ArticleJournal of pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics2009
D-optimal designs for parameter estimation for indirect pharmacodynamic response models.
Article in Journal of pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics, 2009. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- The additive damage model: a mathematical model for cellular responses to drug combinations.Journal of theoretical biology · 2014Article
- D optimal designs for three Poisson dose-response models.Journal of pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics · 2013Article
- Lifespan based indirect response models.Journal of pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics · 2012Review
- Tikhonov adaptively regularized gamma variate fitting to assess plasma clearance of inert renal markers.Journal of pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics · 2010Article
- An example of optimal phase II design for exposure response modelling.Journal of pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics · 2010Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
This report generates efficient experimental designs (dose, sampling times) for parameter estimation for four basic physiologic indirect pharmacodynamic response (IDR) models. The principles underlying IDR models and their response patterns have been well described. Each IDR model explicitly contains four parameters, k (in) (production), k (out) (loss), I (max)/S (max) (capacity) and IC (50)/SC (50) (sensitivity). The pharmacokinetics of an IV dose of drug described by a monoexponential function of time with two parameters, V and k (el), is assumed. The random errors in the response variable are assumed to be additive, independent, and normal with zero mean and variance proportional to some power of the mean response. Optimal design theory was used extensively to assess the role of both dose and sampling times. Our designs were generated in Mathematica (ADAPT 5 typically produces identical results). G-optimality was used to verify that the generated designs were indeed D-optimal. Such designs are efficient and robust when good prior knowledge of the estimated parameters is available. The efficiency of unconstrained D-optimal designs (4 dose, sampling time pairs) does not improve much when the drug doses are allowed to differ, compared with constrained single dose designs (4 sampling times) with one maximal feasible dose. Also, explored were efficiencies of alternative study designs and results from parameter misspecification. This analysis substantiates the importance of larger doses yielding greater certainty in parameter estimation in pharmacodynamics.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.