Comparison of different methods to evaluate population dose-response and relative potency: importance of interoccasion variability.

R L Lalonde, D Ouellet, E K Kimanani, D Potvin, L M Vaughan, M R Hill
{"title":"Comparison of different methods to evaluate population dose-response and relative potency: importance of interoccasion variability.","authors":"R L Lalonde,&nbsp;D Ouellet,&nbsp;E K Kimanani,&nbsp;D Potvin,&nbsp;L M Vaughan,&nbsp;M R Hill","doi":"10.1023/a:1020682729226","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Different mixed-effects models were compared to evaluate the population dose-response and relative potency of two albuterol inhalers. Bronchodilator response was measured after ascending doses of each inhaler in 37 asthmatic patients. A linear mixed-effects model was developed based on the approach proposed by Finney for the evaluation of bioassay data. A nonlinear mixed-effects (Emax) model with interindividual and interoccasion variability (IOV) in the different pharmacodynamic parameters was also fit to the data. Both methods produced a similar estimate of relative potency. However, the estimate of relative potency was 22% lower with the nonlinear mixed-effects model if IOV was not taken into account. Monte Carlo simulations based on a similar study design demonstrated that more biased and variable estimates of ED50 and relative potency were obtained when the nonlinear mixed-effects model ignored the presence of IOV in the data. Furthermore, the linear mixed-effects model that did not account for IOV produced confidence intervals for relative potency that were too narrow and thus could lead to erroneous conclusions. These problems were avoided when the estimation model could account for IOV. Results of the simulations were consistent with those of the experimental data. Although the linear or the nonlinear mixed-effects model may be used to evaluate population dose-response and relative potency, there are important differences in the assumptions made by each method.</p>","PeriodicalId":16765,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Pharmacokinetics and Biopharmaceutics","volume":"27 1","pages":"67-83"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"1999-02-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1023/a:1020682729226","citationCount":"11","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Pharmacokinetics and Biopharmaceutics","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1023/a:1020682729226","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 11

Abstract

Different mixed-effects models were compared to evaluate the population dose-response and relative potency of two albuterol inhalers. Bronchodilator response was measured after ascending doses of each inhaler in 37 asthmatic patients. A linear mixed-effects model was developed based on the approach proposed by Finney for the evaluation of bioassay data. A nonlinear mixed-effects (Emax) model with interindividual and interoccasion variability (IOV) in the different pharmacodynamic parameters was also fit to the data. Both methods produced a similar estimate of relative potency. However, the estimate of relative potency was 22% lower with the nonlinear mixed-effects model if IOV was not taken into account. Monte Carlo simulations based on a similar study design demonstrated that more biased and variable estimates of ED50 and relative potency were obtained when the nonlinear mixed-effects model ignored the presence of IOV in the data. Furthermore, the linear mixed-effects model that did not account for IOV produced confidence intervals for relative potency that were too narrow and thus could lead to erroneous conclusions. These problems were avoided when the estimation model could account for IOV. Results of the simulations were consistent with those of the experimental data. Although the linear or the nonlinear mixed-effects model may be used to evaluate population dose-response and relative potency, there are important differences in the assumptions made by each method.

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
评价人群剂量反应和相对效力的不同方法的比较:场合间变异性的重要性。
不同的混合效应模型进行比较,以评估人群剂量反应和两种沙丁胺醇吸入器的相对效力。在37例哮喘患者中,每次吸入剂量增加后,测量支气管扩张剂的反应。基于芬尼提出的评价生物测定数据的方法,建立了一个线性混合效应模型。非线性混合效应(Emax)模型具有不同药效学参数的个体间和场合间变异性(IOV)。两种方法得出的相对效力估计相似。然而,如果不考虑IOV,使用非线性混合效应模型估计的相对效力降低了22%。基于类似研究设计的蒙特卡罗模拟表明,当非线性混合效应模型忽略数据中IOV的存在时,对ED50和相对效力的估计更有偏差和可变。此外,没有考虑IOV的线性混合效应模型产生的相对效力置信区间太窄,从而可能导致错误的结论。当估计模型能够考虑车联网时,这些问题就得以避免。模拟结果与实验数据吻合较好。虽然线性或非线性混合效应模型可用于评估群体剂量反应和相对效力,但每种方法所作的假设存在重要差异。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Edward R. Garrett 1920–1993 Edward R. Garrett: A biographical sketch Erratum to: Simple approximate formulas for calculating the time to clear drug and the time to accumulate drug when the plasma disposition curve of the drug is multiexponential Erratum to: Simplified methods for the evaluation of the parameters of the time course of plasma concentration in the one-compartment body model with first-order invasion and first-order drug elimination including methods for ascertaining when such rate constants are equal Erratum to: Comparative physiological pharmacokinetics of fenatyl and alfenatil in rats and humans based on parametric single-tissue models
×
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