Erratum: Standardized visual predictive check versus visual predictive check for model evaluation (Journal of Clinical Pharmacology (2012) 52, 1 (39-54) DOI: 10.1177/0091270010390040);Standardized visual predictive check versus visual predictive check for model evaluation

Journal of Clinical Pharmacology

Volumn 52, Issue 1, 2012, Pages 39-54

  Wang, Diane D ^a   Zhang, Shuzhong ^a  

^a PFIZER INC   (United States)

Author keywords

model evaluation; normalized prediction distribution error; pharmacodynamics; pharmacokinetics; prediction discrepancy; standardized visual predictive check; visual predictive check

Indexed keywords

ANTINEOPLASTIC AGENT; RUCAPARIB; WARFARIN;

AGE; ARTICLE; BODY WEIGHT; DOSE CALCULATION; DRUG ABSORPTION; DRUG BLOOD LEVEL; DRUG CLEARANCE; DRUG DOSE ESCALATION; HUMAN; INTERMETHOD COMPARISON; MODEL; NORMALIZED PREDICTION DISTRIBUTION ERROR; PHARMACODYNAMICS; PHASE 1 CLINICAL TRIAL (TOPIC); PREDICTION; SIMULATION; STANDARDIZATION; STANDARDIZED VISUAL PREDICTIVE CHECK; VALIDATION STUDY; VISUAL PREDICTIVE CHECK;

EID: 84855445773     PISSN: 00912700     EISSN: 15524604     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1177/0091270011433286     Document Type: Erratum

References (16)

1. Chien JY, Friedrich S, Heathman MA, de Alwis DP, Sinha V. Pharmacokinetics/pharmacodynamics and the stages of drug development: role of modeling and simulation. AAPS J. 2005 ; 7: E544 - E559
2. Lesko LJ, Rowland M, Peck CC, Blaschke TF. Optimizing the science of drug development: opportunities for better candidate selection and accelerated evaluation in humans. Pharm Res. 2000 ; 17: 1335-1344 (Pubitemid 32109484)
3. Sheiner LB, Steimer JL. Pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic modeling in drug development. Annu Rev Pharmacol Toxicol. 2000 ; 40: 67-95 (Pubitemid 30340674)
4. Ette EI, Williams PJ, Kim YH, Lane JR, Liu MJ, Capparelli EV. Model appropriateness and population pharmacokinetic modeling. J Clin Pharmacol. 2003 ; 43: 610-623 (Pubitemid 36613120)
5. Karlsson MO, Savic RM. Diagnosing model diagnostics. Clin Pharmacol Ther. 2007 ; 82: 17-20 (Pubitemid 46944205)
6. Holford N. The visual predictive check: superiority to standard diagnostic (Rorschach) plots. PAGE. 2005 ; 14: 738
7. Yano Y, Beal SL, Sheiner LB. Evaluating pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic models using the posterior predictive check. J Pharmacokinet Pharmacodyn. 2001 ; 28: 171-192
8. Brendel K, Comets E, Laffont C, Laveille C, Mentré F. Metrics for external model evaluation with an application to the population pharmacokinetics of gliclazide. Pharm Res. 2006 ; 23: 2036-2049
9. Comets E, Brendel K, Mentré F. Computing normalised prediction distribution errors to evaluate nonlinear mixed-effect models: the npde add-on package for R. Comput Methods Programs Biomed. 2008 ; 90: 154-166
10. Mentré F, Escolano S. Prediction discrepancies for the evaluation of nonlinear mixed-effects models. J Pharmacokinet Pharmacodyn. 2006 ; 33: 345-367 (Pubitemid 44020385)
11. Karlsson M, Holford N. A tutorial on visual predictive checks. PAGE. 2008 ; 17: 1434
12. Plummer R, Jones C, Middleton M, et al. Phase I study of the poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase inhibitor, AG014699, in combination with temozolomide in patients with advanced solid tumors. Clin Cancer Res. 2008 ; 14: 7917-7923
13. O'Reilly RA, Aggeler PM. Studies on coumarin anticoagulant drugs: initiation of warfarin therapy without a loading dose. Circulation. 1968 ; 38: 169-177
14. O'Reilly RA, Aggeler PM, Leong LS. Studies on the coumarin anticoagulant drugs: the pharmacodynamics of warfarin in man. J Clin Invest. 1963 ; 42: 1542-1551
15. BergstrandMHookerACWallinJEKarlssonMO. Prediction corrected visual predictive checks [abstract]. American Conference of Pharmacometrics (ACoP)2009. http://www.go-acop.org/acop2009/abstracts.
16. Cleveland WS, McGill R. Graphical perception: the visual decoding of quantitative information on graphical displays of data. J R Stat Soc A (Gen). 1987 ; 150: 192-229