An inequality-constrained least-squares deconvolution method
- 116 Downloads
- 38 Citations
Abstract
The output-function (Y) of a linear system is the convolution of the input function (I) to the system with the disposition-function (H) of the system. Given Y and H deconvolution yields I. A non-parametric method for numerical deconvolution is described. The method is based on an inequality-constrained least-squares criterion and approximates I by a discontinuous function. No assumptions are made about the form of H or Y. Numerical stability and physical realism are obtained by constraining the estimated I to be nonnegative and piecewise-monotonic (nonincreasing, nondecreasing, or alternating segments of both). When I is constrained to be monotonic, the deconvolution yields a staircase function. The method can be used to calculate drug input rates. It is compared to previously published deconvolution methods for this purpose, using simulated data and real theophylline and pentobarbital data.
Key words
deconvolution inequality-constrained least-squares deconvolution estimation of drug absorption rate theophylline absorption pentobarbital absorption computer programs for deconvolutionPreview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
References
- 1.D. P. Vaughan and M. Dennis. Mathematical basis of point-area deconvolution method for determiningin vivo input functionsJ. Pharm. Sci. 67:663–665 (1978).PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 2.K. Iga, Y. Ogawa, T. Yashiki, and T. Shimamoto. Estimation of drug absorption rates using a deconvolution method with nonequal sampling timesJ. Pharmacokin. Biopharm. 14: 213–225 (1986).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 3.S. V. Huffel, J. Vandewalle, M. C. H. Roo, and J. L. Willems. Reliable and efficient deconvolution technique based on total linear least squares for calculating the renal retention functionMed. Biol. Eng. Comput. 25: 26–33 (1987).PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 4.D. J. Cutler. Numerical deconvolution by least squares: use of prescribed input functions.J. Pharmacokin. Biopharm. 6:227–241 (1978).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 5.D. J. Cutler. Numerical deconvolution by least squares: Use of polynomials to represent the input function.J. Pharmacokin. Biopharm. 6:243–263 (1978).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 6.P. Veng-Pedersen. Model-independent method of analyzing input in linear pharmacokinetic systems having polyexponential impulse response II: numerical evaluation.J. Pharm. Sci. 69:305–312 (1980).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 7.P. Veng-Pedersen. Novel deconvolution method for linear pharmacokinetic systems with polyexponential impulse response.J. Pharm. Sci. 69:312–318 (1980).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 8.P. Veng-Pedersen. An algorithm and computer program for deconvolution in linear pharmacokinetics.J. Pharmacokin. Biopharm. 8:463–481 (1980).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 9.W. R. Gillespie and P. Veng-Pedersen. A polyexponential deconvolution method. Evaluation of the “gastrointestinal bioavailability” and mean in vivo dissolution time of some ibuprofen dosage formsJ. Pharmacokin. Biopharm. 13:289–307 (1985).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 10.P. A. Jansson, R. H. Hunt, and E. K. Plyler. Resolution enhancement of spectra.J. Optical Soc. Am. 60:596–599 (1970).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 11.B. R. Frieden. Image enhancement and restorationTop. Appl. Phys. 6:177–248 (1975).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 12.G. Wahba. Constrained regularization for ill posed linear operator equations, with applications in meteorology and medicine. In S. S. Gupta and J. O. Berger (eds.),Statistical Decision Theory and Related Topics HI, Vol. 2, Academic Press, New York, 1982. pp. 383–418.Google Scholar
- 13.M. K. Charter and S. F. Gull. Maximum entropy and its application to the calculation of drug absorption rates.J. Pharmacokin. Biopharm. 15:645–655 (1987).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 14.B. R. Hunt. The inverse problem of radiography.Math. Biosci. 8:161–179 (1970).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 15.B. R. Hunt. Biased estimation for nonparametric identification of linear systems.Math Biosci. 10:215–237 (1971).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 16.QPROG, IMSL, City West Boulevard, Houston, TX 77042-3020.Google Scholar
- 17.D. Goldfarb and A. Idnani. A numerical stable dual method for solving strictly convex quadratic programsMath. Program. 27:1–33 (1983).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 18.D. Verotta, S. Beal, and L. B. Sheiner. Semiparametric approach to pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic data.Am. J. Physiol. 256:R1005-R1010 (1989).PubMedGoogle Scholar
- 19.G. E. P. Box and M. E. Muller. A note on the generation of random normal deviates.Ann. Math. Statist. 29:610–611 (1963).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 20.H. S. Kaumeier, O. H. Kehrhahn, G. Neugebauer, D. Shuppan, J. A. Shwarz, and A. H. Staib. A crossover study after oral administration of theophylline in male volunteers (absolute bioavailability of Afonilum tablets).Int. J. Clin. Pharmacol. Ther. Toxicol. 21:339–345 (1983).PubMedGoogle Scholar
- 21.R. B. Smith, L. W. Dittert, W. O. J. Griffin and J. T. Doluisio. Pharmacokinetics of pentobarbital after intravenous and oral administration.J. Pharmacokin. Biopharm. 1:5–16 (1973).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 22.J. C. K. Loo and S. Riegelman. New method for calculating the intrinsic absorption rate of drugs.J. Pharm. Sci. 57:918–928 (1968).PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 23.W. R. Gillespie, P. Veng-Pedersen, M. J. Berg, and D. D. Schottelius. Linear system approach for the analysis of an induced drug removal process. Phenobarbital removal by oral activated charcoal.J. Pharmacokin. Biopharm. 14:19–28 (1986).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 24.P. Veng-Pedersen and W. R. Gillespie. A note on appropriate constraints on the initial input response when applying deconvolutionJ. Pharmacokin. Biopharm. 14:441–447 (1986).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 25.R. Barlow, D. Bartholemew, J. Bremner, and H. Brunk.Statistical Inference Under Order Restrictions, Wiley & Sons, New York, 1972.Google Scholar