Evidence map›Paper›PMID 19691369›Full record

ArticleClinical pharmacokinetics2009

Refinement of the population pharmacokinetic model for the monoclonal antibody matuzumab: external model evaluation and simulations.

Katharina Kuester, Andreas Kovar, Christian Lüpfert, Brigitte Brockhaus, Charlotte Kloft

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Clinical pharmacokinetics, 2009. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Review
  5. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Katharina KuesterDepartment of Clinical Pharmacy, Institute of Pharmacy, Freie Universitaet Berlin, Berlin, Germany.
Andreas Kovar
Christian Lüpfert
Brigitte Brockhaus
Charlotte Kloft

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesA developed population pharmacokinetic model of the humanized monoclonal antibody (mAb) matuzumab was evaluated by external evaluation. Based on the estimates of the final model, simulations of different dosing regimens and the covariate effect were performed.

methodsThe development dataset included 90 patients, and the evaluation dataset included 81 patients; the two sets of patients were from three different studies. In all studies, the patients had different types of advanced carcinoma - mainly colon, rectal and pancreatic cancer. They received matuzumab as multiple 1-hour intravenous infusions in a wide range of dosing regimens (development dataset: from 400 mg every 3 weeks to 2000 mg in the first week followed by 1600 mg weekly; evaluation dataset: from 100 mg weekly to 800 mg weekly). In addition to 1256 serum mAb concentrations for model development, there were 1124 concentrations available for model evaluation. Serum concentration-time data were simultaneously fitted using NONMEM software. The developed two-compartment model - with the parameters central volume of distribution (V(1)) and peripheral volume of distribution (V(2)), intercompartmental clearance and linear clearance (CLL), an additional nonlinear elimination pathway (Michaelis-Menten constant: the concentration with the half-maximal elimination rate and V(max): the maximum elimination rate) and covariate relations - was evaluated by an external dataset. Different simulation scenarios were performed to demonstrate the impact of the incorporated covariate effect and the influence of different dosing regimens and dosing strategies on the concentration-time profiles.

resultsThe developed model included the covariate fat-free mass (FFM) on V(1) and on CLL. The evaluation did not support the covariate FFM on V(1) and, after deletion of this covariate, the model parameters of the refined model were estimated. The model showed good precision for all parameters: the relative standard errors (RSEs) were <42% for the development dataset and < or = 51% for the evaluation dataset (excluding the higher RSEs for the correlation between V(2) and V(max) and the interindividual variability on V(2) for the evaluation dataset). The model showed good robustness for the ability to estimate highly precise parameters for the combined dataset of 171 patients (RSE <29%). Simulations revealed that variability in concentration-time profiles for minimum and maximum steady-state concentrations was reduced to a marginal extent by a proposed dose adaptation.

conclusionThe population pharmacokinetic model for matuzumab was improved by evaluation with an external dataset. The new model obtained precise parameter estimates and demonstrated robustness. After correlation with efficacy data simulation results in particular could serve as a tool to guide dose selection for this 'targeted' cancer therapy.

Indexed as

Models, BiologicalAdultAgedAged, 80 and overAntibodies, MonoclonalAntibodies, Monoclonal, HumanizedAntineoplastic AgentsClinical Trials as TopicComputer SimulationData CollectionDrug Administration ScheduleDrug Therapy, CombinationHumansInfusions, IntravenousMiddle AgedNeoplasmsAntibodies, MonoclonalAntibodies, Monoclonal, HumanizedAntineoplastic Agentsmatuzumab

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.