Abstract
Delay differential equations (DDEs) are commonly used in pharmacometric models to describe delays present in pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic data analysis. Several DDE solvers have been implemented in NONMEM 7.5 for the first time. Two of them are based on algorithms already applied elsewhere, while others are extensions of existing ordinary differential equations (ODEs) solvers. The purpose of this tutorial is to introduce basic concepts underlying DDE based models and to show how they can be developed using NONMEM. The examples include previously published DDE models such as logistic growth, tumor growth inhibition, indirect response with precursor pool, rheumatoid arthritis, and erythropoiesis-stimulating agents. We evaluated the accuracy of NONMEM DDE solvers, their ability to handle stiff problems, and their performance in parameter estimation using both first-order conditional estimation (FOCE) and the expectation–maximization (EM) method. NONMEM control streams and excerpts from datasets are provided for all discussed examples. All DDE solvers provide accurate and precise solutions with the number of significant digits controlled by the error tolerance parameters. For estimation of population parameters, the EM method is more stable than FOCE regardless of the DDE solver.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Koch G, Krzyzanski W, Perez-Ruixo JJ, Schropp J (2014) Modeling of delays in PKPD: classical approaches and a tutorial for delay differential equations. J Pharmacokinet Pharmacodyn 41(4):291–318
Krzyzanski W, Perez Ruixo JJ (2012) Lifespan based indirect response models. J Pharmacokinet Pharmacodyn 39(1):109–123
Ramakrishnan R, Cheung WK, Wacholtz MC, Minton N, Jusko WJ (2004) Pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic modeling of recombinant human erythropoietin after single and multiple doses in healthy volunteers. J Clin Pharmacol 44(9):991–1002
Bachar M, Dorfmayr A (2004) HIV treatment models with time delay. CR Biol 327(11):983–994
Baccam P, Beauchemin C, Macken CA, Hayden FG, Perelson AS (2006) Kinetics of influenza A virus infection in humans. J Virol 80(15):7590–7599
Koch G, Wagner T, Plater-Zyberk C, Lahu G, Schropp J (2012) Multi-response model for rheumatoid arthritis based on delay differential equations in collagen-induced arthritic mice treated with an anti-GM-CSF antibody. J Pharmacokinet Pharmacodyn 39(1):55–65
Ascher UMPL (1998) Computer methods for ordinary differential equations and differential-algebraic equations. Society for Industrial and Applied Mathematics, Philadelphia
Krzyzanski W (2011) Interpretation of transit compartments pharmacodynamic models as lifespan based indirect response models. J Pharmacokinet Pharmacodyn 38(2):179–204
Driver RD (1977) Ordinary and delay differential equations. Springer, New York
Shampine LF, Thompson S (2001) Solving DDEs in Matlab. Appl Numer Math 37(4):441–458
Guglielmi N, Hairer E (2001) Implementing Radau IIA methods for stiff delay differential dquations. Computing 67(1):1–12
Thompson S, Shampine LF (2004) A Friendly FORTRAN DDE Solver. DDE_SOLVER User’s Guide
Bauer RJ (2020) NONMEM 7.5 Users Guides: Introduction to NONMEM 7.5. ICON plc, Gaithersburg, MD. https://nonmem.iconplc.com/nonmem750
Perez-Ruixo JJ, Kimko HC, Chow AT, Piotrovsky V, Krzyzanski W, Jusko WJ (2005) Population cell life span models for effects of drugs following indirect mechanisms of action. J Pharmacokinet Pharmacodyn 32(5–6):767–793
Soetaert K, Petzoldt T, Setzer R (2010) Solving differential equations in R: package deSolve. J Stat Softw 33(9):1–25
Hutchinson GE (1948) Circular causal systems in ecology. Ann N Y Acad Sci 50(Art 4):221–246
Ribba B, Holford NH, Magni P, Troconiz I, Gueorguieva I, Girard P, Sarr C, Elishmereni M, Kloft C, Friberg LE (2014) A review of mixed-effects models of tumor growth and effects of anticancer drug treatment used in population analysis. CPT Pharmacomet Syst Pharmacol 3:e113
