An introduction to mixed effect modeling: Concepts, definitions, and justification

  • Lewis B. Sheiner
  • Thaddeus H. GraselaJr.


In spite of the vast amount of data generated during the new drug development process, much remains to be learned about the pharmacokinetics of a drug once it is released on the market. The ethical and logistical problems which arise during an experimental pharmacokinetic study frequently prevent the study of elderly, pediatric, or critically ill patients. The recognition of these limitations by scientists and regulators have prompted a desire to extract the maximum amount of information from data available during Phase III and Phase IV clinical trials and, in addition, to use information generated during the routine clinical care of patients. Mixed effect model analysis allows one to overcome the problems of analyzing observational data to obtain accurate and precise estimates of population pharmacokinetic parameters. Use of this approach expands the methodologies available to the data analyst and opens up a number of data sources which can now be considered for analysis.


Observational Data Pharmacokinetic Parameter Mixed Effect Model Interindividual Variability Design Restriction 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


  1. 1.
    L.B. Sheiner et al., Estimation of population characteristics of pharmacokinetic parameters from routine clinical data,J. Pharmacokinet. Biopharm. 5:445 (1977).PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    L.B. Sheiner and T.N. Tozer, Clinical pharmacokinetics: The use of plasma concentrations of drugs, in: “Clinical Pharmacology: Basic Principles in Therapeutics,” 2, K.L. Melmon and H.F. Morrelli, eds., Macmillan, New York, pp. 71–109 (1978).Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    L.B. Sheiner, B. Rosenberg, and K.L. Melmon, Modelling of individual pharmacokinetics for computer-aided drug dosage,Comp. Biomed. Res. 5:441 (1982).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    L.B. Sheiner, S.L. Beal, B. Rosenberg, and V.V. Marathe, Forecasting individual pharmacokinetics,Clin. Pharmacol. Ther. 26:294 (1979).PubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    L.B. Sheiner and S.L. Beal, Bayesian individualization of pharmacokinetics: Simple implementation and comparison with non-Bayesian methods,J. Pharm. Sci. 71:1344 (1982).PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    L.B. Sheiner and S.L. Beal, Evaluation of methods for estimating population pharmacokinetic parameters. I. Michaelis-Menten model: Routine clinical data,J. Pharmacokinet. Biopharm. 8:553 (1980).PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    L.B. Sheiner and S.L. Beal, Evaluation of methods for estimating population pharmacokinetic parameters. III. Monoexponential model: Routine pharmacokinetic data,J. Pharmacokinet. Biopharm. 11:303 (1983).PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    L.B. Sheiner and S.L. Beal, Estimation of pooled pharmacokinetic parameters describing populations, in: “Kinetic Data Analysis,” L. Endrenyi, ed., Plenum Press, New York, pp. 271–284 (1981).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    J.L. Steimer, A. Mallet and F. Mentre, Estimating interindividual pharmacokinetic variability, in: “Variability in Drug Therapy: Description, Estimation, and Control,” M. Rowland et al., eds., Raven Press, New York, pp. 65–111 (1985).Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Plenum Publishing Corporation 1991

Authors and Affiliations

  • Lewis B. Sheiner
    • 1
  • Thaddeus H. GraselaJr.
    • 2
  1. 1.Departments of Laboratory Medicine and Medicine School of MedicineUniversity of California, San FranciscoSan Francisco
  2. 2.Departments of Pharmacy and Social and Preventive Medicine Schools of Pharmacy and MedicineState University of New YorkBuffalo

Personalised recommendations