The use of population pharmacokinetics in drug development

Clinical Pharmacokinetics

Volumn 30, Issue 2, 1996, Pages 81-93

  Vozeh, Samuel ^a   Steimer, Jean Louis ^b   Rowland, Malcolm ^c   Morselli, Paolo ^d,e   Mentré, France ^f   Balant, Luc P ^g   Aarons, Leon ^c  

^a Intercantonal Off Contr Medicines   (Switzerland)

^b F HOFFMANN LA ROCHE LTD   (Switzerland)

^c UNIVERSITY OF MANCHESTER   (United Kingdom)

^d Hopital Trias i Pujol ^*

^e UNIVERSITY OF BARCELONA   (Spain)

^f PITIÉ SALPÊTRIÈRE HOSPITAL   (France)

^g UNIVERSITY OF GENEVA   (Switzerland)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

CLINICAL PROTOCOL; CLINICAL TRIAL; COMPUTER PROGRAM; DOSE RESPONSE; DRUG INFORMATION; DRUG RESEARCH; HUMAN; LABORATORY; METHODOLOGY; MODEL; NONHUMAN; PHARMACODYNAMICS; PHARMACOKINETICS; POPULATION; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROSPECTIVE STUDY; QUALITY CONTROL; RESOURCE ALLOCATION; REVIEW; STATISTICAL ANALYSIS;

EID: 0030064911     PISSN: 03125963     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.2165/00003088-199630020-00001     Document Type: Review

References (39)

