Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33125589›Full record

ArticleThe AAPS journal2020

New Model-Based Bioequivalence Statistical Approaches for Pharmacokinetic Studies with Sparse Sampling.

Florence Loingeville, Julie Bertrand, Thu Thuy Nguyen, Satish Sharan, Kairui Feng, Wanjie Sun, Jing Han, Stella Grosser, Liang Zhao, Lanyan Fang and 3 more

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in The AAPS journal, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed
–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

7 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
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

13 authors.

Florence LoingevilleUniversity of Paris, IAME INSERM, UMR 1137, 75018, Paris, France. florence.loingeville@univ-lille.fr.ORCID 0000-0002-4278-2974
Julie BertrandUniversity of Paris, IAME INSERM, UMR 1137, 75018, Paris, France.
Thu Thuy NguyenUniversity of Paris, IAME INSERM, UMR 1137, 75018, Paris, France.
Satish SharanDivision of Quantitative Methods and Modeling, Office of Research Standards, Office of Generic Drugs, Center for Drug Evaluation and Research, Food and Drug Administration, Silver Spring, Maryland, 20993, USA.
Kairui FengDivision of Quantitative Methods and Modeling, Office of Research Standards, Office of Generic Drugs, Center for Drug Evaluation and Research, Food and Drug Administration, Silver Spring, Maryland, 20993, USA.
Wanjie SunOffice of Biostatistics, Office of Translational Sciences, Center for Drug Evaluation and Research, Food and Drug Administration, Silver Spring, Maryland, 20993, USA.
Jing HanOffice of Biostatistics, Office of Translational Sciences, Center for Drug Evaluation and Research, Food and Drug Administration, Silver Spring, Maryland, 20993, USA.
Stella GrosserOffice of Biostatistics, Office of Translational Sciences, Center for Drug Evaluation and Research, Food and Drug Administration, Silver Spring, Maryland, 20993, USA.
Liang ZhaoDivision of Quantitative Methods and Modeling, Office of Research Standards, Office of Generic Drugs, Center for Drug Evaluation and Research, Food and Drug Administration, Silver Spring, Maryland, 20993, USA.
Lanyan FangDivision of Quantitative Methods and Modeling, Office of Research Standards, Office of Generic Drugs, Center for Drug Evaluation and Research, Food and Drug Administration, Silver Spring, Maryland, 20993, USA.
Kathrin MöllenhoffDepartment of Mathematics, Ruhr-Universitat Bochum, Bochum, Germany.
Holger DetteDepartment of Mathematics, Ruhr-Universitat Bochum, Bochum, Germany.
France MentréUniversity of Paris, IAME INSERM, UMR 1137, 75018, Paris, France.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

In traditional pharmacokinetic (PK) bioequivalence analysis, two one-sided tests (TOST) are conducted on the area under the concentration-time curve and the maximal concentration derived using a non-compartmental approach. When rich sampling is unfeasible, a model-based (MB) approach, using nonlinear mixed effect models (NLMEM) is possible. However, MB-TOST using asymptotic standard errors (SE) presents increased type I error when asymptotic conditions do not hold. In this work, we propose three alternative calculations of the SE based on (i) an adaptation to NLMEM of the correction proposed by Gallant, (ii) the a posteriori distribution of the treatment coefficient using the Hamiltonian Monte Carlo algorithm, and (iii) parametric random effects and residual errors bootstrap. We evaluate these approaches by simulations, for two-arms parallel and two-period, two-sequence cross-over design with rich (n = 10) and sparse (n = 3) sampling under the null and the alternative hypotheses, with MB-TOST. All new approaches correct for the inflation of MB-TOST type I error in PK studies with sparse designs. The approach based on the a posteriori distribution appears to be the best compromise between controlled type I errors and computing times. MB-TOST using non-asymptotic SE controls type I error rate better than when using asymptotic SE estimates for bioequivalence on PK studies with sparse sampling.

Indexed as

Equivalence Trials as TopicModels, BiologicalTherapeutic EquivalencyComputer SimulationHumansMonte Carlo MethodNonlinear Dynamicsbioequivalencenon-asymptotic standard errornonlinear mixed effects modelpharmacokineticstwo one-sided tests

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.