uu.seUppsala University Publications
Change search
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf
The influence of underlying assumptions on evaluating the relative merits of concentration-controlled and dose-controlled trials
Uppsala University, Disciplinary Domain of Medicine and Pharmacy, Faculty of Pharmacy, Department of Pharmaceutical Biosciences. (Farmakometri)
Uppsala University, Disciplinary Domain of Medicine and Pharmacy, Faculty of Pharmacy, Department of Pharmaceutical Biosciences. (Farmakometri)
Uppsala University, Disciplinary Domain of Medicine and Pharmacy, Faculty of Pharmacy, Department of Pharmaceutical Biosciences. (Farmakometri)
2009 (English)In: Clinical Pharmacology and Therapeutics, ISSN 0009-9236, E-ISSN 1532-6535, Vol. 86, no 1, 70-76 p.Article in journal (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]

The objective of this study was to assess the relative performances of concentration-controlled trial (CCT) and dose-controlled clinical trial (DCT) designs with varying (i) interindividual variability (IIV) in clearance (CL), (ii) relative clinical importance of rejection and infection episodes, (iii) parameter values for the concentration-effect relationships, (iv) interindividual covariance between exposure and effect relationships, and (v) nonlinearity of the concentration-effect relationship. Different scenarios were simulated and analyzed for DCT and CCT designs, and these were compared with respect to bias, prediction, and power. The DCT design showed superiority across all the scenarios studied, with regard to precision and bias in parameter estimates, precision and bias in the estimate of optimal exposure, and bias in prediction of the therapeutic benefit at estimated optimal exposure. However, when a pharmacokinetic-pharmacodynamic (PKPD) covariance in the parameters was considered, either the variance-equivalent concentration-controlled trial (VCCT) or the DCT was the more useful design. Across a number of scenarios, the DCT design is the more informative one.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
2009. Vol. 86, no 1, 70-76 p.
National Category
Pharmaceutical Sciences
Identifiers
URN: urn:nbn:se:uu:diva-122154DOI: 10.1038/clpt.2009.24ISI: 000267225200014PubMedID: 19279565OAI: oai:DiVA.org:uu-122154DiVA: diva2:308507
Available from: 2010-04-06 Created: 2010-04-06 Last updated: 2017-12-12Bibliographically approved

Open Access in DiVA

No full text

Other links

Publisher's full textPubMed
By organisation
Department of Pharmaceutical Biosciences
In the same journal
Clinical Pharmacology and Therapeutics
Pharmaceutical Sciences

Search outside of DiVA

GoogleGoogle Scholar

doi
pubmed
urn-nbn

Altmetric score

doi
pubmed
urn-nbn
Total: 379 hits
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf