Estimation of Cmax and Tmax in Populations after Single and Multiple Drug Administrations

Journal of Pharmacokinetics and Pharmacodynamics

Volumn 30, Issue 5, 2003, Pages 363-385

  Tothfalusi, Laszlo ^a   Endrenyi, Laszlo ^b  

^a SEMMELWEIS UNIVERSITY OF MEDICINE   (Hungary)

^b UNIVERSITY OF TORONTO   (Canada)

Author keywords

Bias of estimated metrics; Bioequivalence; Cmax and Tmax; Clinical pharmacology; Pharmacokinetic simulations; Population pharmacokinetics; Steady state pharmacokinetics

Indexed keywords

DRUG;

ARTICLE; BLOOD LEVEL; DRUG ACCUMULATION; MATHEMATICAL COMPUTING; MEASUREMENT; MODEL; MONTE CARLO METHOD; POPULATION; PRIORITY JOURNAL; STATISTICAL ANALYSIS; STATISTICAL MODEL; STEADY STATE; BLOOD; CHEMICAL MODEL; METABOLISM; ORAL DRUG ADMINISTRATION; PHARMACOKINETICS; TISSUE DISTRIBUTION;

ADMINISTRATION, ORAL; MODELS, CHEMICAL; PHARMACEUTICAL PREPARATIONS; PHARMACOKINETICS; TISSUE DISTRIBUTION;

EID: 0347932018     PISSN: 1567567X     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1023/B:JOPA.0000008159.97748.09     Document Type: Article

References (35)