1. Balant LP, Roseboom H, Gundert-Remy UM. Pharmacokinetic criteria for drug research and development. Adv Drug Res 1990; 19: 1-138
2. Salmonson T, Rane A. Clinical pharmacokinetics in the drug regulatory process. Clin Pharmacokinet 1990; 18: 177-83
3. Peck CC, Harter J, Sanathanan L, et al. Simultaneous pharmacokinetic-pharmacodynamic modeling in drug development and registration. Proceedings of IUPHAR Satellite Symposium on Measurement and kinetics of in vivo drug effects. Noordwijk. The Netherlands: 1990; 28-9
4. Campbell DB. The use of kinetic-dynamic interactions in the evaluation of drugs. Psychopharmacology 1990; 100: 433-450
5. Kroboth PD, Schmith VD, Smith RB. Pharmacodynamic modelling: application to new drug development. Clin Pharmacokinet 1991; 20: 91-8
6. Sale ME, Blaschke TF. Incorporating pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic modeling in drug development - are we ready? Drug Inf J 1992; 26: 119-24
7. Peck CC, Barr WH, Benet LZ, et al. Conference report: opportunities for integration of pharmacokinetics, pharmacodynamics, and toxicokinetics in rational drug development. Clin Pharmacol Ther 1992; 51: 465-73
8. Sheiner LB. Population approach in drug development: rationale and basic concepts. In: Rowland M, Aarons L, editors. New strategies in drug development and clinical evaluation: the population approach. Luxembourg: Commission of the European Communities, 1992; 13-29
9. Gundert-Remy U. Population approach in pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics - views within regulatory agencies: Europe. In: Rowland M, Aarons L, editors. New strategies in drug development and clinical evaluation: the population approach. Luxembourg: Commission of the European Communities, 1992; 153-6
10. Peck CC. Population approach in pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics: FDA view. In: Rowland M, Aarons L, editors. New strategies in drug development and clinical evaluation: the population approach. Luxembourg: Commission of the European Communities 1992; 157-168
11. Colburn WA, Olson SC. Classic and population pharmacokinetics. In: Welling PG, Tse FLS, editors. Pharmacokinetics: regulatory, industrial, academic perspectives. New York: Marcel Dekker 1988; 337-84
12. Bergman RN, Cobelli C. Minimal modeling partition analysis and the estimation of insulin sensitivity. Fed Proc 1980; 39: 110-5
13. Steimer JL, Vozeh S, Racine-Poon A, et al. The population approach: rationale, methods, applications in clinical pharmacology and drug development. In: Welling PE, Balant LP, editors. Handbook of experimental pharmacology. Vol 110: Pharmacokinetics of drugs. Heidelberg: Springer-Verlag, 1994; 405-51
14. Balant LP, Rowland M, Aarons L, et al. New strategies in drug development and clinical evaluation: the population approach. Commentary on an action for co-operative research. Eur J Clin Pharmacol 1993; 45: 93-4
15. Rowland M, Aarons L, editors. New strategies in drug development and clinical evaluation: the population approach. Luxembourg: Commission of the European Communities, 1992
16. Aarons L, Balant LP, Mentré F, et al. Population approaches in drug development: report on an expert meeting to discuss population pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic software. Eur J Clin Pharmacol 1994; 46: 389-91
17. Aarons L, Balant LP, Mentré F, et al. Practical experience and issues in designing and performing population pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic studies. Eur J Clin Pharmacol. In press
18. Sambol NC, Sheiner LB. Population dose versus response of betaxolol and atenolol: a comparison of potency and variability. Clin Pharmacol Ther 1991; 49: 24-31
19. Sheiner LB, Beal SL, Sambol NC. Study designs for dose-ranging. Clin Pharmacol Ther 1989, 46: 63-77
20. Van Bree J, Nedelman J, Steimer JL, et al. Application of sparse sampling approaches in rodent toxicokinetics: a prospective view. Drug Inf J 1994; 28: 263-79
21. Sheiner LB, Rosenberg B, Marathe VV. Estimation of population characteristics of pharmacokinetic parameters from routine clinical data. J Pharmacokinet Biopharm 1977; 5: 445-79
22. Ratain MJ, Schilsky RL, Conley BA, et al. Pharmacodynamics in cancer therapy. J Clin Oncol 1990; 8: 1739-53
23. Mentré F, Escolano S, Golmard JL, et al. Clinical pharmacokinetics of zidovudine: inter and intraindividual variability and relationship to long term efficacy and toxicity. Eur J Clin Pharmacol 1993; 45: 397-407
24. Holford NHG, Peace KE. Methodologic aspects of a population pharmacodynamic model for cognitive effects in Alzheimer patients treated with tacrine. Proc Natl Acad Sci 1992; 89: 11466-70
25. Holford NHG, Peace KE. Results and validation of a population pharmacodynamic model for cognitive effects in Alzheimer patients treated with tacrine. Proc Natl Acad Sci 1992; 89: 11471-5
26. Sanathanan L, Peck CC. The randomized concentration controlled trial: an evaluation of its sample size efficiency. Controlled Clin Trials 1991; 12: 780-94
27. Morselli PL. Effect of age on the dose-response curve. In: Lasagna L, Erill S, Naranjo CA, editors. Dose response relationships in clinical pharmacology. New York: Elsevier, 1989; 187-99
28. Sheiner LB, Rosenberg B, Melmon KL. Modeling of individual pharmacokinetics for computer-aided dosage. Comp Biomed Res 1972; 5: 441-59
29. Balant L, Gex-Fabry M, Balant-Gorgia A. The relevance of inter-ethnic differences for drug development and registration: implications for the design and interpretation of phase III clinical trials. In: Walker S, Lumley C, McAuslane N, editors. The relevance of ethnic factors in the clinical evaluation of medicines. London: Kluwer Academic, 1994; 201-17
30. Sheiner LB, Ludden TM. Population pharmacokinetics/pharmacodynamics. Annu Rev Pharmacol Toxicol 1992; 32: 185-209
31. Tanigawara Y, Hori R. Population approach in post-marketing dose adjustment. In: Rowland M, Aarons L, editors. New strategies in drug development and clinical evaluation: the population approach. Luxembourg, Commission of the European Communities 1992; 223-32
32. Balant LP. Blood-concentration measurements in clinical trials. Appl Clin Trials 1993; 2: 44-55
33. Beal SL, Sheiner LB. The NONMEM system. Am Statistics 1980; 34: 118-9
34. Linstrom MJ, Bates DM. Nonlinear mixed effects models for repeated measures data. Biometrics 1990; 46: 673-87
35. Mallet A. A maximum likelihood estimation method for random coefficient regression models. Biometrika 1986; 73: 645-56
36. Schumitzky A. Nonparametric EM algorithms for estimating prior distribution. Appl Math Comput 1991; 45: 141-57
37. Wakefield J, Smith AFM, Racine-Poon A, et al. Bayesian analysis of linear and nonlinear population models using the Gibbs sampler. Appl Statistics 1994; 43: 201-21
38. Mentré F, Gomeni R. A two-step iterative algorithm for estimation in nonlinear mixed effect models with an evaluation in population pharmacokinetics. J Biopharm Statistics 1995; 5: 141-58
39. Yuh L, Beal S, Davidian M, et al. Population pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic methodology and applications: a bibliography. Biometry 1994; 50: 566-75