; C Steiner
Journal:  J Pharmacokinet Biopharm       Date:  1987-10

Review 6.  Feedback control methods for drug dosage optimisation. Concepts, classification and clinical application.

Authors:  S Vozeh; J L Steimer
Journal:  Clin Pharmacokinet       Date:  1985 Nov-Dec       Impact factor: 6.447

7.  Intravenous phenytoin loading in patients after neurosurgery and in status epilepticus. A population pharmacokinetic study.

Authors:  S Vozeh; T Uematsu; L Aarons; P Maitre; H Landolt; O Gratzl
Journal:  Clin Pharmacokinet       Date:  1988-02       Impact factor: 6.447

8.  Bayesian clinical trials at The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center: An update.

Authors:  Rebecca S Slack Tidwell; S Andrew Peng; Minxing Chen; Diane D Liu; Ying Yuan; J Jack Lee
Journal:  Clin Trials       Date:  2019-08-26       Impact factor: 2.486

Review 9.  Methods for clinical monitoring of cyclosporin in transplant patients.

Authors:  R J Dumont; M H Ensom
Journal:  Clin Pharmacokinet       Date:  2000-05       Impact factor: 6.447

10.  P-glycoprotein-mediated transport of itraconazole across the blood-brain barrier.

Authors:  T Miyama; H Takanaga; H Matsuo; K Yamano; K Yamamoto; T Iga; M Naito; T Tsuruo; H Ishizuka; Y Kawahara; Y Sawada
Journal:  Antimicrob Agents Chemother       Date:  1998-07       Impact factor: 5.191

  10 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.