ArticleJournal of pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics2021
The power of modelling pulsatile profiles.
Article in Journal of pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The quantitative description of individual observations in non-linear mixed effects models over time is complicated when the studied biomarker has a pulsatile release (e.g. insulin, growth hormone, luteinizing hormone). Unfortunately, standard non-linear mixed effects population pharmacodynamic models such as turnover and precursor response models (with or without a cosinor component) are unable to quantify these complex secretion profiles over time. In this study, the statistical power of standard statistical methodology such as 6 post-dose measurements or the area under the curve from 0 to 12 h post-dose on simulated dense concentration-time profiles of growth hormone was compared to a deconvolution-analysis-informed modelling approach in different simulated scenarios. The statistical power of the deconvolution-analysis-informed approach was determined with a Monte-Carlo Mapped Power analysis. Due to the high level of intra- and inter-individual variability in growth hormone concentrations over time, regardless of the simulated effect size, only the deconvolution-analysis informed approach reached a statistical power of more than 80% with a sample size of less than 200 subjects per cohort. Furthermore, the use of this deconvolution-analysis-informed modelling approach improved the description of the observations on an individual level and enabled the quantification of a drug effect to be used for subsequent clinical trial simulations.
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.