Does Sample Size, Sampling Strategy, or Handling of Concentrations Below the Lower Limit of Quantification Matter When Externally Evaluating Population Pharmacokinetic Models?

IF 1.9 4区 医学 Q3 PHARMACOLOGY & PHARMACY
Mehdi El Hassani, Uwe Liebchen, Amélie Marsot
{"title":"Does Sample Size, Sampling Strategy, or Handling of Concentrations Below the Lower Limit of Quantification Matter When Externally Evaluating Population Pharmacokinetic Models?","authors":"Mehdi El Hassani, Uwe Liebchen, Amélie Marsot","doi":"10.1007/s13318-024-00897-1","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background and objectives: </strong>Precision dosing requires selecting the appropriate population pharmacokinetic model, which can be assessed through external evaluations (EEs). The lack of understanding of how different study design factors influence EE study outcomes makes it challenging to select the most suitable model for clinical use. This study aimed to evaluate the impact of sample size, sampling strategy, and handling of concentrations below the lower limit of quantification (BLQ) on the outcomes of EE for four population pharmacokinetic models using vancomycin and tobramycin as examples.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Three virtual patient populations undergoing vancomycin or tobramycin therapy were simulated with varying sample size and sampling scenarios. The three approaches used to handle BLQ data were to (1) discard them, (2) impute them as LLOQ/2, or (3) use a likelihood-based approach. EEs were performed with NONMEM and R.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Sample size did not have an important impact on the EE results for a given scenario. Increasing the number of samples per patient did not improve predictive performance for two out of the three evaluated models. Evaluating a model developed with rich sampling did not result in better performance than those developed with regular therapeutic drug monitoring. A likelihood-based method to handle BLQ samples impacted the outcomes of the EE with lower bias for predicted troughs.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>This study suggests that a large sample size may not be necessary for an EE study, and models selected based on TDM may be more generalizable. The study highlights the need for guidelines for EE of population pharmacokinetic models for clinical use.</p>","PeriodicalId":11939,"journal":{"name":"European Journal of Drug Metabolism and Pharmacokinetics","volume":" ","pages":"419-436"},"PeriodicalIF":1.9000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"European Journal of Drug Metabolism and Pharmacokinetics","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s13318-024-00897-1","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/5/5 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"PHARMACOLOGY & PHARMACY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background and objectives: Precision dosing requires selecting the appropriate population pharmacokinetic model, which can be assessed through external evaluations (EEs). The lack of understanding of how different study design factors influence EE study outcomes makes it challenging to select the most suitable model for clinical use. This study aimed to evaluate the impact of sample size, sampling strategy, and handling of concentrations below the lower limit of quantification (BLQ) on the outcomes of EE for four population pharmacokinetic models using vancomycin and tobramycin as examples.

Methods: Three virtual patient populations undergoing vancomycin or tobramycin therapy were simulated with varying sample size and sampling scenarios. The three approaches used to handle BLQ data were to (1) discard them, (2) impute them as LLOQ/2, or (3) use a likelihood-based approach. EEs were performed with NONMEM and R.

Results: Sample size did not have an important impact on the EE results for a given scenario. Increasing the number of samples per patient did not improve predictive performance for two out of the three evaluated models. Evaluating a model developed with rich sampling did not result in better performance than those developed with regular therapeutic drug monitoring. A likelihood-based method to handle BLQ samples impacted the outcomes of the EE with lower bias for predicted troughs.

Conclusions: This study suggests that a large sample size may not be necessary for an EE study, and models selected based on TDM may be more generalizable. The study highlights the need for guidelines for EE of population pharmacokinetic models for clinical use.

Abstract Image

在外部评估群体药代动力学模型时,样本大小、取样策略或对低于定量下限浓度的处理是否重要?
背景和目的:精确用药需要选择合适的群体药代动力学模型,可通过外部评价(EE)进行评估。由于缺乏对不同研究设计因素如何影响 EE 研究结果的了解,因此选择最适合临床使用的模型具有挑战性。本研究旨在以万古霉素和妥布霉素为例,评估样本大小、取样策略以及低于定量下限(BLQ)浓度的处理对四种群体药代动力学模型的 EE 结果的影响:方法:模拟了接受万古霉素或妥布霉素治疗的三个虚拟病人群体,样本量和取样方案各不相同。处理 BLQ 数据的三种方法是:(1) 丢弃 BLQ 数据;(2) 以 LLOQ/2 计算;或 (3) 使用基于似然法的方法。结果:在特定情况下,样本量对 EE 结果没有重要影响。在三个评估模型中,增加每个患者的样本数量并没有提高其中两个模型的预测性能。对使用丰富样本开发的模型进行评估,其结果并不比使用常规治疗药物监测开发的模型更好。基于似然法处理 BLQ 样本的方法影响了 EE 的结果,降低了预测谷值的偏差:本研究表明,EE 研究可能并不需要大量样本,基于 TDM 选择的模型可能更具普遍性。该研究强调了制定用于临床的群体药代动力学模型 EE 指南的必要性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
3.70
自引率
0.00%
发文量
64
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: Hepatology International is a peer-reviewed journal featuring articles written by clinicians, clinical researchers and basic scientists is dedicated to research and patient care issues in hepatology. This journal focuses mainly on new and emerging diagnostic and treatment options, protocols and molecular and cellular basis of disease pathogenesis, new technologies, in liver and biliary sciences. Hepatology International publishes original research articles related to clinical care and basic research; review articles; consensus guidelines for diagnosis and treatment; invited editorials, and controversies in contemporary issues. The journal does not publish case reports.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信