Skip to main content
Log in

Impact of Pharmacokinetic–Pharmacodynamic Model Linearization on the Accuracy of Population Information Matrix and Optimal Design

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

Abstract

Influence of experimental design on hyperparameter estimates precision when performing a population pharmacokinetic–pharmacodynamic (PK–PD) analysis has been shown by several studies and various approaches have been proposed for optimizing or evaluating such designs. Some of these methods rely on the optimization of a suitable scalar function of the population information matrix. Unfortunately for the nonlinear models encountered in pharmacokinetics or pharmacodynamics the latter is particularly difficult to evaluate. Under some assumptions and after a linearization of the PK–PD model a closed form of this matrix can be obtained which considerably simplifies its calculation but leads to an approximation. The aim of this paper is to evaluate the quality of the latter and its potential impact, when comparing or optimizing population designs and to relate it to Bates and Watts curvature measures. Two models commonly used in PK–PD were considered and nominal hyperparameter values where chosen for each one. Several population designs were studied and the associated population information matrix was computed for each using the approximate procedure and also using a reference method. Design optimizations were calculated under constraints for each model from the reference and approximate population information matrix. Nonlinearity curvatures were also computed for every model and design. The impact of model linearization when calculating the population information matrix was then examined in terms of lower bound accuracies on the hyperparameter estimates, design criterion variation, as well as D-optimal population designs, these results being related to nonlinearity curvature measures. Our results emphasize the influence of the parameter effects curvature when deriving the lower bounds of the hyperparameter estimates precision for a given design from the approximate population information matrix especially for hyperparameters quantifying the PK–PD interindividual variability. No discrepancies were detected between the population D-optimal designs obtained from the approximate and reference matrix despite some minor differences in criterion variation with respect to the design. More pronounced differences were, however, observed when comparing the amplitudes of criterion variation which can lead to errors when calculating design efficiencies. From a practical point of view, a strategy easily applicable by the pharmacokineticist for avoiding such problems in the context of population design optimization or comparison is then proposed.

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

Access this article

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

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

REFERENCES

  1. L. Yu, S. Beal, M. Davidian, F. Harrisson, A. Hester, K. Kowalski, E. Vonesh, and R. Wolfinger. Population pharmacokinetics/pharmacodynamics methodology and applications: a bibliography. Biometrics 50:566–575 (1994).

    Google Scholar 

  2. M. Davidian and D. M. Giltinian. Nonlinear Models for Repeated Measurement Data, Chapman and Hall, London, 1995.

    Google Scholar 

  3. L. Aarons. Software for population pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics. Clin. Pharmacokin. 36:255–264 (1999).

    Google Scholar 

  4. L. B. Sheiner and S. L. Beal. Evaluation of methods for estimating population pharmacokinetic parameters. III. Monoexponential model: routine clinical pharmacokinetic data. J. Pharmacokin. Biopharm. 11:303–319 (1983).

    Google Scholar 

  5. M. K. Al-Banna, A. W. Kelman, and B. Whiting. Experimental design and efficient parameter estimation in population pharmacokinetics. J. Pharmacokin. Biopharm. 18:347–359 (1990).

    Google Scholar 

  6. Y. Hashimoto and L. B. Sheiner. Designs for population pharmacodynamics: value of pharmacokinetic data and population analysis. J. Pharmacokin. Biopharm. 19:333–353 (1991).

    Google Scholar 

  7. E. N. Jonsson, J. R. Wade, and M. O. Karlsson. Comparison of some practical sampling strategies for population pharmacokinetic studies. J. Pharmacokin. Biopharm. 24:245–263 (1996).

    Google Scholar 

  8. J. Wang and L. Edrenyi. A computationally efficient approach for the design of population pharmacokinetic studies. J. Pharmacokin. Biopharm. 20:279–294 (1992).

    Google Scholar 

  9. J. L. Palmer and P. Muller. Bayesian optimal design in population models for haematologic data. Statist. Med. 17:1613–1622 (1998).

    Google Scholar 

  10. F. Y. Bois, T. J. Smith, A. Gelman, H. Y. Chang, and A. E. Smith. Optimal design for a study of butadiene toxicokinetics in humans. Toxicol. Sci. 49:213–224 (1999).

