Distinguishing animal subsets in toxicokinetic studies: Comparison of non-linear mixed effects modelling with non-compartmental methods

Journal of Applied Toxicology

Volumn 22, Issue 6, 2002, Pages 437-443

  Hing, Jeremy P ^a   Woolfrey, Steven G ^b   Greenslade, Dennis ^b   Wright, Peter M C ^a  

^a NEWCASTLE UNIVERSITY   (United Kingdom)

^b Alnwick Research Centre   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Destructive sampling; Mixed effects model; Research study design; Statistics; Toxicokinetics

Indexed keywords

ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE; ANIMAL EXPERIMENT; ANIMAL TESTING REDUCTION; AREA UNDER THE CURVE; ARTICLE; CALCULATION; COMPARTMENT MODEL; CONFIDENCE INTERVAL; CONTROLLED STUDY; DATA BASE; EXPERIMENTAL ANIMAL WELFARE; FEMALE; LINEAR SYSTEM; MALE; METHODOLOGY; MOUSE; NONHUMAN; NONLINEAR SYSTEM; PRIORITY JOURNAL; RAT; STATISTICAL ANALYSIS; TOXICOKINETICS; ANIMAL; BIOLOGICAL MODEL; COMPARATIVE STUDY; DOSE RESPONSE; PHARMACOKINETICS; SEX DIFFERENCE; SPECIES DIFFERENCE; STATISTICAL MODEL; TOXICITY TESTING;

ANIMALS; AREA UNDER CURVE; DOSE-RESPONSE RELATIONSHIP, DRUG; FEMALE; MALE; MICE; MODELS, BIOLOGICAL; MODELS, STATISTICAL; NONLINEAR DYNAMICS; PHARMACOKINETICS; RATS; SEX FACTORS; SPECIES SPECIFICITY; TOXICITY TESTS;

EID: 0036854666     PISSN: 0260437X     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/jat.883     Document Type: Article

References (16)

1. Burtin P, Mentre F, Van Bree J, Steimer JL. 1996. Sparse sampling for assessment of drug exposure in toxicological studies. Eur. J. Drug Metab. Pharmacokin. 21: 105-111.
2. Chiou WL. 1978. Critical evaluation of the potential error in pharmacokinetic studies of using the linear trapezoidal rule method for the calculation of the area under the plasma level-time curve. J. Pharmacokin. Biopharm. 6: 539-546.
3. Dahlem AM, Allerheiligen SR, Vodicnik MJ. 1995. Concomitant toxicokinetics: techniques for and interpretation of exposure data obtained during the conduct of toxicology studies. Toxicol. Pathol. 23: 170-178.
4. Ette EI, Howie CA, Kelman AW, Whiting B. 1995a. Efficient design and efficient parameter estimation in preclinical pharmacokinetic studies. Pharm. Res. 12: 729-737.
5. Ette EI, Kelman AW, Howie CA, Whiting B. 1995b. Analysis of animal pharmacokinetic data: performance of the one point per animal design. J. Pharmacokin. Biopharm. 23: 551-566.
6. Graves DA, Locke CS Jr, Muir KT, Miller RP. 1989. The influence of assay variability on pharmacokinetic parameter estimation. J. Pharmacokin. Biopharm. 17: 571 -592.
7. Hing JP, Woolfrey SG, Greenslade D, Wright PM. 2001. Is mixed effects modeling or naive pooled data analysis preferred for the interpretation of single sample per subject toxicokinetic data. J. Pharmacokin. Pharmacodyn. 28: 193-210.
8. Ings R. 1994. The application of modelling in toxicokinetics. Arch. Toxicol. Suppl. 16: 233-241.
9. Lindstrom FT, Birkes DS. 1984. Estimation of population pharmacokinetic parameters using destructively obtained experimental data: a simulation study of the one-compartment open model. Drug Metab. Rev. 15: 195-264.
10. max) in toxicokinetics. J. Pharm. Sci. 86: 579-583.
11. Nedelman JR, Gibiansky E. 1996. The variance of a better AUC estimator for sparse, destructive sampling in toxicokinetics. J. Pharm. Sci. 85: 884-886.
12. Nedelman JR, Gibiansky E, Lau DT. 1995. Applying Bailer's method for AUC confidence intervals to sparse sampling [published erratum appears in Pharm. Res. 1996 13(1): 183]. Pharm. Res. 12: 124-128.
13. Racine-Poon A, Wakefield J. 1998. Statistical methods for population pharmacokinetic modelling. Stat. Methods Med. Res. 7: 63-84.
14. Sheiner L, Rosenberg B, Marathe VV. 1977. Estimation of population characteristics of pharmacokinetic parameters from routine clinical data. J. Pharmacokin. Biopharm. 5: 445-479.
15. Sun H, Ette EI, Ludden TM. 1996. On the recording of sample times and parameter estimation from repeated measures pharmacokinetic data. J. Pharmacokin. Biopharm. 24: 637-650.
16. Yeh KC, Kwan KC. 1978. A comparison of numerical integrating algorithms by trapezoidal, Lagrange, and spline approximation. J. Pharmacokin. Biopharm. 6: 79-98.