PubMed HealthSearch

PubMed · 9145382

A comparative computer simulation study of three different sparse-sampling methods for the estimation of steady-state area under the concentration-time curve (AUC) and maximum concentration (Cmax) in toxicokinetics.

Abstract

A limited-sampling method is proposed to estimate the area under the curve (AUC) of concentration versus time and maximum concentration (Cmax) following single or multiple oral doses of a hypothetical drug. The plasma concentration versus time data sets for 50 animals were generated by simulation. The limited-sampling model (LSM) was developed with samples from 10 animals at a single time point. The model was validated in another 40 animals who received either a 500-mg single dose or multiple doses orally. The model provided good population mean estimates of AUC and Cmax. The proposed method was compared with the existing two methods; they are, naive sampling (five time points) and optimal sampling (three time points). The method described here may be useful in estimating AUC and Cmax with one or two samples in toxicokinetic studies following single or multiple oral dosing without detailed pharmacokinetic studies.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

I Mahmood. 1997. A comparative computer simulation study of three different sparse-sampling methods for the estimation of steady-state area under the concentration-time curve (AUC) and maximum concentration (Cmax) in toxicokinetics.. https://doi.org/10.1021/js960450i

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related citations

Comparison of Neoral and Sandimmun cyclosporin A pharmacokinetic profiles in young renal transplant recipients.

A major factor influencing whole blood cyclosporin A levels in young children with renal transplants is the variable absorption of Sandimmun (SIM). Neoral (NEO) is a new microemulsion of cyclosporin A (CYA) that has been reported to have better absorption characteristics. We compared the pharmacokinetics of SIM and NEO in nine renal transplant recipients aged less than 11 years (range 4.8-10.9 years) and observed clinical parameters during 6 months of NEO therapy. Median CYA dosage was 149 mg/m2 per day (range 98-226). We observed an increase in the maximum CYA concentration (Cmax) of 114%, an increase in area under the curve (AUC) of 71% and the time to reach Cmax was reduced from 1.75 h to 1.25 h with NEO, while 12-h trough levels (C12 h) did not change significantly. AUC correlated with C12 h for SIM (r2 = 0.833) and NEO (r2 = 0.699) and also C1.5 h for NEO (r2 = 0.775). During 24 weeks' follow-up, the coefficient of variation of CYA levels was lower for NEO (13%) than for SIM (20%). Although CYA dosages at the start and the end of 6 months on NEO were similar, only one patient was maintained on a constant dose. Four patients had acute reversible rises in plasma creatinine which responded to a 11% reduction in NEO dose; their increase in AUC was greater than those patients not showing a rise in plasma creatinine. Overall, median plasma creatinine was unchanged at the end of the study. NEO was well tolerated by the patients; temporary nausea and headache were experienced by three patients and one of them stopped NEO after 20 days. Other biochemical parameters were not significantly different on NEO.

Area Under Curve

Sampling variability of nonparametric estimates of the areas under receiver operating characteristic curves: an update.

RATIONALE AND OBJECTIVES: Several methods have been proposed for calculating the variances and covariances of nonparametric estimates of the area under receiver operating characteristic curves (AUC). The authors provide an explanation of the relationships between them and illustrate the factors that determine sampling variability. METHODS: The authors investigated the algebraic links between two methods, that of "placements" and that of "pseudovalues" based on jackknifing. They also performed a numerical investigation of the comparative performance of the two methods. RESULTS: The "placement" method has a simple structure that illustrates the determinants of the sampling variability and does not require specialized software. The authors show that the pseudovalues used in the jackknife method are directly linked to the placement values. CONCLUSION: Because of the close link, borne out in a numeric investigation of the sampling variation, and because of the ease of computation, the choice between the two methods can be based on users' preferences. For indexes other than the AUC, however, the use of pseudovalues holds greater promise.

Area Under Curve