1. T. N. Tozer, F. Y. Bois, W. W. Hauck, M. L. Chen, and R. L. Williams. Absorption rate vs. exposure: which is more useful for bioequivalence testing? Pharm. Res. 13:453-456 (1996).
2. J. Bonneterre, B. Chevalier, C. Focan, L. Mauriac, and M. Piccart. Phase I and pharmacokinetic study of weekly oral therapy with vinorelbine in patients with advanced breast cancer (ABC). Ann. Oncol. 12:1683-91 (2001).
3. Guzzo, C. I. Furtekl, A. G. Porras, C. Chen, R. Tipping, C. M. Clineschmidt, D. G. Sciberras, J. Y. Hsieh, and K. C. Lasseter. Safety, tolerability, and pharmacokinetics of escalating high doses of ivermectin in healthy adult subjects. J. Clin. Pharmacol. 42:1122-33 (2002).
4. G. M. Levin, L. A. Nelson, C. L. DeVane, S. L. Preston, G. Eisele, and S. W. Carson. A pharmacokinetic drug-drug interaction study of venlafaxine and indinavir. Psychopharmacol. Bull. 35:62-71 (2001).
5. G. T. Tucker, A. Rostami-Hodjegan, and P. R. Jackson. Bioequivalence - a measure of therapeutic equivalence. In H. H. Blume and K. K. Midha (eds.) Bio-International 2 - Bioavailability, Bioequivalence and Pharmacokinetic Studies, Medpharm, Stuttgart, pp. 35-43.
6. P. D. Kroboth, V. D. Schmith, and R. B. Smith. Pharmacodynamic modelling. Application to new drug development. Clin. Pharmacokinet. 20:91-98 (1991).
7. B. Meibohm and H. Derendorf. Basic concepts of pharmacokinetic/ pharmacodynamic (PK/PD) modelling. Int. J. Clin. Pharmacol. Ther. 35:401-13 (1997).
8. H. H. Blume, I. J. McGilveray, and K. K. Midha. Main conference report. In H. H. Blume and K. K. Midha (eds.) Bio-International 2 - Bioavailability, Bioequivalence and Pharmacokinetic Studies, Medpharm, Stuttgart, pp. 15-25.
9. R. P. Basson, B. J. Cerimele, K. A. DeSante, and D. C. Howey. Tmax: an unconfounded metric for rate of absorption in single dose bioequivalence studies. Pharm. Res. 13:324-328 (1996).
10. R. P. Basson, A. Ghos, B. J. Cerimele, K. A. DeSante, and D. C. Howey. Why rate of absorption inferences in single dose bioequivalence studies are often inappropriate. Pharm. Res. 15:276-279 (1998).
11. The European Agency for the Evaluation of Medicinal Products, Committee for Proprietary Medicinal Products (CPMP). Note for Guidance on Bioavailability and Bioequivalence. London, 2001.
12. Food and Drug Administration, Center for Drug Evaluation and Research (CDER). Bioavailability and Bioequivalence Studies for Orally Administered Drug Products - General Considerations - Guidance for Industry. Rockville, MD, 2000.
13. Health Canada, Therapeutic Products Program. Conduct and Analysis of Bioavailability and Bioequivalence Studies. Part A: Oral Dosage Formulations Used for Systemic Effects. Ottawa, 1992.
14. A. J. Jackson. Prediction of steady-state bioequivalence relationships using single dose data. I-Linear kinetics. Biopharm. Drug Dispos. 8:483-496 (1987).
15. max/AUC in investigations of bioequivalence. Int. J. Clin. Pharmacol. Ther. Toxicol. 31:184-189.
16. F. Y. Bois, T. N. Tozer, W. W. Hauck, M. L. Chen, R. Patnaik, and R.L. Williams. Bioequivalence: performance of several measures of rate of absorption. Pharm. Res. 11:966-974 (1994).
17. L. F. Lacey, O. N. Keene, C. Duquesnoy, and A. Bye. Evaluation of different indirect measures of rate of drug absorption in comparative pharmacokinetic studies. J. Pharm. Sci. 83:212-215 (1994).
18. C. Reppas, L. F. Lacey, O. N. Keene, P. Macheras, and A. Bye. Evaluation of different metrics as indirect measures of rate of drug absorption from extended release dosage forms at steady state. Pharm. Res. 12:103-107 (1995).
19. max. Pharm. Res. 12:1634-1641 (1995).
20. L. Endrenyi, F. Csizmadia, L.Tothfalusi, and M. L. Chen. Metrics comparing simulated early concentration profiles for the determination of bioequivalence. Pharm. Res. 15:1292-1299 (1998).
21. J. Zha and L. Endrenyi. Variation of the peak concentration following single and repeated drug administrations in investigations of bioavailability and bioequivalence. J. Biopharm. Stat. 7:191-204 (1997).
22. L. Endrenyi and L. Tothfalusi. Truncated AUC evaluates effectively the bioequivalence of drugs with long half-lives. Int. J. Clin. Pharmacol. Ther. 35:142-150 (1997).
23. J. Gaudreault, D. Potvin, J. Lavigne, and R.L. Lalonde. Truncated area under the curve as a measure of relative extent of bioavailability: evaluation using experimental data and Monte Carlo simulations. Pharm. Res. 15:1621-1629 (1998).
24. W. J. Westlake. Use of statistical methods in evaluation of in vivo performance of dosage forms. J. Pharm. Sci. 62:1579-1589 (1973).
25. H. L. Aarons. Assessment of rate of absorption in bioequivalence studies. J. Pharm. Sci. 76:853-855 (1987).
26. E. Lloyd. Probability. Handbook of Applicable Mathematics. Vol II. Wiley, New York, 1980.
27. S. Senn. Statistical Issues in Drug Development. Wiley, Chichester, New York, p. 321.
28. N. J. Kapur and H. K. Kesavan. Entropy Optimization Principles with Applications. Academic Press, Boston, 1992.
29. L. Tothfalusi and L. Endrenyi. Limits for the scaled average bioequivalence of highly variable drugs and drug products. Pharm. Res. 20:382-389 (2003).
30. D. Hauschke, V. W. Steinijans, and E. Diletti. A distribution-free procedure for the statistical analysis of bioequivalence studies. Int. J. Clin. Pharmacol. Ther. Toxicol. 28:72-78 (1990).
31. V. W. Steinijans and D. Hauschke. Update on the statistical analysis of bioequivalence studies. Int. J. Clin. Pharmacol. Ther. Toxicol. 28:105-110 (1990).
32. R. Sauter, V. W. Steinijans, E. Diletti, A. Böhm, and H.-U. Schulz. Presentation of results from bioequivalence studies. Int. J. Clin. Pharmacol. Ther. Toxicol. 30:233-256 (1992).
33. A. W. Pidgen. Statistical aspects of bioequivalence - a review. Xenobiotica, 22:881-893 (1992).
34. M.-L. Chen, L. Lesko, and R. L. Williams. Measures of exposure versus measures of rate and extent of absorption. Clin. Pharmacokin. 40:565-572 (2001).
35. H. Boxenbaum. Pharmacokinetic determinants in the design and evaluation of sustained-release dosage forms. Pharm. Res. 2:82-88 (1984).