. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2014 Mar 12.

Published in final edited form as: Clin Pharmacol Ther. 2012 Oct 3;92(5):575–583. doi: 10.1038/clpt.2012.137

Table 1.

Comparison of atazanavir model parameters obtained with three different analyses with respect to dosing histories assumptions. Relative standard errors, expressed in percentages, are given in parenthesis (except for full MEMS where they were not obtained).

PK Parameters	A_ss: SS assumption	A_MEMS: Full MEMS	A_GOLD: Gold standard
CL/F (L/h)	7.2 (4.4)	6.8	6.9 (8.1)
V/F (L)	79.2 (8.9)	102	81.1 (6.8)
ka (h⁻¹)	2.7 (26.8)	5.6	3.2 (42.1)
MTT (h)	1.3 (11.2)	1.5	1.35 (11)
NN	17.3 (46.7)	8	11.5 (26.4)
BSV (CL/F) ^*	47.4 (28.7)	44.3	40.2 (32.7)
WSV (CL/F) ^*	26.5 (16.9)	<1	<1
BSV (V/F) ^*	30.0 (43.2)	61.4	30.1 (28.5)
BSV (ka) ^*	73.5 (47.2)	120	78.4 (73.2)
BSV (MTT) ^*	47.4 (28.7)	40.1	45.2 (31.8)
RV (week 4) ^*	18.7 (16.9)	27.7	19.4 (15.5)
RV (> week 4) ^*	38.0 (33.1)	47.4	43.4 (10.6)

Note: All BSV, WSV and RV are expressed as CV (%).

BSV=Between-subject variability, WSV=Within-subject variability, RV=Residual variability, MTT=mean transit time, NN=number of transit compartments, ka=absorption rate constant