Development and comparison of model-integrated evidence approaches for bioequivalence studies with pharmacokinetic end points

IF 3.1 3区 医学 Q2 PHARMACOLOGY & PHARMACY
Xiaomei Chen, Henrik B. Nyberg, Mark Donnelly, Liang Zhao, Lanyan Fang, Mats O. Karlsson, Andrew C. Hooker
{"title":"Development and comparison of model-integrated evidence approaches for bioequivalence studies with pharmacokinetic end points","authors":"Xiaomei Chen,&nbsp;Henrik B. Nyberg,&nbsp;Mark Donnelly,&nbsp;Liang Zhao,&nbsp;Lanyan Fang,&nbsp;Mats O. Karlsson,&nbsp;Andrew C. Hooker","doi":"10.1002/psp4.13216","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>By applying nonlinear mixed-effect (NLME) models, model-integrated evidence (MIE) approaches are able to analyze bioequivalence (BE) data with pharmacokinetic end points that have sparse sampling, which is problematic for non-compartmental analysis (NCA). However, MIE approaches may suffer from inflation of type I error due to underestimation of parameter uncertainty and to the assumption of asymptotic normality. In this study, we developed a MIE BE analysis method that is based on a pre-defined model and consists of several steps including model fitting, uncertainty assessment, simulation, and BE determination. The presented MIE approach has several improvements compared with the previously reported model-integrated methods: (1) treatment, sequence, and period effects are only added to absorption parameters (such as relative bioavailability and rate of absorption) instead of all PK parameters; (2) a simulation step is performed to generate confidence intervals of the pharmacokinetic metrics for BE assessment; and (3) in an effort to maintain type I error, two more advanced parameter uncertainty evaluation approaches are explored, a nonparametric (case resampling) bootstrap, and sampling importance resampling (SIR). To evaluate the developed method and compare the uncertainty assessment methods, simulation experiments were performed for BE studies using a two-way crossover design with different amounts of information (sparse to rich designs) and levels of variability. Based on the simulation results, the method using SIR for parameter uncertainty quantification controls type I error at the nominal level of 0.05 (i.e., the significance level set for BE evaluation) even for studies with small sample size and/or sparse sampling. As expected, our MIE approach for BE assessment exhibited higher power than the NCA-based method, especially as the data becomes sparser and/or more variable.</p>","PeriodicalId":10774,"journal":{"name":"CPT: Pharmacometrics & Systems Pharmacology","volume":"13 10","pages":"1734-1747"},"PeriodicalIF":3.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11494825/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"CPT: Pharmacometrics & Systems Pharmacology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/psp4.13216","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PHARMACOLOGY & PHARMACY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

By applying nonlinear mixed-effect (NLME) models, model-integrated evidence (MIE) approaches are able to analyze bioequivalence (BE) data with pharmacokinetic end points that have sparse sampling, which is problematic for non-compartmental analysis (NCA). However, MIE approaches may suffer from inflation of type I error due to underestimation of parameter uncertainty and to the assumption of asymptotic normality. In this study, we developed a MIE BE analysis method that is based on a pre-defined model and consists of several steps including model fitting, uncertainty assessment, simulation, and BE determination. The presented MIE approach has several improvements compared with the previously reported model-integrated methods: (1) treatment, sequence, and period effects are only added to absorption parameters (such as relative bioavailability and rate of absorption) instead of all PK parameters; (2) a simulation step is performed to generate confidence intervals of the pharmacokinetic metrics for BE assessment; and (3) in an effort to maintain type I error, two more advanced parameter uncertainty evaluation approaches are explored, a nonparametric (case resampling) bootstrap, and sampling importance resampling (SIR). To evaluate the developed method and compare the uncertainty assessment methods, simulation experiments were performed for BE studies using a two-way crossover design with different amounts of information (sparse to rich designs) and levels of variability. Based on the simulation results, the method using SIR for parameter uncertainty quantification controls type I error at the nominal level of 0.05 (i.e., the significance level set for BE evaluation) even for studies with small sample size and/or sparse sampling. As expected, our MIE approach for BE assessment exhibited higher power than the NCA-based method, especially as the data becomes sparser and/or more variable.

Abstract Image

开发和比较用于药代动力学终点生物等效性研究的模型整合证据方法。
通过应用非线性混合效应(NLME)模型,模型整合证据(MIE)方法能够分析具有稀疏采样的药代动力学终点的生物等效性(BE)数据,这对于非室分析(NCA)来说是个问题。然而,由于低估了参数的不确定性和假设了渐近正态性,MIE 方法可能会导致 I 型误差的扩大。在本研究中,我们开发了一种 MIE BE 分析方法,该方法基于预先定义的模型,包括模型拟合、不确定性评估、模拟和 BE 测定等几个步骤。与之前报道的模型整合方法相比,本研究提出的 MIE 方法有几处改进:(1) 只在吸收参数(如相对生物利用度和吸收率)中加入治疗、序列和时期效应,而不是所有 PK 参数;(2) 执行模拟步骤以生成用于 BE 评估的药代动力学指标的置信区间;(3) 为了保持 I 型误差,我们探索了两种更先进的参数不确定性评估方法,即非参数(个案重采样)自引导法和采样重要性重采样法(SIR)。为了评估所开发的方法并比较不确定性评估方法,我们对采用双向交叉设计的 BE 研究进行了模拟实验,并采用了不同的信息量(稀疏设计到丰富设计)和变异水平。根据模拟结果,使用 SIR 进行参数不确定性量化的方法即使在样本量较小和/或取样稀少的研究中,也能将 I 型误差控制在 0.05 的标称水平(即为 BE 评估设定的显著性水平)。正如预期的那样,我们的 MIE BE 评估方法比基于 NCA 的方法显示出更高的能力,尤其是当数据变得更稀少和/或更多变时。
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
5.00
自引率
11.40%
发文量
146
审稿时长
8 weeks
×
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