Skip to main content
. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2013 May 1.
Published in final edited form as: J Hepatol. 2012 Jan 13;56(5):1019–1024. doi: 10.1016/j.jhep.2011.12.012

Table 2.

Mean viral kinetic parameters estimated using a population approach

Model t0 [day] ε δ [day−1] η AIC

10+15 mg/kg/day dosing group 20 mg/kg/day dosing group
Blocking infection only Pop. parameters 0** 0 0 3.36 0.40* 232.7
SE 1.30 0.072
Q1–Q3 2.0–5.81 --

Blocking production only Pop. parameters 0.68 0.69 0.91 0.91 0 26.3
SE 0.036 0.13 0.034 0.076
Q1–Q3 0.65–0.73 0.43–0.81 0.72–0.98 0.78–1.03

Blocking production and infection Pop. parameters 0.66 0.49 0.89 0.77 0.60* 16.7
SE 0.11 0.19 0.049 0.075 0.18
Q1–Q3 0.63–0.70 0.24–0.80 0.66–0.98 0.65–0.90
*

Parameter estimated assuming no inter-individual variations; Pop. parameters, parameters estimated using mixed-effect modeling (see Methods);

**

t0 was fixed to zero; SE, standard error; Q1–Q3: first and third quartiles of the distribution of the individual a posteriori estimates (see Supp. Materials); t0, HCV delay before decline begins; ε, SIL effectiveness in blocking viral production/release; δ, HCV-infected cell loss rate; η; SIL effectiveness in blocking viral infection; AIC; Akaike information criterion. The model with the lowest AIC is considered the best.