Cargando…

Comparison of three a-priori models in the prediction of serum lithium concentration

CONTEXT: Mathematical models are valuable for optimizing drug dose and dosing regimens. AIMS: To compare the precision and bias of three a-priori methods in the prediction of serum level of lithium in patients with bipolar disorder, and to determine their sensitivity and specificity in detecting ser...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Radhakrishnan, Rajiv, Kanigere, Milanduth, Menon, Jayakumar, Calvin, Sam, Srinivasan, Krishnamachari
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Medknow Publications & Media Pvt Ltd 2012
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3326919/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22529482
http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/0253-7613.93856
Descripción
Sumario:CONTEXT: Mathematical models are valuable for optimizing drug dose and dosing regimens. AIMS: To compare the precision and bias of three a-priori methods in the prediction of serum level of lithium in patients with bipolar disorder, and to determine their sensitivity and specificity in detecting serum lithium levels outside the therapeutic range. SETTINGS AND DESIGN: Hospital-based, retrospective study. MATERIALS AND METHODS: In a retrospective study of 31 in-patients, the serum level of lithium was calculated using three different a-priori methods. Mean Prediction Error was used as a measure of bias while Mean Absolute Error and Root Mean Squared Error were used as a measure of precision. The sensitivity and specificity of the methods was calculated. RESULTS: All three models underestimated serum lithium level. Precision was best with the model described by Pepin et al., while bias of prediction was the least with the method of Abou Auda et al. The formula by Pepin et al. was able to predict serum lithium level with a mean error of 36.57%. The sensitivity and specificity of the models in identifying serum lithium levels outside the therapeutic range was 80% and 76.19% for Pepin et al., 90% and 74.19% for Zetin et al., and 90% and 66.67% for Abou-Auda et al., respectively. CONCLUSION: The study demonstrates the difference in precision and bias of three a-priori methods, with no one method being superior to the other in the prediction of serum concentration.