Journal of Pharmacokinetics and Pharmacodynamics

, Volume 34, Issue 4, pp 433–449

Weighted target interval stochastic control methods with global optimization and their applications in individualizing therapy

  • Shaolin Ji
  • Yingzhi Zeng
  • Ping Wu
  • Edmund Jon Deoon Lee
Article

Abstract

Several improvements on the target interval stochastic control (TISC) method are addressed for individualizing therapy. In particular, a global optimization control strategy is implemented to obtain the optimal dosage regimen, and weighting functions are introduced to balance the drug efficacy and the risk of toxicity. Since general guidance is often lacking in the determination of a weighting function, we introduce a systematic approach, i.e., the standard reference gamble method of medical decision theory, for the determination of the weighting function. The population model for the individualization of theophylline therapy reported by D’Argenio and Katz is applied in this research. The present method of the integration of weighting functions and global optimal strategy offer an effective and safe means to balance the drug efficacy and risk of toxicity. In addition, it also achieves better accuracy than the existing TISC method which uses a local optimal strategy.

Keywords

Target interval stochastic control Weighting function Bayesian estimation Dosage regimen Global optimization 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    D’Argenio DZ and Katz D (1988). Application of stochastic control methods to the problem of individualizing intravenous theophylline therapy. Biomed Meas Inform Contr 2: 115–122 Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    D’Argenio DZ and Park K (1997). Uncertainty pharmacokinetic/pharmaco-dynamic systems: design, estimation and control. Control Eng Pract 5: 1707–1716 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Hu C (1994) Suboptimal control policies in medical drug therapy. PhD Dissertation, Stanford UniversityGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Jelliffe R, Bayard D, Milman M, Guilder MV and Schumitzky A (2000). Achieving target goals most precisely using nonparametric compartmental models and “multiple model” design of dosage regimens. Ther Drug Monit 22: 346–353 PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Jelliffe RW, Schumitzky A and Bayard D (1998). Model-based, goal-oriented, individualized drug therapy. Clin Pharmacokinet 34: 57–77 PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Taright N, Mentre F, Mallet A and Jouvent R (1994). Nonparametric estimation of population characteristics of the kinetics of lithium from observational and experimental data. Ther Drug Monit 16: 258–269 PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Rowland M and Tozer T (1994). Clinical pharmacokinetics: concepts and applications. Williams & Wilkins, Baltimore Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Wakefield J and Racine-Poon A (1995). An application of Bayesian population pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic models to dose recommendation. Stat Med 14: 971–986 PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Comets E, Mentre F, Pousset F, Diquet B, Montalescot G, Ankri A, Mallet A and Lechat P (1998). Modeling INR data to predict maintenance fluindione dosage. Ther Drug Monit 20: 631–639 PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Wakefield J (1994). An expected loss approach to the design of dosage regimens via sampling-based methods. Statistics 43: 13–29 Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Harold C Jr, Sox et al (1988) Medical decision making. Butterworths, BostonGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Berger JO (1985). Statistical decision theory and Bayesian analysis. Springer-Verlag, New York Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Parmigiani G (2002) Modeling in medical decision making. John Wiley & Sons, England, chap. 2Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Hu C, Lovejoy WS and Shafer SL (1994). An efficient control strategy for dosage regimens. J Pharmacokin Biopharm 22: 73–94 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Katz D (1983). Discrete approximations to continuous density functions that are L 1 optimal. Computat Stat Data Anal 1: 175–181 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Katz D and D’Argenio DZ (1984). Discrete approximation of multivariate densities with application to Bayesian estimation. Computat Stat Data Anal 2: 27–36 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Statistics Toolbox User’s Guide for use with MATLAB. The Mathworks Inc. http://www.mathworks.comGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Ji S, Zeng Y, Wu P and Lee E (2005). Sampling schedule design towards optimal drug monitoring for individualizing therapy. Comput Meth Prog Bio 80: 57–63 CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2007

Authors and Affiliations

  • Shaolin Ji
    • 1
    • 3
  • Yingzhi Zeng
    • 2
  • Ping Wu
    • 2
  • Edmund Jon Deoon Lee
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Pharmacology, Faculty of MedicineNational University of SingaporeSingaporeSingapore
  2. 2.Institute of High Performance ComputingSingaporeSingapore
  3. 3.School of Mathematics and System ScienceShandong UniversityJinanP.R. China

Personalised recommendations