Literature DB >> 8842055

Bioequivalence: individual and population compartmental modeling compared to the noncompartmental approach.

H S Pentikis1, J D Henderson, N L Tran, T M Ludden.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: The purpose of this study were to evaluate the use of individual compartmental and population compartmental methods for bioequivalence determination, and to determine their utility as adjuncts to the current methods used for bioequivalence assessment.
METHODS: Data from three bioequivalence studies of chlorthalidone were analyzed with PCNONLIN using individual compartmental modeling and NONMEM for population analyses. These results were compared with results obtained from the traditional noncompartmental or SHAM (slopes, heights, areas, and moments) approach for bioequivalence assessment and the 90% confidence interval procedure.
RESULTS: Individual compartmental modeling and population compartmental modeling techniques performed well on this routine set of bioequivalence data which displayed simple pharmacokinetic properties. A direct assessment of the analysis methods was made by comparing the final estimates and 90% confidence intervals for the test to reference ratios (T/R) of AUC and CMAX. The final estimates and 90% confidence intervals for AUC T/R and CMAX T/R were similar and suggest consistency of results, independent of the method used.
CONCLUSIONS: These results demonstrate the utility of modeling techniques as adjuncts to the traditional noncompartmental approach for bioequivalence determination.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  1996        PMID: 8842055     DOI: 10.1023/a:1016083429903

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Pharm Res        ISSN: 0724-8741            Impact factor:   4.200


  8 in total

1.  Bioequivalence revisited.

Authors:  L B Sheiner
Journal:  Stat Med       Date:  1992-09-30       Impact factor: 2.373

2.  Application of the NONMEM method to evaluation of the bioavailability of drug products.

Authors:  N Kaniwa; N Aoyagi; H Ogata; M Ishii
Journal:  J Pharm Sci       Date:  1990-12       Impact factor: 3.534

3.  Estimation of population characteristics of pharmacokinetic parameters from routine clinical data.

Authors:  L B Sheiner; B Rosenberg; V V Marathe
Journal:  J Pharmacokinet Biopharm       Date:  1977-10

4.  Application of NONMEM to routine bioavailability data.

Authors:  D A Graves; I Chang
Journal:  J Pharmacokinet Biopharm       Date:  1990-04

5.  A comparison of the two one-sided tests procedure and the power approach for assessing the equivalence of average bioavailability.

Authors:  D J Schuirmann
Journal:  J Pharmacokinet Biopharm       Date:  1987-12

6.  A note on confidence intervals with extended least squares parameter estimates.

Authors:  L B Sheiner; S L Beal
Journal:  J Pharmacokinet Biopharm       Date:  1987-02

7.  Estimating bioavailability when clearance varies with time.

Authors:  M O Karlsson; L B Sheiner
Journal:  Clin Pharmacol Ther       Date:  1994-06       Impact factor: 6.875

8.  Absolute bioavailability of chlorthalidone in man: a cross-over study after intravenous and oral administration.

Authors:  H L Fleuren; T A Thien; C P Verwey-van Wissen; J M van Rossum
Journal:  Eur J Clin Pharmacol       Date:  1979-02-19       Impact factor: 2.953

  8 in total
  8 in total

1.  Characterization of the highly variable bioavailability of tiludronate in normal volunteers using population pharmacokinetic methodologies.

Authors:  G A Maier; G F Lockwood; J A Oppermann; G Wei; P Bauer; J Fedler-Kelly; T Grasela
Journal:  Eur J Drug Metab Pharmacokinet       Date:  1999 Jul-Sep       Impact factor: 2.441

2.  Population pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic model-based comparability assessment of a recombinant human Epoetin Alfa and the Biosimilar HX575.

Authors:  Xiaoyu Yan; Philip J Lowe; Martin Fink; Alexander Berghout; Sigrid Balser; Wojciech Krzyzanski
Journal:  J Clin Pharmacol       Date:  2011-12-12       Impact factor: 3.126

3.  Statistical issues in a modeling approach to assessing bioequivalence or PK similarity with presence of sparsely sampled subjects.

Authors:  Chuanpu Hu; Katy H P Moore; Yong H Kim; Mark E Sale
Journal:  J Pharmacokinet Pharmacodyn       Date:  2004-08       Impact factor: 2.745

4.  Pharmacokinetic similarity of biologics: analysis using nonlinear mixed-effects modeling.

Authors:  A Dubois; S Gsteiger; S Balser; E Pigeolet; J L Steimer; G Pillai; F Mentré
Journal:  Clin Pharmacol Ther       Date:  2011-12-28       Impact factor: 6.875

5.  Bioequivalence tests based on individual estimates using non-compartmental or model-based analyses: evaluation of estimates of sample means and type I error for different designs.

Authors:  Anne Dubois; Sandro Gsteiger; Etienne Pigeolet; France Mentré
Journal:  Pharm Res       Date:  2009-10-30       Impact factor: 4.200

6.  Population pharmacokinetic model for cancer chemoprevention with sulindac in healthy subjects.

Authors:  Alexander K Berg; Sumithra J Mandrekar; Katie L Allen Ziegler; Elsa C Carlson; Eva Szabo; Mathew M Ames; Daniel Boring; Paul J Limburg; Joel M Reid
Journal:  J Clin Pharmacol       Date:  2013-02-22       Impact factor: 3.126

7.  Comparison of non-compartmental and mixed effect modelling methods for establishing bioequivalence for the case of two compartment kinetics and censored concentrations.

Authors:  Jim H Hughes; Richard N Upton; David J R Foster
Journal:  J Pharmacokinet Pharmacodyn       Date:  2017-02-13       Impact factor: 2.745

8.  Population pharmacokinetics of adalimumab biosimilar adalimumab-adbm and reference product in healthy subjects and patients with rheumatoid arthritis to assess pharmacokinetic similarity.

Authors:  Jia Kang; Rena J Eudy-Byrne; John Mondick; William Knebel; Girish Jayadeva; Karl-Heinz Liesenfeld
Journal:  Br J Clin Pharmacol       Date:  2020-06-11       Impact factor: 4.335

  8 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.