Cargando…
Performance comparison of first-order conditional estimation with interaction and Bayesian estimation methods for estimating the population parameters and its distribution from data sets with a low number of subjects
BACKGROUND: Exploratory preclinical, as well as clinical trials, may involve a small number of patients, making it difficult to calculate and analyze the pharmacokinetic (PK) parameters, especially if the PK parameters show very high inter-individual variability (IIV). In this study, the performance...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
BioMed Central
2017
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5709938/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29191177 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12874-017-0427-0 |
_version_ | 1783282877818994688 |
---|---|
author | Pradhan, Sudeep Song, Byungjeong Lee, Jaeyeon Chae, Jung-woo Kim, Kyung Im Back, Hyun-moon Han, Nayoung Kwon, Kwang-il Yun, Hwi-yeol |
author_facet | Pradhan, Sudeep Song, Byungjeong Lee, Jaeyeon Chae, Jung-woo Kim, Kyung Im Back, Hyun-moon Han, Nayoung Kwon, Kwang-il Yun, Hwi-yeol |
author_sort | Pradhan, Sudeep |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: Exploratory preclinical, as well as clinical trials, may involve a small number of patients, making it difficult to calculate and analyze the pharmacokinetic (PK) parameters, especially if the PK parameters show very high inter-individual variability (IIV). In this study, the performance of a classical first-order conditional estimation with interaction (FOCE-I) and expectation maximization (EM)-based Markov chain Monte Carlo Bayesian (BAYES) estimation methods were compared for estimating the population parameters and its distribution from data sets having a low number of subjects. METHODS: In this study, 100 data sets were simulated with eight sampling points for each subject and with six different levels of IIV (5%, 10%, 20%, 30%, 50%, and 80%) in their PK parameter distribution. A stochastic simulation and estimation (SSE) study was performed to simultaneously simulate data sets and estimate the parameters using four different methods: FOCE-I only, BAYES(C) (FOCE-I and BAYES composite method), BAYES(F) (BAYES with all true initial parameters and fixed ω (2)), and BAYES only. Relative root mean squared error (rRMSE) and relative estimation error (REE) were used to analyze the differences between true and estimated values. A case study was performed with a clinical data of theophylline available in NONMEM distribution media. NONMEM software assisted by Pirana, PsN, and Xpose was used to estimate population PK parameters, and R program was used to analyze and plot the results. RESULTS: The rRMSE and REE values of all parameter (fixed effect and random effect) estimates showed that all four methods performed equally at the lower IIV levels, while the FOCE-I method performed better than other EM-based methods at higher IIV levels (greater than 30%). In general, estimates of random-effect parameters showed significant bias and imprecision, irrespective of the estimation method used and the level of IIV. Similar performance of the estimation methods was observed with theophylline dataset. CONCLUSIONS: The classical FOCE-I method appeared to estimate the PK parameters more reliably than the BAYES method when using a simple model and data containing only a few subjects. EM-based estimation methods can be considered for adapting to the specific needs of a modeling project at later steps of modeling. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (10.1186/s12874-017-0427-0) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-5709938 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2017 |
publisher | BioMed Central |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-57099382017-12-06 Performance comparison of first-order conditional estimation with interaction and Bayesian estimation methods for estimating the population parameters and its distribution from data sets with a low number of subjects Pradhan, Sudeep Song, Byungjeong Lee, Jaeyeon Chae, Jung-woo Kim, Kyung Im Back, Hyun-moon Han, Nayoung Kwon, Kwang-il Yun, Hwi-yeol BMC Med Res Methodol Research Article BACKGROUND: Exploratory preclinical, as well as clinical trials, may involve a small number of patients, making it difficult to calculate and analyze the pharmacokinetic (PK) parameters, especially if the PK parameters show very high inter-individual variability (IIV). In this study, the performance of a classical first-order conditional estimation with interaction (FOCE-I) and expectation maximization (EM)-based Markov chain Monte Carlo Bayesian (BAYES) estimation methods were compared for estimating the population parameters and its distribution from data sets having a low number of subjects. METHODS: In this study, 100 data sets were simulated with eight sampling points for each subject and with six different levels of IIV (5%, 10%, 20%, 30%, 50%, and 80%) in their PK parameter distribution. A stochastic simulation and estimation (SSE) study was performed to simultaneously simulate data sets and estimate the parameters using four different methods: FOCE-I only, BAYES(C) (FOCE-I and BAYES composite method), BAYES(F) (BAYES with all true initial parameters and fixed ω (2)), and BAYES only. Relative root mean squared error (rRMSE) and relative estimation