Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Pharmacometrics

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Book cover Handbook of Anticancer Pharmacokinetics and Pharmacodynamics

Part of the book series: Cancer Drug Discovery and Development ((CDD&D))

  • 3843 Accesses

Abstract

Pharmacometrics is the science of quantifying disease, drug, and trial characteristics with the goal of influencing drug development and regulatory and therapeutic decisions. Techniques employing pharmacometric principles are increasingly being used, allowing for efficient utilization of prior experimental information and ultimately streamlining drug development. Using mathematical and statistical models, modeling and simulation allows a simplification of complex systems under investigation and may be able to predict the effects of various treatment options, and the corresponding consequence, on the future course of the disease process. The summation of information can be used to develop more efficient, and hopefully successful, clinical trials. This chapter summarizes the basic theory and application of pharmacometric techniques. Examples of where such pharmacometric principles have been successfully employed in oncology drug development are presented.

The chapter was written while the corresponding author (Joga Gobburu) was at the FDA.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 219.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 279.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 279.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  1. Bhattaram VA, Booth BP, Ramchandani RP, Beasley BN, Wang Y, Tandon V, Duan JZ, Baweja RK, Marroum PJ, Uppoor RS, Rahman NA, Sahajwalla CG, Powell JR, Mehta MU, Gobburu JV (2005) Impact of pharmacometrics on drug approval and labeling decisions: a survey of 42 new drug applications. AAPS J 7:E503–E512

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Lalonde RL, Kowalski KG, Hutmacher MM, Ewy W, Nichols DJ, Milligan PA, Corrigan BW, Lockwood PA, Marshall SA, Benincosa LJ, Tensfeldt TG, Parivar K, Amantea M, Glue P, Koide H, Miller R (2007) Model-based drug development. Clin Pharmacol Ther 82:21–32

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Miller R, Ewy W, Corrigan BW, Ouellet D, Hermann D, Kowalski KG, Lockwood P, Koup JR, Donevan S, El-Kattan A, Li CS, Werth JL, Feltner DE, Lalonde RL (2005) How modeling and simulation have enhanced decision making in new drug development. J Pharmacokinet Pharmacodyn 32:185–197

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Orloff J, Douglas F, Pinheiro J, Levinson S, Branson M, Chaturvedi P, Ette E, Gallo P, Hirsch G, Mehta C, Patel N, Sabir S, Springs S, Stanski D, Evers MR, Fleming E, Singh N, Tramontin T, Golub H (2009) The future of drug development: advancing clinical trial design. Nat Rev Drug Discov 8:949–957

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Zhang L, Sinha V, Forgue ST, Callies S, Ni L, Peck R, Allerheiligen SR (2006) Model-based drug development: the road to quantitative pharmacology. J Pharmacokinet Pharmacodyn 33:369–393

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Ette E, Williams PJ (2007) Pharmacometrics: the science of quantitative pharmacology, vol 1. Wiley-Interscience, New York, Ref Type: Edited Book

    Book  Google Scholar 

  7. Sheiner LB (1997) Learning versus confirming in clinical drug development. Clin Pharmacol Ther 61:275–291

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Jelliffe RW, Maire P (2001) Goal-oriented, model-based drug regimens. Comput Biol Med 31:145–146

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Bonate PL (2000) Clinical trial simulation in drug development. Pharm Res 17:252–256

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Ratain MJ, Humphrey RW, Gordon GB, Fyfe G, Adamson PC, Fleming TR, Stadler WM, Berry DA, Peck CC (2008) Recommended changes to oncology clinical trial design: revolution or evolution? Eur J Cancer 44:8–11

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Jadhav PR, Agerso H, Tornoe CW, Gobburu JV (2006) Semi-mechanistic pharmacodynamic modeling for degarelix, a novel gonadotropin releasing hormone (GnRH) blocker. J Pharmacokinet Pharmacodyn 33:609–634

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. (2009) Firmagon® (degarelix for injection) highlights of prescribing information. Ferring Pharmaceuticals, Parsippany, NJ

    Google Scholar 

  13. Gobburu JV, Lesko LJ (2009) Quantitative disease, drug, and trial models. Annu Rev Pharmacol Toxicol 49:291–301

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Bruno R, Hille D, Riva A, Vivier N, ten Bokkel Huinnink WW, van Oosterom AT, Kaye SB, Verweij J, Fossella FV, Valero V, Rigas JR, Seidman AD, Chevallier B, Fumoleau P, Burris HA, Ravdin PM, Sheiner LB (1998) Population pharmacokinetics/pharmacodynamics of docetaxel in phase II studies in patients with cancer. J Clin Oncol 16:187–196