Mo G, Gibbons F, Schroeder P, Krzyzanski W (2014) Lifespan based pharmacokinetic-pharmacodynamic model of tumor growth inhibition by anticancer therapeutics. PLoS One 9(10):e109747
Koch G, Walz A, Lahu G, Schropp J (2009) Modeling of tumor growth and anticancer effects of combination therapy. J Pharmacokinet Pharmacodyn 36(2):179–197
Koch G, Schropp J (2012) General relationship between transit compartments and lifespan models. J Pharmacokinet Pharmacodyn 39(4):343–355
Krzyzanski W, Perez-Ruixo JJ, Vermeulen A (2008) Basic pharmacodynamic models for agents that alter the lifespan distribution of natural cells. J Pharmacokinet Pharmacodyn 35(3):349–377
Krzyzanski W, Jusko WJ, Wacholtz MC, Minton N, Cheung WK (2005) Pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic modeling of recombinant human erythropoietin after multiple subcutaneous doses in healthy subjects. Eur J Pharm Sci 26(3–4):295–306
Samtani MN, Perez-Ruixo JJ, Brown KH, Cerneus D, Molloy CJ (2009) Pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic modeling of pegylated thrombopoietin mimetic peptide (PEG-TPOm) after single intravenous dose administration in healthy subjects. J Clin Pharmacol 49(3):336–350
Woo S, Krzyzanski W, Jusko WJ (2006) Pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic modeling of recombinant human erythropoietin after intravenous and subcutaneous administration in rats. J Pharmacol Exp Ther 319(3):1297–1306
Perez-Ruixo JJ, Krzyzanski W, Bouman-Thio E, Miller B, Jang H, Bai SA, Zhou H, Yohrling J, Cohen A, Burggraaf J, Franson K, Davis HM (2009) Pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of the erythropoietin Mimetibody construct CNTO 528 in healthy subjects. Clin Pharmacokinet 48(9):601–613
Gaddum JH (1957) Theories of drug antagonism. Pharmacol Rev 9(2):211–218
Gibiansky L, Gibiansky E, Bauer R (2012) Comparison of Nonmem 7.2 estimation methods and parallel processing efficiency on a target-mediated drug disposition model. J Pharmacokinet Pharmacodyn 39(1):17–35
van Gorp F, Duffull S, Hackett LP, Isbister GK (2012) Population pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of escitalopram in overdose and the effect of activated charcoal. Br J Clin Pharmacol 73(3):402–410
Bauer RJ (2019) NONMEM tutorial part II: estimation methods and advanced examples. CPT Pharmacomet Syst Pharmacol 8(8):538–556
Bauer RJ, Mo G, Krzyzanski W (2013) Solving delay differential equations in S-ADAPT by method of steps. Comput Methods Programs Biomed 111(3):715–734
Ernst H, Nørsett S, Gerhard W (2000) Solving ordinary differential equations I, 2nd Revised edn. Springer, Berlin
Smith HL (2011) An introduction to delay differential equations with applications to the life sciences. Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, New York
Hu S, Dunlavey M, Guzy S, Teuscher N (2018) A distributed delay approach for modeling delayed outcomes in pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics studies. J Pharmacokinet Pharmacodyn 45(2):285–308
Krzyzanski W (2019) Ordinary differential equation approximation of gamma distributed delay model. J Pharmacokinet Pharmacodyn 46(1):53–63
Acknowledgements
This work was supported by Research Grants Council Early Career Scheme Project 24103120 from University Grants Committee, Hong Kong SAR, China.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Additional information
Publisher's Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Appendices
Appendix 1
Solution to the linear DDE model Eq. (4)
An explicit solution to Eq. (4) can be obtained by the method of steps [8] and is provided as in a form of the following recursive formulas. Let \( i = 0, 1, \ldots \) be a non-negative integer and \(i\tau \le t\le \left(i+1\right)\tau \). The solution is
where
and for \(i\ge 1\)
Appendix 2
R code to calculate the exact solution to the delayed linear model Eq. (4) based on method of steps
Appendix 3
NONMEM code for solving Stiff DDE model Eqs. (5)–(6) and an excerpt from the data file
First 14 lines of data fileNM3.csv
