The authors of González‐Sales et al. 1 have supplied the following correction to their article.
Figure 3 is incorrect. The simulated data suggest the K‐PD approach is in fact biased compared to the PK/PD approach. In the absence of residual variability, the KPD individual predictions are not in a perfect agreement with the observations (panel B). The K‐PD approach is not valid for drugs with non‐linear elimination. This is expected because the “kinetic” components in a K‐PD model, kDE and EDK50, are related to the linear PK parameters of the PK/PD model if a one compartment model with linear elimination after a bolus administration is assumed. In this sense, kDE is equivalent to the ratio between CL and V, and EDK50 is equivalent to the product of EC50 and CL. However, in the case of non‐linear elimination, this relationship cannot be maintained when non‐linear PK parameters such as Vm and Km are introduced.
The corrected figure is provided below:
Reference
- 1. González‐Sales M, Nekka F, Tanguay M, Tremblay P‐O, Li J. Modelling the dose–response relationship: the fair share of pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic information. Br J Clin Pharmacol 2017; 83: 1240–1251. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]