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Jadhav PR, Zhang J, Gobburu JV (2009) Leveraging prior quantitative knowledge in guiding pediatric drug development: a case study. Pharm Stat 8:216–224

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Rohatagi S, Carrothers TJ, Jin J, Jusko WJ, KharitonT WJ, Truitt K, Salszar D (2008) Model-based development of a PPARgamma agonist, rivoglitazone, to aid dose selection and optimize clinical trial designs. J Clin Pharmacol 48:1420–1429

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Booth CM, Calvert AH, Giaccone G, Lobbezoo MW, Eisenhauer EA, Seymour LK (2008) Design and conduct of phase II studies of targeted anticancer therapy: recommendations from the task force on methodology for the development of innovative cancer therapies (MDICT). Eur J Cancer 44:25–29

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Eisenhauer EA, O'Dwyer PJ, Christian M, Humphrey JS (2000) Phase I clinical trial design in cancer drug development. J Clin Oncol 18:684–692

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Fox E, Curt GA, Balis FM (2002) Clinical trial design for target-based therapy. Oncologist 7:401–409

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Takimoto CH (2003) Anticancer drug development at the US National Cancer Institute. Cancer Chemother Pharmacol 52(Suppl 1):S29–S33

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Thall PF (2008) A review of phase 2-3 clinical trial designs. Lifetime Data Anal 14:37–53

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Sanathanan LP, Peck CC (1991) The randomized concentration-controlled trial: an evaluation of its sample size efficiency. Control Clin Trials 12:780–794

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Ebling WF, Levy G (1996) Population pharmacodynamics: strategies for concentration-and effect-controlled clinical trials. Ann Pharmacother 30:12–19

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Endrenyi L, Zha J (1994) Comparative efficiencies of randomized concentration- and dose-controlled clinical trials. Clin Pharmacol Ther 56:331–338

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Michelson S (2006) The impact of systems biology and biosimulation on drug discovery and development. Mol Biosyst 2:288–291

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Chan PL, Holford NH (2001) Drug treatment effects on disease progression. Annu Rev Pharmacol Toxicol 41:625–659

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Holford NH, Peace KE (1992) Methodologic aspects of a population pharmacodynamic model for cognitive effects in Alzheimer patients treated with tacrine. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 89:11466–11470

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Tham LS, Wang L, Soo RA, Lee SC, Lee HS, Yong WP, Goh BC, Holford NH (2008) A pharmacodynamic model for the time course of tumor shrinkage by gemcitabine + carboplatin in non-small cell lung cancer patients. Clin Cancer Res 14:4213–4218

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Earp JC, Dubois DC, Molano DS, Pyszczynski NA, Keller CE, Almon RR, Jusko WJ (2008) Modeling corticosteroid effects in a rat model of rheumatoid arthritis I: mechanistic disease progression model for the time course of collagen-induced arthritis in Lewis rats. J Pharmacol Exp Ther 326:532–545

    Article  CAS  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Benedetti F (2008) Mechanisms of placebo and placebo-related effects across diseases and treatments. Annu Rev Pharmacol Toxicol 48:33–60

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Gomeni R, Lavergne A, Merlo-Pich E (2009) Modelling placebo response in depression trials using a longitudinal model with informative dropout. Eur J Pharm Sci 36:4–10

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Chvetzoff G, Tannock IF (2003) Placebo effects in oncology. J Natl Cancer Inst 95:19–29

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Gelman A, Meng XL, Stern H (1996) Posterior predictive assessment of model fitness via realized discrepancies. Statistica Sinica 6:733–760

    Google Scholar 

  34. Green B, Duffull SB (2003) Prospective evaluation of a D-optimal designed population pharmacokinetic study. J Pharmacokinet Pharmacodyn 30:145–161

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. Jadhav PR, Gobburu JV (2005) A new equivalence based metric for predictive check to qualify mixed-effects models. AAPS J 7:E523–E531

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  36. Post TM, Freijer JI, Ploeger BA, Danhof M (2008) Extensions to the visual predictive check to facilitate model performance evaluation. J Pharmacokinet Pharmacodyn 35:185–202

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  37. Khor SP, McCarthy K, Dupont M, Murray K, Timony G (2000) Pharmacokinetics, pharmacodynamics, allometry, and dose selection of rPSGL-Ig for phase I trial. J Pharmacol Exp Ther 293:618–624

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  38. Lieberman R, McMichael J (1996) Role of pharmacokinetic-pharmacodynamic principles in rational and cost-effective drug development. Ther Drug Monit 18:423–428

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  39. Bullingham RE (1996) Pharmacokinetics of mycophenolate mofetil (RS61443): a short review. Transplant Proc 28:925–929

