A new equivalence based metric for predictive check to qualify mixed-effects models

AAPS Journal

Volumn 7, Issue 3, 2005, Pages

  Jadhav, Pravin R ^a,b   Gobburu, Jogarao V S ^a  

^a Center for Drug Evaluation and Research   (United States)

^b VIRGINIA COMMONWEALTH UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF MEDICINE   (United States)

Author keywords

Discrepancy variable; Model qualification; Model validation; Posterior predictive check; Test statistic

Indexed keywords

DRUG;

ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE; ARTICLE; CALCULATION; CLINICAL TRIAL; COMPARTMENT MODEL; CONCENTRATION RESPONSE; CONTROLLED CLINICAL TRIAL; CONTROLLED STUDY; DECISION MAKING; DRUG ADMINISTRATION ROUTE; DRUG CLEARANCE; DRUG RESEARCH; FEMALE; HUMAN; MALE; PREDICTION; PROBABILITY; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL; SEX DIFFERENCE; SIMULATION; STATISTICAL ANALYSIS; COMPARATIVE STUDY; METABOLISM; METRIC SYSTEM; PHARMACOKINETICS; PREDICTION AND FORECASTING; REVIEW; THEORETICAL MODEL;

HUMANS; METRIC SYSTEM; MODELS, THEORETICAL; PHARMACEUTICAL PREPARATIONS; PREDICTIVE VALUE OF TESTS; THERAPEUTIC EQUIVALENCY;

EID: 33644813010     PISSN: 15221059     EISSN: 15221059     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1208/aapsj070353     Document Type: Article

References (16)

1. Sheiner LB, Steimer JL. Pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic modeling in drug development. Annu Rev Pharmacol Toxicol. 2000;40:67-95.
2. Gobburu JV, Marroum PJ. Utilisation of pharmacokinetic-pharmacodynamic modelling and simulation in regulatory decision-making. Clin Pharmacokinet. 2001;40:883-892.
3. Holford NHG, Hale M, Ko HS, Steimer JL, Sheiner LB. Simulation in Drug development: good practices. Center for Drug Development Science. Available at:http://cdds.georgetown.edu. Accessed January 1, 2004.
4. Wahlby U, Jonsson EN, Karlsson MO. Assessment of actual significance levels for covariate effects in NONMEM. J Pharmacokinet Pharmacodyn. 2001;28:231-252.
5. FDA. Guidance: Population Pharmacokinetics. FDA guidanee page. Available at:http://www.fda.gov/cder/guidance. Accessed January 13, 2004.
6. Rubin D. Bayesianly justifiable and relevant frequency calculations for the applied statisitcian. Ann Stat. 1984;12:1151-1172.
7. Gelman A, Carlin JB, Stern HS, Rubin DB. Model checking and sensitivity analysis. In: Gelman A, ed. Bayesian Data Analysis. London: Chapman & Hall; 1995:161-189.
8. Gelman A, Meng XL. Model checking and model improvement. In: Gilks WR, Richardson S, Spiegelhalter DJ, eds. Markov Chain and Monte Carlo in Practice. London: Chapman & Hall; 1996:189-202.
9. Yano Y, Beal SL, Sheiner LB. Evaluating pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic models using the posterior predictive check. J Pharmacokinet Pharmacodyn. 2001;28:171-192.
10. Gelman A, Meng XL, Stern HS. Posterior predictive assessment of model fitness via realized discrepancies. Statistica Sinica. 1996;6:733-807.
11. Guttman I. The use of a concept of a future observation in the goodness-of-fit problems. J R Statist Soc B. 1967;1:83-100.
12. Tiao GC, Xu D. Robustness of maximum likelihood estimates for multi-step predictions: the exponential smoothing case. Biometrika. 1993;80:623-641.
13. Gelman A, Goegebeur Y, Tuerlinckx F, Van Mechelen I. Diagnostic checks for discrete data regression models using posterior predictive simulations. J Royal Stat Soc: C. 2000;49:247-268.
14. Duffull SB, Aarons L. Development of a sequential linked pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic simulation model for ivabradine in healthy volunteers. Eur J Pharm Sci. 2000;10:275-284.
15. Duffull SB, Chabaud S, Nony P, Laveille C, Girard P, Aarons L. A pharmacokinetic simulation model for ivabradine in healthy volunteers. Eur J Pharm Sci. 2000;10:285-294.
16. Friberg LE, Freijs A, Sandstrom M, Karlsson MO. Semiphysiological model for the time course of leukocytes after varying schedules of 5-fluorouracil in rats. J Pharmacol Exp Ther. 2000;295:734-740.