ArticleJournal of pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics2013
D optimal designs for three Poisson dose-response models.
Article in Journal of pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The objective of this paper was to find and investigate the performance of the D optimal designs for three Poisson dose-response models. Phase II dose ranging studies are pivotal in the drug development program, being used to select dose(s) for phase III. Count data is encountered in a number of clinical areas. The Poisson distribution provides an intuitive platform for modelling such data, especially when combined with random effects which allow subjects to differ in their response rates. This work investigated three Poisson dose-response models of increasing complexity. A simple E(max) model was used to describe the drug effect, and D optimal designs under a range of different parameter values (scenarios) were found. The relative performances between scenarios were assessed using: the precision of all parameters, the precision of the drug effect parameters, and the percent coefficient of variation (%CV) of the ED(50) parameter. The results showed that the D optimal designs were similar across models and scenarios, with the D optimal designs consisting of placebo, the maximum dose, and a dose just below the ED(50). However the relative performance of the optimal designs was very different. For example, with 1,000 subjects, the %CV of the ED(50) parameter ranged from 1.4 to 91 %. Performance typically improved with higher baseline counts, smaller random effects, and larger E(max). This work introduces a framework for determining and evaluating the performance of D optimal designs for phase II dose ranging studies with count data as the primary endpoint.
Indexed as
Identifiers
23420229What 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.