A simulation study to assess the influence of population pharmacokinetic model selection on initial dosing recommendations of vancomycin in neonates.

IF 3.1 3区 医学 Q2 PHARMACOLOGY & PHARMACY British journal of clinical pharmacology Pub Date : 2024-12-03 DOI:10.1111/bcp.16345
Mehdi El Hassani, Mathieu Blouin, Amélie Marsot
{"title":"A simulation study to assess the influence of population pharmacokinetic model selection on initial dosing recommendations of vancomycin in neonates.","authors":"Mehdi El Hassani, Mathieu Blouin, Amélie Marsot","doi":"10.1111/bcp.16345","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Aims: </strong>The accuracy of model-informed precision dosing largely depends on selecting the most appropriate population pharmacokinetic (popPK) model from many available options. This study aims to evaluate the concordance of optimal initial simulated doses among various vancomycin popPK models developed in neonates and to explore the role of predictive performance in explaining the variability in probability of target attainment (PTA).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A virtual neonatal patient population was created and 26 previously externally evaluated vancomycin popPK models were used to simulate 5 different dosing regimens. For each simulated scenario, the area under the concentration-time curve and PTA were calculated to assess the agreement on optimal initial doses across the 26 models. A multiple regression was performed to explore the impact of the models' predictive performance on PTA.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>For most models (15/26), there was an agreement on the optimal dosing regimen. The highest PTA being achieved by the model with the best a priori predictive performance. The multiple regression model significantly predicted mean ln-transformed PTA, with F(2, 23) = 5.406 and P = .010, yielding an adjusted R<sup>2</sup> of .21. PTA was significantly influenced by imprecision (P = .048) but not bias (P = .469).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>In conclusion, our study demonstrated that, despite the variability in bias and imprecision, there was a consensus on the initial optimal doses for the majority of models; however, models with superior a priori predictive performance yielded higher PTA values. Bias and imprecision alone only seem to predict a small proportion of the variability in PTA, with imprecision having a more pronounced effect.</p>","PeriodicalId":9251,"journal":{"name":"British journal of clinical pharmacology","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"British journal of clinical pharmacology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/bcp.16345","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PHARMACOLOGY & PHARMACY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Aims: The accuracy of model-informed precision dosing largely depends on selecting the most appropriate population pharmacokinetic (popPK) model from many available options. This study aims to evaluate the concordance of optimal initial simulated doses among various vancomycin popPK models developed in neonates and to explore the role of predictive performance in explaining the variability in probability of target attainment (PTA).

Methods: A virtual neonatal patient population was created and 26 previously externally evaluated vancomycin popPK models were used to simulate 5 different dosing regimens. For each simulated scenario, the area under the concentration-time curve and PTA were calculated to assess the agreement on optimal initial doses across the 26 models. A multiple regression was performed to explore the impact of the models' predictive performance on PTA.

Results: For most models (15/26), there was an agreement on the optimal dosing regimen. The highest PTA being achieved by the model with the best a priori predictive performance. The multiple regression model significantly predicted mean ln-transformed PTA, with F(2, 23) = 5.406 and P = .010, yielding an adjusted R2 of .21. PTA was significantly influenced by imprecision (P = .048) but not bias (P = .469).

Conclusion: In conclusion, our study demonstrated that, despite the variability in bias and imprecision, there was a consensus on the initial optimal doses for the majority of models; however, models with superior a priori predictive performance yielded higher PTA values. Bias and imprecision alone only seem to predict a small proportion of the variability in PTA, with imprecision having a more pronounced effect.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
6.30
自引率
8.80%
发文量
419
审稿时长
1 months
期刊介绍: Published on behalf of the British Pharmacological Society, the British Journal of Clinical Pharmacology features papers and reports on all aspects of drug action in humans: review articles, mini review articles, original papers, commentaries, editorials and letters. The Journal enjoys a wide readership, bridging the gap between the medical profession, clinical research and the pharmaceutical industry. It also publishes research on new methods, new drugs and new approaches to treatment. The Journal is recognised as one of the leading publications in its field. It is online only, publishes open access research through its OnlineOpen programme and is published monthly.
期刊最新文献
Optimizing preclinical models of ageing for translation to clinical trials. Frailty in clinical drug trials: Frailty assessments, subgroup analyses and outcomes. Innovations in pharmacovigilance studies of medicines in older people. Mobile applications on app stores for deprescribing: A scoping review. The effects of diuretic deprescribing in adult patients: A systematic review to inform an evidence-based diuretic deprescribing guideline.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1