    Google Scholar 

  11. E. Walter and L. Pronzato. Qualitative and quantitative experiment design for phenomenological models—A survey. Automatica 26:195–213 (1990).

    Google Scholar 

  12. F. Mentré, P. Burtin, Y. Merlé J. Van Bree, A. Mallet, and J. L. Steimer. Sparse-sampling optimal designs in pharmacokinetics and toxicokinetics. Drug. Inform. J. 19:997–1019 (1995).

    Google Scholar 

  13. F. Mentré, A. Mallet, and D. Baccar. Optimal design in nonlinear random effect models. Biometrika 84:429–442 (1997).

    Google Scholar 

  14. M. Tod, F. Mentré, Y. Merlé, and A. Mallet. Robust optimal design for the estimation of hyperparameters in population pharmacokinetics. J. Pharmacokin. Biopharm. 26:689–716 (1998).

    Google Scholar 

  15. A. Mallet and F. Mentré. An approach to the design of the experiments for estimating the distribution of parameters in random models. In R. Vichnevetsky, P. Borne, and J. Vignes (eds.), Proceedings of the 12th Imacs World Congress, Villeneuve d'Ascq, France, 1988, pp. 134–137.

    Google Scholar 

  16. E. M. L. Beale. Confidence regions in nonlinear estimation (with discussion). J. Royal Statist. Soc. B 22:41–88 (1960).

    Google Scholar 

  17. I. Guttman and D. A. Meeter. On Beale's measure of nonlinearity. Technometrics 7:623–637 (1965).

    Google Scholar 

  18. M. J. Box. Bias in nonlinear estimation (with discussion). J. Royal Statit. Soc. B 32:171–201 (1971).

    Google Scholar 

  19. P. R. Gillis and D. A. Ratkowsky. The behaviour of estimators of the parameters of various yield-density relationship. Biometrics 34:191–198 (1978).

    Google Scholar 

  20. D. M. Bates and D. G. Watts. Relative curvature measures of nonlinearity. J. Royal Statist. Soc. B 42:1–25 (1980).

    Google Scholar 

  21. D. M. Bates and D. G. Watts. Nonlinear Regression Model, Chapman and Hall, London, 1995.

    Google Scholar 

  22. D. M. Bates, D. C. Hamilton, and D. G. Watts. Calculation of intrinsic and parameter effects curvature for nonlinear regression models. Commun. Statist. Simul. Comput. 12:469–477 (1983).

    Google Scholar 

  23. R. D. Cook and M. L. Goldberg. Curvatures for parameter subsets in nonlinear regression. Ann. Statist. 14:1399–1418 (1986).

    Google Scholar 

  24. M. Guay. Curvature measures for multiregression models. Biometrika 82:411–417 (1995).

    Google Scholar 

  25. J. G. Wagner. Pharmacokinetics for the Pharmaceutical Scientist, Technomic Publishing, Lancaster, PA, 1993.

    Google Scholar 

  26. D. Baccar. Experimental design optimization of population models. Doctoral thesis, Paris VI, 1996.

  27. W. H. Press, B. P. Flannery, S. A. Teukolsky, and W. T. Wetterling. Numerical Recipes in Pascal, Cambridge University Press, 1989.

  28. L. B. Sheiner and S. L. Beal. NONMEM'S Users Guides, NONMEM project group, University of California at San Francisco, 1989.

    Google Scholar 

  29. S. Das and A. Krishen. Some bootstrap methods in nonlinear mixed-effect models. J. Statist. Plan. Infer. 75:237–245 (1999).

    Google Scholar 

  30. A. Yafune and M. Ishiguro. Bootstrap approach for constructing confidence intervals for population pharmacokinetic parameters. I: Use of bootstrap standard error. Statist. Med. 18:581–599 (1999).

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Merlé, Y., Tod, M. Impact of Pharmacokinetic–Pharmacodynamic Model Linearization on the Accuracy of Population Information Matrix and Optimal Design. J Pharmacokinet Pharmacodyn 28, 363–388 (2001). https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1011534830530

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1011534830530

Navigation