C ID | AMT | TIME | DV | EVID | CMT |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
1 | . | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 |
1 | . | 0 | 1 | 0 | 2 |
1 | . | 0.1 | 1 | 0 | 1 |
1 | . | 0.1 | 1 | 0 | 2 |
1 | . | 0.2 | 1 | 0 | 1 |
1 | . | 0.2 | 1 | 0 | 2 |
1 | . | 0.3 | 1 | 0 | 1 |
1 | . | 0.3 | 1 | 0 | 2 |
1 | . | 0.4 | 1 | 0 | 1 |
1 | . | 0.4 | 1 | 0 | 2 |
1 | 1 | 0.5 | . | 1 | 1 |
1 | . | 0.5 | 1 | 0 | 1 |
1 | . | 0.5 | 1 | 0 | 2 |
1 | . | 0.6 | 1 | 0 | 1 |
Appendix 4
NONMEM code for solving delayed logistic growth model shown in Eq. (8) and example of data file
The first 10 rows of data file NM4.csv
C.ID | AMT | TIME | DV | EVID | CMT | TAU |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
1 | . | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 2 |
1 | . | 1 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 2 |
1 | . | 2 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 2 |
1 | . | 3 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 2 |
1 | . | 4 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 2 |
1 | . | 5 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 2 |
1 | . | 6 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 2 |
1 | . | 7 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 2 |
1 | . | 8 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 2 |
1 | . | 9 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 2 |
1 | . | 10 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 2 |
Appendix 5
MATLAB script for solving delayed logistic growth model Eq. (8) using dde23
Appendix 6
NONMEM code for solving lifespan tumor growth inhibition model shown in Eqs. (9)–(14) and data file
The first 12 rows of data file NM6.csv
CID | TIME | AMT | RATE | CMT | EVID | MDV | DV |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 |
0 | 9 | 0 | 0 | 3 | 0 | 0 | 0.222772 |
0 | 12 | 0 | 0 | 3 | 0 | 0 | 0.482673 |
0 | 14 | 0 | 0 | 3 | 0 | 0 | 0.831683 |
0 | 16 | 0 | 0 | 3 | 0 | 0 | 1.061881 |
0 | 19 | 0 | 0 | 3 | 0 | 0 | 1.492574 |
0 | 21 | 0 | 0 | 3 | 0 | 0 | 1.737624 |
0 | 23 | 0 | 0 | 3 | 0 | 0 | 2.287129 |
100 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 |
100 | 9 | 0 | 0 | 3 | 0 | 0 | 0.230198 |
100 | 12 | 100 | 0 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 0 |
100 | 12 | 0 | 0 | 3 | 0 | 0 | 0.475248 |
100 | 13 | 100 | 0 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 0 |
100 | 14 | 100 | 0 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 0 |
100 | 14 | 0 | 0 | 3 | 0 | 0 | 0.660891 |
100 | 15 | 100 | 0 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 0 |
100 | 16 | 100 | 0 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 0 |
100 | 16 | 0 | 0 | 3 | 0 | 0 | 0.831683 |
100 | 19 | 0 | 0 | 3 | 0 | 0 | 1.002475 |
100 | 21 | 0 | 0 | 3 | 0 | 0 | 1.232673 |
100 | 23 | 0 | 0 | 3 | 0 | 0 | 1.477723 |
Appendix 7
NONMEM code for simulation of RA model Eqs. (15)–(21)
The first 10 rows of data file NM7.csv
CID | TIME | AMT | RATE | CMT | EVID | MDV | DV | DOSE |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 |
1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 |
1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 3 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 |
1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 4 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 |
1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 |
1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 |
1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 3 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 |
1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 4 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 |
1 | 3 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 |
1 | 3 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 |
Appendix 8
NONMEM code for simulation of data for PDLIDR model Eqs. (22)–(27) using the methods of steps. Note that MOS does not require a DDE solver. The generation of this code was facilitated by the ddexpand utility using its MOS expansion process.
