Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Variability and uncertainty: interpretation and usage of pharmacometric simulations and intervals

  • Commentary
  • Published:
Journal of Pharmacokinetics and Pharmacodynamics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Variability and estimation uncertainty are important sources of variation in pharmacometric simulations. Different combinations of uncertainty and the variability components lead to a variety types of simulation intervals, and many realized and unrealized confusions exist among pharmacometricians on their interpretation and usage. This commentary aims to clarify some of the important underlying concepts and provide a convenient guideline on pharmacometric simulation conduct and interpretation.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

References

  1. Kummel A, Bonate PL, Dingemanse J, Krause A (2018) Confidence and Prediction Intervals for Pharmacometric Models. CPT: pharmacometrics & systems pharmacology 7(6):360–373. doi:https://doi.org/10.1002/psp4.12286

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. Bergstrand M, Hooker AC, Wallin JE, Karlsson MO (2011) Prediction-Corrected Visual Predictive Checks for Diagnosing Nonlinear Mixed-Effects Models. AAPS J 13(2):143–151

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Vonesh EF, Chinchilli VM (1997) Linear and Nonlinear Models for the Analysis of Repeated Measurements. Marcel Dekker, New York

    Google Scholar 

  4. Efron B, Tibshirani RJ (1993) An Introduction to the Bootstrap. Chapman & Hall

  5. Wolfsegger MJ, Bauer A, Labes D, Schutz H, Vonk R, Lang B, Lehr S, Jaki TF, Engl W, Hale MD (2021) Assessing goodness-of-fit for evaluation of dose-proportionality. Pharm Stat 20(2):272–281. doi:https://doi.org/10.1002/pst.2074

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Yano Y, Beal SL, Sheiner LB (2001) Evaluating pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic models using the posterior predictive check. J Pharmacokinet Pharmacodyn 28(2):171–192. doi:https://doi.org/10.1023/a:1011555016423

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Kowalski KG (2019) Integration of Pharmacometric and Statistical Analyses Using Clinical Trial Simulations to Enhance Quantitative Decision Making in Clinical Drug Development. Stat Biopharm Res 11(1):85–103. doi:https://doi.org/10.1080/19466315.2018.1560361

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Kirouac DC (2018) How Do We “Validate” a QSP Model? CPT: pharmacometrics & systems pharmacology 7. 547–548. https://doi.org/10.1002/psp4.12310. 9

  9. Bai JPF, Schmidt BJ, Gadkar KG, Damian V, Earp JC, Friedrich C, van der Graaf PH, Madabushi R, Musante CJ, Naik K, Rogge M, Zhu H (2021) FDA-Industry Scientific Exchange on assessing quantitative systems pharmacology models in clinical drug development: a meeting report, summary of challenges/gaps, and future perspective. AAPS J 23(3):60. doi:https://doi.org/10.1208/s12248-021-00585-x

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Hu C, Moore K, Kim Y, Sale ME (2004) Statistical issues in a modeling approach to assessing bioequivalence or PK similarity with presence of sparsely sampled subjects. J Pharmacokinet Pharmacodyn 33(4):321–339

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Hu C, Zhou H, Sharma A (2017) Landmark and longitudinal exposure-response analyses in drug development. J Pharmacokinet Pharmacodyn 44(5):503–507. doi:https://doi.org/10.1007/s10928-017-9534-0

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Akacha M, Bartels C, Bornkamp B, Bretz F, Coello N, Dumortier T, Looby M, Sander O, Schmidli H, Steimer JL, Vong C (2021) Estimands-What they are and why they are important for pharmacometricians. CPT: pharmacometrics & systems pharmacology 10(4):279–282. doi:https://doi.org/10.1002/psp4.12617

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Dong X, Tsong Y, Shen M, Zhong J (2015) Using tolerance intervals for assessment of pharmaceutical quality. J Biopharm Stat 25(2):317–327. doi:https://doi.org/10.1080/10543406.2014.972512

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Karlsson MO, Sheiner LB (1993) The importance of modeling interoccasion variability in population pharmacokinetic analyses. J Pharmacokinet Biopharm 21(6):735–750. doi:https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01113502

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Hu C, Dong Y (2007) Estimating the predictive quality of dose-response after model selection. Stat Med 26(16):3114–3139. doi:https://doi.org/10.1002/sim.2786

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Chatfield C (1995) Model uncertainty, data mining and statistical inference. J Royal Stat Soc Seris (Statitistics Society) 158(3):419–466

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. The SAS NLMIXED Procedure. https://support.sas.com/documentation/onlinedoc/stat/141/nlmixed.pdf

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Clinical Pharmacology and pharmacometrics, Janssen Research & Development, LLC, 1400 McKean Road, 19477, Spring House, PA, PO Box 776, USA

    Chuanpu Hu

Authors
  1. Chuanpu Hu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Chuanpu Hu.

Additional information

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Hu, C. Variability and uncertainty: interpretation and usage of pharmacometric simulations and intervals. J Pharmacokinet Pharmacodyn 49, 487–491 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10928-022-09817-9

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10928-022-09817-9

Keywords

Search

Navigation