Cargando…

Machine Learning and Pharmacometrics for Prediction of Pharmacokinetic Data: Differences, Similarities and Challenges Illustrated with Rifampicin

Pharmacometrics (PM) and machine learning (ML) are both valuable for drug development to characterize pharmacokinetics (PK) and pharmacodynamics (PD). Pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic (PKPD) analysis using PM provides mechanistic insight into biological processes but is time- and labor-intensive. In...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Keutzer, Lina, You, Huifang, Farnoud, Ali, Nyberg, Joakim, Wicha, Sebastian G., Maher-Edwards, Gareth, Vlasakakis, Georgios, Moghaddam, Gita Khalili, Svensson, Elin M., Menden, Michael P., Simonsson, Ulrika S. H.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: MDPI 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9330804/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35893785
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/pharmaceutics14081530
_version_ 1784758250815619072
author Keutzer, Lina
You, Huifang
Farnoud, Ali
Nyberg, Joakim
Wicha, Sebastian G.
Maher-Edwards, Gareth
Vlasakakis, Georgios
Moghaddam, Gita Khalili
Svensson, Elin M.
Menden, Michael P.
Simonsson, Ulrika S. H.
author_facet Keutzer, Lina
You, Huifang
Farnoud, Ali
Nyberg, Joakim
Wicha, Sebastian G.
Maher-Edwards, Gareth
Vlasakakis, Georgios
Moghaddam, Gita Khalili
Svensson, Elin M.
Menden, Michael P.
Simonsson, Ulrika S. H.
author_sort Keutzer, Lina
collection PubMed
description Pharmacometrics (PM) and machine learning (ML) are both valuable for drug development to characterize pharmacokinetics (PK) and pharmacodynamics (PD). Pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic (PKPD) analysis using PM provides mechanistic insight into biological processes but is time- and labor-intensive. In contrast, ML models are much quicker trained, but offer less mechanistic insights. The opportunity of using ML predictions of drug PK as input for a PKPD model could strongly accelerate analysis efforts. Here exemplified by rifampicin, a widely used antibiotic, we explore the ability of different ML algorithms to predict drug PK. Based on simulated data, we trained linear regressions (LASSO), Gradient Boosting Machines, XGBoost and Random Forest to predict the plasma concentration-time series and rifampicin area under the concentration-versus-time curve from 0–24 h (AUC(0–24h)) after repeated dosing. XGBoost performed best for prediction of the entire PK series (R(2): 0.84, root mean square error (RMSE): 6.9 mg/L, mean absolute error (MAE): 4.0 mg/L) for the scenario with the largest data size. For AUC(0–24h) prediction, LASSO showed the highest performance (R(2): 0.97, RMSE: 29.1 h·mg/L, MAE: 18.8 h·mg/L). Increasing the number of plasma concentrations per patient (0, 2 or 6 concentrations per occasion) improved model performance. For example, for AUC(0–24h) prediction using LASSO, the R(2) was 0.41, 0.69 and 0.97 when using predictors only (no plasma concentrations), 2 or 6 plasma concentrations per occasion as input, respectively. Run times for the ML models ranged from 1.0 s to 8 min, while the run time for the PM model was more than 3 h. Furthermore, building a PM model is more time- and labor-intensive compared with ML. ML predictions of drug PK could thus be used as input into a PKPD model, enabling time-efficient analysis.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-9330804
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2022
publisher MDPI
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-93308042022-07-29 Machine Learning and Pharmacometrics for Prediction of Pharmacokinetic Data: Differences, Similarities and Challenges Illustrated with Rifampicin Keutzer, Lina You, Huifang Farnoud, Ali Nyberg, Joakim Wicha, Sebastian G. Maher-Edwards, Gareth Vlasakakis, Georgios Moghaddam, Gita Khalili Svensson, Elin M. Menden, Michael P. Simonsson, Ulrika S. H. Pharmaceutics Article Pharmacometrics (PM) and machine learning (ML) are both valuable for drug development to characterize pharmacokinetics (PK) and pharmacodynamics (PD). Pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic (PKPD) analysis using PM provides mechanistic insight into biological processes but is time- and labor-intensive. In contrast, ML models are much quicker trained, but offer less mechanistic insights. The opportunity of using ML predictions of drug PK as input for a PKPD model could strongly accelerate analysis efforts. Here exemplified by rifampicin, a widely used antibiotic, we explore the ability of different ML algorithms to predict drug PK. Based on simulated data, we trained linear regressions (LASSO), Gradient Boosting Machines, XGBoost and Random Forest to predict the plasma concentration-time series and rifampicin area under the concentration-versus-time curve from 0–24 h (AUC(0–24h)) after repeated dosing. XGBoost performed best for prediction of the entire PK series (R(2): 0.84, root mean square error (RMSE): 6.9 mg/L, mean absolute error (MAE): 4.0 mg/L) for the scenario with the largest data size. For AUC(0–24h) prediction, LASSO showed the highest performance (R(2): 0.97, RMSE: 29.1 h·mg/L, MAE: 18.8 h·mg/L). Increasing the number of plasma concentrations per patient (0, 2 or 6 concentrations per occasion) improved model performance. For example, for AUC(0–24h) prediction using LASSO, the R(2) was 0.41, 0.69 and 0.97 when using predictors only (no plasma concentrations), 2 or 6 plasma concentrations per occasion as input, respectively. Run times for the ML models ranged from 1.0 s to 8 min, while the run time for the PM model was more than 3 h. Furthermore, building a PM model is more time- and labor-intensive compared with ML. ML predictions of drug PK could thus be used as input into a PKPD model, enabling time-efficient analysis. MDPI 2022-07-22 /pmc/articles/PMC9330804/ /pubmed/35893785 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/pharmaceutics14081530 Text en © 2022 by the authors. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
spellingShingle Article
Keutzer, Lina
You, Huifang
Farnoud, Ali
Nyberg, Joakim
Wicha, Sebastian G.
