The time of maximum effect for model selection in pharmacokinetic- pharmacodynamic analysis applied to frusemide

British Journal of Clinical Pharmacology

Volumn 45, Issue 1, 1998, Pages 63-70

  Wakelkamp, Monique ^a   Alván, Gunnar ^a   Paintaud, Gilles ^b  

^a KAROLINSKA UNIVERSITY HOSPITAL   (Sweden)

^b UNIVERSITY HOSPITAL OF BESANÇON   (France)

Author keywords

Frusemide; Pharmacodynamics; Pharmacokinetics

Indexed keywords

FUROSEMIDE;

ADULT; ANALYTIC METHOD; ARTICLE; CLINICAL TRIAL; CONTROLLED CLINICAL TRIAL; CONTROLLED STUDY; DIURESIS; DOSE RESPONSE; DOSE TIME EFFECT RELATION; DRUG EFFECT; DRUG TOLERANCE; HUMAN; HUMAN EXPERIMENT; INTRAVENOUS DRUG ADMINISTRATION; MALE; NATRIURESIS; NORMAL HUMAN; PRIORITY JOURNAL; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL;

ADULT; CROSS-OVER STUDIES; DIURETICS; DOSE-RESPONSE RELATIONSHIP, DRUG; FUROSEMIDE; HUMANS; INJECTIONS, INTRAVENOUS; MALE; MODELS, BIOLOGICAL;

EID: 0031881728     PISSN: 03065251     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1046/j.1365-2125.1998.00637.x     Document Type: Article

References (14)

1. Levy G. Mechanism-based pharmacodynamic modelling. Clin Pharmacol Ther 1994; 56: 356-358.
2. Wakelkamp M, Alva̧n G, Gabrielsson J, Paintaud G. Pharmacodynamic modelling of furosemide tolerance after multiple intravenous administration. Clin Pharmacol Ther 1996; 60: 75-88.
3. Odlind B, Beermann B. Renal tubular secretion and effects of furosemide. Clin Pharmacol Ther 1980; 27: 784-790.
4. Holford NHG. Parametric models of the time course of drug action. In The in vivo study of drug action, eds. van Boxtel CJ, Holford NHG, Danhof M. Amsterdam: Elsevier, 1992: 61-70.
5. Holford NHG, Sheiner LB. Understanding the dose-effect relationship: clinical application of pharmacokinetic-pharmacodynamic models. Clin Pharmacokinet 1981; 6: 429-453.
6. Dayneka NL, Garg V, Jusko WJ. Comparison of four basic models of indirect pharmacodynamic responses. J Pharmacokinet Biopharm 1993; 21: 457-478.
7. Jusko WJ, Ko HC. Physiologic indirect response models characterize diverse types of pharmacodynamic effects. Clin Pharmacol Ther 1994; 56: 406-419.
8. Sheiner LB, Verotta D. Further notes on physiologic indirect response models. Clin Pharmacol Ther 1995; 58: 238-240.
9. Brater DC. Diuretic pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics. In The in vivo study of drug action, eds. van Boxtel CJ, Holford NHG, Danhof M. Amsterdam: Elsevier, 1992: 253-275.
10. Sood SP, Green VI, Norton ZM. Routine methods in toxicology and therapeutic drug monitoring by high performance liquid chromatography: III. A rapid microscale method for determination of furosemide in plasma and urine. Ther Drug Monit 1987; 9: 484-488.
11. Ono T, Taniguchi J, Mitsuniaki H, et al. A new enzymatic assay of chloride in serum. Clin Chem 1988; 34: 552-553.
12. Greger K, Wangemann P. Loop diuretics. Renal Physiol 1987; 10: 174-183.
13. Jusko WJ, Ko HC, Ebling WF. Convergence of direct and indirect pharmacodynamic response models. J Pharmacokinet Biopharm 1995; 23: 5-6.
14. Verotta D, Sheiner LB. A general conceptual model for nonsteady state pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic data. J Pharmacokinet Biopharm 1995; 23: 1-4.