Skip to main content
Log in

Simultaneous vs. Sequential Analysis for Population PK/PD Data I: Best-Case Performance

  • Published:
Journal of Pharmacokinetics and Pharmacodynamics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Dose [-concentration]-effect relationships can be obtained by fitting a predictive pharmacokinetic (PK)-pharmacodynamic (PD) model to both concentration and effect observations. Either a model can be fit simultaneously to all the data (“simultaneous” method), or first a model can be fit to the PK data and then a model can be fit to the PD data, conditioning in some way on the PK data or on the estimates of the PK parameters (“sequential” method). Using simulated data, we compare the performance of the simultaneous method with that of three sequential method variants with respect to computation time, estimation precision, and inference. Using NONMEM, under various study designs, observations of one type of PK and one type of PD response from different numbers of individuals were simulated according to a one-compartment PK model and direct Emax PD model, with parameters drawn from an appropriate population distribution. The same PK and PD models were fit to these observations using simultaneous and sequential methods. Performance measures include computation time, fraction of cases for which estimates are successfully obtained, precision of PD parameter estimates, precision of PD parameter standard error estimates, and type-I error rates of a likelihood ratio test. With the sequential method, computation time is less, and estimates are more likely to be obtained. Using the First Order Conditional Estimation (FOCE) method, a sequential approach that conditions on both population PK parameter estimates and PK data, estimates PD parameters and their standard errors about as well as the “gold standard” simultaneous method, and saves about 40% computation time. Type-I error rates of likelihood ratio test for both simultaneous and sequential approaches are close to the nominal rates.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

REFERENCES

  1. D. M. Foster. Developing and testing integrated multicompartment models to describe a single-input multiple-output study using the SAAM II software system. Adv. Exp. Med. Biol. 445:59-78 (1998).

    Google Scholar 

  2. J. Bennett and J. Wakefield. Errors-in-variables in joint population pharmacokinetic/ pharmacodynamic modeling. Biometrics 57:803-812 (2001).

    Google Scholar 

  3. Y. Hashimoto and L. B. Sheiner. Designs for population pharmacodynamics: value of pharmacokinetic data and population analysis. J. Pharmacokinet. Biopharm. 19:333-353 (1991).

    Google Scholar 

  4. J. Shi, N. L. Benowitz, C. P. Denaro, and L. B. Sheiner. Pharmacokinetic-pharmacodynamic modeling of caffeine: tolerance to pressor effects. Clin. Pharmacol. Ther. 53:6-14 (1993).

    Google Scholar 

  5. K. E. Fattinger, D. Verotta, H. C. Porchet, A. Munafo, J. Y. Le Cotonnec, and L. B. Sheiner. Modeling a bivariate control system: LH and testosterone response to the GnRH antagonist antide. Am. J. Physiol. 271:E775-787. (1996).

    Google Scholar 

  6. J. R. Wade and M. O. Karlsson. In Population Approach Group Europe, Saintes, France, (1999).

  7. L. Sheiner and J. Wakefield. Population modelling in drug development. Stat. Methods Med. Res. 8:183-193 (1999).

    Google Scholar 

  8. M. Davidian and D. Giltinan. Nonlinear Models for Repeated Measurement Data. Chapman & Hall, London (1995).

    Google Scholar 

  9. H. C. Kimko, S. S. Reele, N. H. Holford, and C. C. Peck. Prediction of the outcome of a phase 3 clinical trial of an antischizophrenic agent (quetiapine fumarate) by simulation with a population pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic model. Clin. Pharmacol. Ther. 68:568-577 (2000).

    Google Scholar 

  10. J. C. Wakefield, L. Aarons, and A. Racine-Poon. The Bayesian approach of population pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic modeling Springer-Verlag, (1998).

  11. L. Zhang, R. Price, F. Aweeka, S. E. Bellibas, and L. B. Sheiner. Making the most of sparse clinical data by using a predictive-model-based analysis, illustrated with a stavudine pharmacokinetic study. Eur. J. Pharm. Sci. 12:377-385. (2001).

    Google Scholar 

  12. M. Gibaldi and D. Perrier. Pharmacokinetics. Marcel Dekker, New York (1982).

    Google Scholar 

  13. M. L. Stein. Large sample properties of simulations using Latin hypercube sampling. Technometrics 29:143-151 (1987).

    Google Scholar 

  14. A. B. Owen. Controlling correlations in Latin hypercube samples. J. Am. Stat. Assoc. 89:1517-1522 (1994).

    Google Scholar 

  15. S. L. Beal and L. B. Sheiner. NONMEM Users Guides. Globomax, Inc., Maryland. (1989-1998).

    Google Scholar 

  16. A. R. Gallant. Nonlinear Statistical Models. John Wiley & Sons, Inc., New York, p. 217(1986).

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Lewis B. Sheiner.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Zhang, L., Beal, S.L. & Sheiner, L.B. Simultaneous vs. Sequential Analysis for Population PK/PD Data I: Best-Case Performance. J Pharmacokinet Pharmacodyn 30, 387–404 (2003). https://doi.org/10.1023/B:JOPA.0000012998.04442.1f

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/B:JOPA.0000012998.04442.1f

Navigation