Maher-Edwards, Gareth
Vlasakakis, Georgios
Moghaddam, Gita Khalili
Svensson, Elin M.
Menden, Michael P.
Simonsson, Ulrika S. H.
Machine Learning and Pharmacometrics for Prediction of Pharmacokinetic Data: Differences, Similarities and Challenges Illustrated with Rifampicin
title Machine Learning and Pharmacometrics for Prediction of Pharmacokinetic Data: Differences, Similarities and Challenges Illustrated with Rifampicin
title_full Machine Learning and Pharmacometrics for Prediction of Pharmacokinetic Data: Differences, Similarities and Challenges Illustrated with Rifampicin
title_fullStr Machine Learning and Pharmacometrics for Prediction of Pharmacokinetic Data: Differences, Similarities and Challenges Illustrated with Rifampicin
title_full_unstemmed Machine Learning and Pharmacometrics for Prediction of Pharmacokinetic Data: Differences, Similarities and Challenges Illustrated with Rifampicin
title_short Machine Learning and Pharmacometrics for Prediction of Pharmacokinetic Data: Differences, Similarities and Challenges Illustrated with Rifampicin
title_sort machine learning and pharmacometrics for prediction of pharmacokinetic data: differences, similarities and challenges illustrated with rifampicin
topic Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9330804/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35893785
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/pharmaceutics14081530
work_keys_str_mv AT keutzerlina machinelearningandpharmacometricsforpredictionofpharmacokineticdatadifferencessimilaritiesandchallengesillustratedwithrifampicin
AT youhuifang machinelearningandpharmacometricsforpredictionofpharmacokineticdatadifferencessimilaritiesandchallengesillustratedwithrifampicin
AT farnoudali machinelearningandpharmacometricsforpredictionofpharmacokineticdatadifferencessimilaritiesandchallengesillustratedwithrifampicin
AT nybergjoakim machinelearningandpharmacometricsforpredictionofpharmacokineticdatadifferencessimilaritiesandchallengesillustratedwithrifampicin
AT wichasebastiang machinelearningandpharmacometricsforpredictionofpharmacokineticdatadifferencessimilaritiesandchallengesillustratedwithrifampicin
AT maheredwardsgareth machinelearningandpharmacometricsforpredictionofpharmacokineticdatadifferencessimilaritiesandchallengesillustratedwithrifampicin
AT vlasakakisgeorgios machinelearningandpharmacometricsforpredictionofpharmacokineticdatadifferencessimilaritiesandchallengesillustratedwithrifampicin
AT moghaddamgitakhalili machinelearningandpharmacometricsforpredictionofpharmacokineticdatadifferencessimilaritiesandchallengesillustratedwithrifampicin
AT svenssonelinm machinelearningandpharmacometricsforpredictionofpharmacokineticdatadifferencessimilaritiesandchallengesillustratedwithrifampicin
AT mendenmichaelp machinelearningandpharmacometricsforpredictionofpharmacokineticdatadifferencessimilaritiesandchallengesillustratedwithrifampicin
AT simonssonulrikash machinelearningandpharmacometricsforpredictionofpharmacokineticdatadifferencessimilaritiesandchallengesillustratedwithrifampicin
AT machinelearningandpharmacometricsforpredictionofpharmacokineticdatadifferencessimilaritiesandchallengesillustratedwithrifampicin