ArticleThe AAPS journal2020
New Model-Based Bioequivalence Statistical Approaches for Pharmacokinetic Studies with Sparse Sampling.
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.
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
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- Model-Integrated Bioequivalence (MIBE) in Generic Drug Research: Can We Ease the Bioequivalence Burden?Pharmaceutics · 2026Review
- Multivariate Adjustments for Average Equivalence Testing.Statistics in medicine · 2025Article
- Development and comparison of model-integrated evidence approaches for bioequivalence studies with pharmacokinetic end points.CPT: pharmacometrics & systems pharmacology · 2024Article
- Evaluation of model-integrated evidence approaches for pharmacokinetic bioequivalence studies using model averaging methods.CPT: pharmacometrics & systems pharmacology · 2024Article
- A Bayesian framework for virtual comparative trials and bioequivalence assessments.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2024Article
- Evaluation of model-based bioequivalence approach for single sample pharmacokinetic studies.CPT: pharmacometrics & systems pharmacology · 2023Article
- Impact of model misspecification on model-based tests in PK studies with parallel design: real case and simulation studies.Journal of pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
13 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
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
Identifiers
33125589What 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.