error (REE) were used to analyze the differences between true and estimated values. A case study was performed with a clinical data of theophylline available in NONMEM distribution media. NONMEM software assisted by Pirana, PsN, and Xpose was used to estimate population PK parameters, and R program was used to analyze and plot the results. RESULTS: The rRMSE and REE values of all parameter (fixed effect and random effect) estimates showed that all four methods performed equally at the lower IIV levels, while the FOCE-I method performed better than other EM-based methods at higher IIV levels (greater than 30%). In general, estimates of random-effect parameters showed significant bias and imprecision, irrespective of the estimation method used and the level of IIV. Similar performance of the estimation methods was observed with theophylline dataset. CONCLUSIONS: The classical FOCE-I method appeared to estimate the PK parameters more reliably than the BAYES method when using a simple model and data containing only a few subjects. EM-based estimation methods can be considered for adapting to the specific needs of a modeling project at later steps of modeling. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (10.1186/s12874-017-0427-0) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users. BioMed Central 2017-12-01 /pmc/articles/PMC5709938/ /pubmed/29191177 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12874-017-0427-0 Text en © The Author(s). 2017 Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated. |
spellingShingle | Research Article Pradhan, Sudeep Song, Byungjeong Lee, Jaeyeon Chae, Jung-woo Kim, Kyung Im Back, Hyun-moon Han, Nayoung Kwon, Kwang-il Yun, Hwi-yeol Performance comparison of first-order conditional estimation with interaction and Bayesian estimation methods for estimating the population parameters and its distribution from data sets with a low number of subjects |
title | Performance comparison of first-order conditional estimation with interaction and Bayesian estimation methods for estimating the population parameters and its distribution from data sets with a low number of subjects |
title_full | Performance comparison of first-order conditional estimation with interaction and Bayesian estimation methods for estimating the population parameters and its distribution from data sets with a low number of subjects |
title_fullStr | Performance comparison of first-order conditional estimation with interaction and Bayesian estimation methods for estimating the population parameters and its distribution from data sets with a low number of subjects |
title_full_unstemmed | Performance comparison of first-order conditional estimation with interaction and Bayesian estimation methods for estimating the population parameters and its distribution from data sets with a low number of subjects |
title_short | Performance comparison of first-order conditional estimation with interaction and Bayesian estimation methods for estimating the population parameters and its distribution from data sets with a low number of subjects |
title_sort | performance comparison of first-order conditional estimation with interaction and bayesian estimation methods for estimating the population parameters and its distribution from data sets with a low number of subjects |
topic | Research Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5709938/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29191177 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12874-017-0427-0 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT pradhansudeep performancecomparisonoffirstorderconditionalestimationwithinteractionandbayesianestimationmethodsforestimatingthepopulationparametersanditsdistributionfromdatasetswithalownumberofsubjects AT songbyungjeong performancecomparisonoffirstorderconditionalestimationwithinteractionandbayesianestimationmethodsforestimatingthepopulationparametersanditsdistributionfromdatasetswithalownumberofsubjects AT leejaeyeon performancecomparisonoffirstorderconditionalestimationwithinteractionandbayesianestimationmethodsforestimatingthepopulationparametersanditsdistributionfromdatasetswithalownumberofsubjects AT chaejungwoo performancecomparisonoffirstorderconditionalestimationwithinteractionandbayesianestimationmethodsforestimatingthepopulationparametersanditsdistributionfromdatasetswithalownumberofsubjects AT kimkyungim performancecomparisonoffirstorderconditionalestimationwithinteractionandbayesianestimationmethodsforestimatingthepopulationparametersanditsdistributionfromdatasetswithalownumberofsubjects AT backhyunmoon performancecomparisonoffirstorderconditionalestimationwithinteractionandbayesianestimationmethodsforestimatingthepopulationparametersanditsdistributionfromdatasetswithalownumberofsubjects AT hannayoung performancecomparisonoffirstorderconditionalestimationwithinteractionandbayesianestimationmethodsforestimatingthepopulationparametersanditsdistributionfromdatasetswithalownumberofsubjects AT kwonkwangil performancecomparisonoffirstorderconditionalestimationwithinteractionandbayesianestimationmethodsforestimatingthepopulationparametersanditsdistributionfromdatasetswithalownumberofsubjects AT yunhwiyeol performancecomparisonoffirstorderconditionalestimationwithinteractionandbayesianestimationmethodsforestimatingthepopulationparametersanditsdistributionfromdatasetswithalownumberofsubjects |