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  40. Hale MD, Nicholls AJ, Bullingham RES, Hene R, Hoitsma A, Squifflet JP, Weimar W, Vanrenterghem Y, Van de Woude FJ, Verpooten GA (1998) The pharmacokinetic-pharmacodynamic relationship for mycophenolate mofetil in renal transplantation. Clin Pharmacol Ther 64:672–683

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  41. Bhattaram VA, Bonapace C, Chilukuri DM, Duan JZ, Garnett C, Gobburu JV, Jang SH, Kenna L, Lesko LJ, Madabushi R, Men Y, Powell JR, Qiu W, Ramchandani RP, Tornoe CW, Wang Y, Zheng JJ (2007) Impact of pharmacometric reviews on new drug approval and labeling decisions - a survey of 31 new drug applications submitted between 2005 and 2006. Clin Pharmacol Ther 81:213–221

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  42. Booth BP, Rahman A, Dagher R, Griebel D, Lennon S, Fuller D, Sahajwalla C, Mehta M, Gobburu JV (2007) Population pharmacokinetic-based dosing of intravenous busulfan in pediatric patients. J Clin Pharmacol 47:101–111

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  43. Wang Y, Bhattaram AV, Jadhav PR, Lesko LJ, Madabushi R, Powell JR, Qiu W, Sun H, Yim DS, Zheng JJ, Gobburu JV (2008) Leveraging prior quantitative knowledge to guide drug development decisions and regulatory science recommendations: impact of FDA pharmacometrics during 2004-2006. J Clin Pharmacol 48:146–156

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  44. Kola I, Landis J (2004) Can the pharmaceutical industry reduce attrition rates? Nat Rev Drug Discov 3:711–715

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  45. Wang Y, Sung C, Dartois C, Ramchandani R, Booth BP, Rock E, Gobburu J (2009) Elucidation of relationship between tumor size and survival in non-small-cell lung cancer patients can aid early decision making in clinical drug development. Clin Pharmacol Ther 86:167–174

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  46. Food and Drug Administration. Backgrounder for the Advisory Committee for Pharmaceutical Science and Clinical Pharmacology Meeting. Proc Clin Pharmacol Sub- Comm Advis Comm Meet:8-37. 3-18-2008. Ref Type: Conference Proceeding

    Google Scholar 

  47. Gordian M, Singh N, Zemmel R, Elais T (2006) Why products fail in Phase III. In Vivo 24:49–54

    Google Scholar 

  48. Meibohm B, Derendorf H (2002) Pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic studies in drug product development. J Pharm Sci 91:18

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  49. Olson SC, Bockbrader H, Boyd RA, Cool J, Koup JR, Lalonde RL, Siedlik PH, Powell JR (2000) Impact of population pharmacokinetic-pharmacodynamic analyses on the drug development process: experience at Parke-Davis. Clin Pharmacokinet 38:449–459

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  50. Reigner BG, Williams PEO, Patel JH, Steimer JL, Peck C, van Brummelen P (1997) An evaluation of the integration of pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic principles in clinical drug development. Experience within Hoffmann La Roche. Clin Pharmacokinet 33:142–152

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Office of Clinical Pharmacology, Division of Pharmacometrics, U.S. Food and Drug Administration, Silver Spring, MD, USA

    Satjit S. Brar Pharm.D., Ph.D. & Joga Gobburu Ph.D.

  2. Schools of Pharmacy, Medicine, University of Maryland, N407, 20N Pine St., Baltimore, MD, 21201, USA

    Joga Gobburu Ph.D.

Authors
  1. Satjit S. Brar Pharm.D., Ph.D.
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Joga Gobburu Ph.D.
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Joga Gobburu Ph.D. .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Sidney Kimmel Comprehensive Cancer Cente, Baltimore, Maryland, USA

    Michelle A. Rudek

  2. Center for Cancer Research, National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, Maryland, USA

    Cindy H. Chau

  3. Center for Cancer Research, National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, Maryland, USA

    William D. Figg

  4. Moffitt Cancer Center, Tampa, Florida, USA

    Howard L. McLeod

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2014 Springer Science+Business Media New York

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Brar, S.S., Gobburu, J. (2014). Pharmacometrics. In: Rudek, M., Chau, C., Figg, W., McLeod, H. (eds) Handbook of Anticancer Pharmacokinetics and Pharmacodynamics. Cancer Drug Discovery and Development. Springer, New York, NY. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4614-9135-4_11

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4614-9135-4_11

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, New York, NY

  • Print ISBN: 978-1-4614-9134-7

  • Online ISBN: 978-1-4614-9135-4

  • eBook Packages: MedicineMedicine (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation