In this work a model for analyzing categorical data is presented; the differential odds model. Unlike the commonly used proportional odds model, this model does not assume that a covariate affects all categories equally on the log odds scale. The differential odds model was compared to the proportional odds model, by assessing statistical significance and improvement of predictive performance when applying the differential odds model to data previously analyzed using the proportional odds model. Three clinical studies; 3-category T-cell receptor density data, 5-category diarrhea data and 6-category sedation data, were re-analyzed with the differential odds model. As expected, no improvements were seen with T-cell receptor density and diarrhea data. However, for the more complex measurement sedation, the differential odds model provided both statistical improvements and improvements in simulation properties. The estimated actual critical value was for all data lower than the nominal value, using the number of added parameters as the degree of freedom, i.e. the differential odds model is statistically indicated to a less extent than expected. The differential odds model had the desired property of not being indicated when not necessary, but it may provide improvements when the data does not represent a categorization of continuous data.
NONMEM Mixed-effects models Pharmacodynamics Categorical data Proportional odds model Differential odds model
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.
Agresti A (2002) Categorical data analysis. Wiley, Hoboken, NJGoogle Scholar
Sheiner LB (1994) A new approach to the analysis of analgesic drug trials, illustrated with bromfenac data. Clin Pharmacol Ther 56: 309–322PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zingmark PH, Edenius C, Karlsson MO (2004) Pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic models for the depletion of Vbeta5.2/5.3 T-cells by monoclonal antibody ATM-027 in patients with multiple sclerosis as measured by FACS. Br J Clin Pharmacol 58: 378–389. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2125.2004.02177.xPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gupta SK, Sathyan G, Lindemulder EA, Ho PL, Sheiner LB, Aarons L (1999) Quantitative characterization of therapeutic index: application of mixed-effects modeling to evaluate oxybutynin dose-efficacy and dose-side effect relationship. Clin Pharmacol Ther 65: 672–685. doi:10.1016/S0009-9236(99)90089-9PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gomeni R, Teneggi L, Iavarone L, Squassante L, Bye A (2001) Population pharmacokinetic-pharmacodynamic model of craving in an enforced smoking cessation population: indirect response and probabilistic modeling. Pharm Res 18: 537–543. doi:10.1023/A:1011070814530PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mould DR, Chapelsky M, Aluri J, Swagdis J, Samuels R, Granett J (2001) A population pharmacokinetic-pharmacodynamic and logistic regression analysis of lotrafiban in patients. Clin Pharmacol Ther 69: 210–222. doi:10.1067/mcp.2001.114925PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mould DR, Holford NHG, Schellens JHM, Beijner JH, Hutson PR, Rosing H et al (2002) Population pharmacokinetic and adverse event analysis of topotecan in patients with solid tumors. Clin Pharmacol Ther 71: 334–348. doi:10.1067/mcp.2002.123553PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Johnston SR, Hickish T, Ellis P, Houston S, Kelland L, Dowsett M et al (2003) Phase II study of the efficacy and tolerability of two dosing regimens of the farnesyl transferase inhibitor, R11577, in advanced breast cancer. J Clin Oncol 21: 2492–2499. doi:10.1200/JCO.2003.10.064PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cullberg M, Eriksson UG, Wåhlander K, Eriksson H, Shulman S, Karlsson MO (2005) Pharmacokinetics of ximelagatran and relationships to clinical response in acute deep vein thrombosis. Clin Pharmacol Ther 77: 279–290. doi:10.1016/j.clpt.2004.11.001PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Knibbe CAJ, Zuideveld KP, DeJongh J, Kuks PFM, Aarts LPHJ, Danhof M (2002) Population pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic modeling of propofol for long-term sedation in critically ill patents: a comparison between propofol 6% and propofol 1%. Clin Pharmacol Ther 72: 670–684. doi:10.1067/mcp.2002.129500PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Olofsen E, Romberg R, Bijl H, Mooren R, Engbers F, Kest B et al (2005) Alfentanil and placebo analgesia. No sex difference detected in models of experimental pain. Anesthesiology 103: 130–139. doi:10.1097/00000542-200507000-00020Google Scholar
Gibiansky E, Gibiansky L (2007) Population PK/PD model of GPI 15715 and GPI 15715-derived propofol in sedation and comparison of PK/PD models for ordered categorical observations. In: Abstracts of the annual meeting of the population approach group in Europe. http://www.page-meeting.org/?abstract=735. Accessed 10/03/07
Armstrong BG, Sloan M (1989) Ordinal regression models for epidemiologic data. Am J Epidemiol 129: 191–204PubMedGoogle Scholar