Abstract
This study was performed to develop a new nonparametric approach for the estimation of robust tissue-to-plasma ratio from extremely sparsely sampled paired data (ie, one sample each from plasma and tissue per subject). Tissue-to-plasma ratio was estimated from paired/unpaired experimental data using independent time points approach, area under the curve (AUC) values calculated with the naive data averaging approach, and AUC values calculated using sampling based approaches (eg, the pseudoprofile-based bootstrap [PpbB] approach and the random sampling approach [our proposed approach]). The random sampling approach involves the use of a 2-phase algorithm. The convergence of the sampling/resampling approaches was investigated, as well as the robustness of the estimates produced by different approaches. To evaluate the latter, new data sets were generated by introducing outlier(s) into the real data set. One to 2 concentration values were inflated by 10% to 40% from their original values to produce the outliers. Tissue-to-plasma ratios computed using the independent time points approach varied between 0 and 50 across time points. The ratio obtained from AUC values acquired using the naive data averaging approach was not associated with any measure of uncertainty or variability. Calculating the ratio without regard to pairing yielded poorer estimates. The random sampling and pseudoprofile-based bootstrap approaches yielded tissue-to-plasma ratios with uncertainty and variability. However, the random sampling approach, because of the 2-phase nature of its algorithm, yielded more robust estimates and required fewer replications. Therefore, a 2-phase random sampling approach is proposed for the robust estimation of tissue-to-plasma ratio from extremely sparsely sampled data.
Keywords: paired extremely sparsely sampled data, tissue-to-plasma ratio, random sampling approach, pseudoprofile-based approach, convergence, robustness
Full Text
The Full Text of this article is available as a PDF (295.8 KB).
References
- 1.Lindstrom FT, Birkes DS. Estimation of population pharmacokinetic parameters using destructively obtained data: a simulation study of the one compartment open model. Drug Metab Rev. 1984;15:195–264. doi: 10.3109/03602538409015065. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 2.McArthur RD. Parameter estimation in a two compartment population pharmacokinetic model with destructive sampling. Math Biosci. 1988;91:157–173. doi: 10.1016/0025-5564(88)90012-0. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- 3.Mager H, Goller G. Resampling methods in sparse sampling situations in preclinical pharmacokinetic studies. J Pharm Sci. 1998;87:372–378. doi: 10.1021/js970114h. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 4.Efron B. Bootstrap methods: another look at the jackknife. Ann Statist. 1979;7:1–26. doi: 10.1214/aos/1176344552. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- 5.Jones CD, Sun H, Ette EI. Designing cross-sectional pharmacokinetic studies: implications for pediatric and animal studies. Clin Res Regul Affairs. 1996;13(3&4):133–165. doi: 10.3109/10601339609035949. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- 6.Ette EI, Onyiah LC. Estimating inestimable standard errors in population pharmacokinetic studies: the bootstrap with winsorization. Eur J Drug Metab Pharmacokinet. 2002;27:213–224. doi: 10.1007/BF03190460. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]