Evidence map›Paper›PMID 22339450›Full record

ArticleClinical pharmacokinetics2012

Therapeutic drug monitoring of imatinib: Bayesian and alternative methods to predict trough levels.

Verena Gotta, Nicolas Widmer, Michael Montemurro, Serge Leyvraz, Amina Haouala, Laurent A Decosterd, Chantal Csajka, Thierry Buclin

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Clinical pharmacokinetics, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 25 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
25citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
3.5field-weighted citation impact, top 7% of its field
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

25 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 56 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Article
  7. Observational
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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

8 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Verena GottaDivision of Clinical Pharmacology and Toxicology, Laboratory Department, Centre Hospitalier Universitaire Vaudois and University of Lausanne, Lausanne, Switzerland.
Nicolas Widmer
Michael Montemurro
Serge Leyvraz
Amina Haouala
Laurent A Decosterd
Chantal Csajka
Thierry Buclin
University Hospital of Lausanne · CHUniversity of Lausanne · CH

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe imatinib trough plasma concentration (C(min)) correlates with clinical response in cancer patients. Therapeutic drug monitoring (TDM) of plasma C(min) is therefore suggested. In practice, however, blood sampling for TDM is often not performed at trough. The corresponding measurement is thus only remotely informative about C(min) exposure.

objectivesThe objectives of this study were to improve the interpretation of randomly measured concentrations by using a Bayesian approach for the prediction of C(min), incorporating correlation between pharmacokinetic parameters, and to compare the predictive performance of this method with alternative approaches, by comparing predictions with actual measured trough levels, and with predictions obtained by a reference method, respectively.

methodsA Bayesian maximum a posteriori (MAP) estimation method accounting for correlation (MAP-ρ) between pharmacokinetic parameters was developed on the basis of a population pharmacokinetic model, which was validated on external data. Thirty-one paired random and trough levels, observed in gastrointestinal stromal tumour patients, were then used for the evaluation of the Bayesian MAP-ρ method: individual C(min) predictions, derived from single random observations, were compared with actual measured trough levels for assessment of predictive performance (accuracy and precision). The method was also compared with alternative approaches: classical Bayesian MAP estimation assuming uncorrelated pharmacokinetic parameters, linear extrapolation along the typical elimination constant of imatinib, and non-linear mixed-effects modelling (NONMEM) first-order conditional estimation (FOCE) with interaction. Predictions of all methods were finally compared with 'best-possible' predictions obtained by a reference method (NONMEM FOCE, using both random and trough observations for individual C(min) prediction).

resultsThe developed Bayesian MAP-ρ method accounting for correlation between pharmacokinetic parameters allowed non-biased prediction of imatinib C(min) with a precision of ±30.7%. This predictive performance was similar for the alternative methods that were applied. The range of relative prediction errors was, however, smallest for the Bayesian MAP-ρ method and largest for the linear extrapolation method. When compared with the reference method, predictive performance was comparable for all methods. The time interval between random and trough sampling did not influence the precision of Bayesian MAP-ρ predictions.

conclusionClinical interpretation of randomly measured imatinib plasma concentrations can be assisted by Bayesian TDM. Classical Bayesian MAP estimation can be applied even without consideration of the correlation between pharmacokinetic parameters. Individual C(min) predictions are expected to vary less through Bayesian TDM than linear extrapolation. Bayesian TDM could be developed in the future for other targeted anticancer drugs and for the prediction of other pharmacokinetic parameters that have been correlated with clinical outcomes.

Indexed as

Bayes TheoremModels, BiologicalAdultAgedAged, 80 and overAntineoplastic AgentsBenzamidesDrug MonitoringFemaleGastrointestinal Stromal TumorsHumansImatinib MesylateLinear ModelsMaleMiddle AgedNonlinear DynamicsAntineoplastic AgentsBenzamidesImatinib MesylatePiperazinesProtein Kinase InhibitorsPyrimidines

Identifiers

PMID22339450
OpenAlexW2227200581

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.