The first 10 rows of data file NM8.csv
C ID | AMT | TIME | DV | EVID | CMT | DOSE |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
1 | 0.1 | 0 | . | 1 | 1 | 0.1 |
1 | 0.1 | 0 | . | 1 | 4 | 0.1 |
1 | 0 | 0 | 1.867322 | 0 | 3 | 0.1 |
1 | 0 | 4 | 2.005362 | 0 | 3 | 0.1 |
1 | 0 | 8 | 2.285038 | 0 | 3 | 0.1 |
1 | 0 | 12 | 2.37155 | 0 | 3 | 0.1 |
1 | 0 | 16 | 2.545543 | 0 | 3 | 0.1 |
1 | 0 | 20 | 2.596434 | 0 | 3 | 0.1 |
1 | 0 | 24 | 2.3411 | 0 | 3 | 0.1 |
1 | 0 | 28 | 2.276433 | 0 | 3 | 0.1 |
Appendix 9
NONMEM code for PDLIDR model Eqs. (22)–(27) using DDE solver in ADVAN13 with FOCEI
The first 10 rows of NM9.csv
ID | AMT | TIME | DV | EVID | CMT | DOSE |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
1 | 0.1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0.1 |
1 | 0 | 0 | 2.5516 | 0 | 3 | 0.1 |
1 | 0 | 4 | 2.5194 | 0 | 3 | 0.1 |
1 | 0 | 8 | 2.6586 | 0 | 3 | 0.1 |
1 | 0 | 12 | 2.8158 | 0 | 3 | 0.1 |
1 | 0 | 16 | 2.7879 | 0 | 3 | 0.1 |
1 | 0 | 20 | 2.9741 | 0 | 3 | 0.1 |
1 | 0 | 24 | 2.8118 | 0 | 3 | 0.1 |
1 | 0 | 28 | 2.8435 | 0 | 3 | 0.1 |
1 | 0 | 32 | 2.7563 | 0 | 3 | 0.1 |
Appendix 10
NONMEM code for ESA population model Eqs. (28)–(51), Importance Sampling
The first 10 rows of the data NM10.csv
ID | TIME | AMT | RATE | CP | CMT | BSL | DOSE | FLAG | ET1 | ET2 | ET3 | ET4 |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
1008 | 0 | 2.04 | 32.64 | 0 | 1 | 8 | 0.03 | 0 | 0.353 | 0.241 | 0.253 | 0.191 |
1008 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0.8 | 5 | 8 | 0.03 | 0 | 0.353 | 0.241 | 0.253 | 0.191 |
1008 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 4.75 | 6 | 8 | 0.03 | 0 | 0.353 | 0.241 | 0.253 | 0.191 |
1008 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 14.17 | 6 | 8 | 0.03 | 1 | 0.353 | 0.241 | 0.253 | 0.191 |
1008 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0.8 | 5 | 8 | 0.03 | 0 | 0.353 | 0.241 | 0.253 | 0.191 |
1008 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 4.82 | 6 | 8 | 0.03 | 0 | 0.353 | 0.241 | 0.253 | 0.191 |
1008 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 14.17 | 6 | 8 | 0.03 | 1 | 0.353 | 0.241 | 0.253 | 0.191 |
1008 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 5 | 8 | 0.03 | 0 | 0.353 | 0.241 | 0.253 | 0.191 |
1008 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 5.06 | 6 | 8 | 0.03 | 0 | 0.353 | 0.241 | 0.253 | 0.191 |
1008 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 14.98 | 6 | 8 | 0.03 | 1 | 0.353 | 0.241 | 0.253 | 0.191 |
Appendix 11
NONMEM code for ESA population model Eqs. (28)–(51), MCMC Bayes
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Yan, X., Bauer, R., Koch, G. et al. Delay differential equations based models in NONMEM. J Pharmacokinet Pharmacodyn 48, 763–802 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10928-021-09770-z
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10928-021-09770-z