Literature DB >> 8269582

Statistical approaches to pharmacodynamic modeling: motivations, methods, and misperceptions.

R Mick1, M J Ratain.   

Abstract

We have attempted to outline the fundamental statistical aspects of pharmacodynamic modeling. Unexpected yet substantial variability in effect in a group of similarly treated patients is the key motivation for pharmacodynamic investigations. Pharmacokinetic and/or pharmacodynamic factors may influence this variability. Residual variability in effect that persists after accounting for drug exposure indicates that further statistical modeling with pharmacodynamic factors is warranted. Factors that significantly predict interpatient variability in effect may then be employed to individualize the drug dose. In this paper we have emphasized the need to understand the properties of the effect measure and explanatory variables in terms of scale, distribution, and statistical relationship. The assumptions that underlie many types of statistical models have been discussed. The role of residual analysis has been stressed as a useful method to verify assumptions. We have described transformations and alternative regression methods that are employed when these assumptions are found to be in violation. Sequential selection procedures for the construction of multivariate models have been presented. The importance of assessing model performance has been underscored, most notably in terms of bias and precision. In summary, pharmacodynamic analyses are now commonly performed and reported in the oncologic literature. The content and format of these analyses has been variable. The goals of such analyses are to identify and describe pharmacodynamic relationships and, in many cases, to propose a statistical model. However, the appropriateness and performance of the proposed model are often difficult to judge. Table 1 displays suggestions (in a checklist format) for structuring the presentation of pharmacodynamic analyses, which reflect the topics reviewed in this paper.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1993        PMID: 8269582     DOI: 10.1007/bf00686015

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Cancer Chemother Pharmacol        ISSN: 0344-5704            Impact factor:   3.333


  28 in total

Review 1.  Therapeutic relevance of pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics.

Authors:  M J Ratain
Journal:  Semin Oncol       Date:  1992-08       Impact factor: 4.929

2.  Simultaneous modeling of pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics with nonparametric kinetic and dynamic models.

Authors:  J D Unadkat; F Bartha; L B Sheiner
Journal:  Clin Pharmacol Ther       Date:  1986-07       Impact factor: 6.875

3.  A survey of models for repeated ordered categorical response data.

Authors:  A Agresti
Journal:  Stat Med       Date:  1989-10       Impact factor: 2.373

Review 4.  Understanding the dose-effect relationship: clinical application of pharmacokinetic-pharmacodynamic models.

Authors:  N H Holford; L B Sheiner
Journal:  Clin Pharmacokinet       Date:  1981 Nov-Dec       Impact factor: 6.447

5.  Simultaneous pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic modeling.

Authors:  W A Colburn
Journal:  J Pharmacokinet Biopharm       Date:  1981-06

Review 6.  Pharmacodynamics in cancer therapy.

Authors:  M J Ratain; R L Schilsky; B A Conley; M J Egorin
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  1990-10       Impact factor: 44.544

7.  Influence of sex and age on fluorouracil clearance.

Authors:  G Milano; M C Etienne; E Cassuto-Viguier; A Thyss; J Santini; M Frenay; N Renee; M Schneider; F Demard
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  1992-07       Impact factor: 44.544

8.  Phase I study of amonafide dosing based on acetylator phenotype.

Authors:  M J Ratain; R Mick; F Berezin; L Janisch; R L Schilsky; N J Vogelzang; L B Lane
Journal:  Cancer Res       Date:  1993-05-15       Impact factor: 12.701

9.  Paradoxical relationship between acetylator phenotype and amonafide toxicity.

Authors:  M J Ratain; R Mick; F Berezin; L Janisch; R L Schilsky; S F Williams; J Smiddy
Journal:  Clin Pharmacol Ther       Date:  1991-11       Impact factor: 6.875

10.  The population approach to pharmacokinetic data analysis: rationale and standard data analysis methods.

Authors:  L B Sheiner
Journal:  Drug Metab Rev       Date:  1984       Impact factor: 4.518

View more
  3 in total

1.  An interface model for dosage adjustment connects hematotoxicity to pharmacokinetics.

Authors:  C Meille; A Iliadis; D Barbolosi; N Frances; G Freyer
Journal:  J Pharmacokinet Pharmacodyn       Date:  2008-12-24       Impact factor: 2.745

2.  A phase I trial of aprinocarsen (ISIS 3521/LY900003), an antisense inhibitor of protein kinase C-alpha administered as a 24-hour weekly infusion schedule in patients with advanced cancer.

Authors:  Ranjana Advani; Bert L Lum; George A Fisher; Joanne Halsey; Richard S Geary; Jon T Holmlund; T Jesse Kwoh; F Andrew Dorr; Branimir I Sikic
Journal:  Invest New Drugs       Date:  2005-10       Impact factor: 3.850

3.  Phase I study of escalating does of carboplatin.

Authors:  R Mick; M J Ratain
Journal:  Cancer Chemother Pharmacol       Date:  1994       Impact factor: 3.333

  3 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.