Key result
Including interoccasion variability (IOV) in generating empirical Bayes estimates but excluding it when calculating future doses was the most precise forecasting method for dose individualization.
Why the study?
This study aimed to assess approaches to handle interoccasion variability in a model-based therapeutic drug monitoring context, using a population pharmacokinetic model of coagulation factor VIII as an example.
What is the best approach to handle interoccasion variability in model-based dose individualization using therapeutic drug monitoring data?
What is the best approach to handle interoccasion variability in model-based dose individualization using therapeutic drug monitoring data?
The best approach to handle interoccasion variability in model-based dose individualization is to include it when generating empirical Bayes estimates but exclude it when calculating future doses.
AIMS: This study aims to assess approaches to handle interoccasion variability (IOV) in a model-based therapeutic drug monitoring (TDM) context, using a population pharmacokinetic model of coagulation factor VIII as example. METHODS: We assessed 5 model-based TDM approaches: empirical Bayes estimates (EBEs) from a model including IOV, with individualized doses calculated based on individual parameters either (i) including or (ii) excluding variability related to IOV; and EBEs from a model excluding IOV by (iii) setting IOV to zero, (iv) summing variances of interindividual variability (IIV) and IOV into a single IIV term, or (v) re-estimating the model without IOV. The impact of varying IOV magnitudes (0-50%) and number of occasions/observations was explored. The approaches were compared with conventional weight-based dosing. Predictive performance was assessed with the prediction error percentiles. RESULTS: percentile of the prediction error [P50] <7.4%), but the precision varied substantially between IOV magnitudes (P97.5 61-528%). Approach (ii) was the most precise forecasting method across a wide range of scenarios, particularly in case of sparse sampling or high magnitudes of IOV. Weight-based dosing led to less precise predictions than the model-based TDM approaches in most scenarios. CONCLUSIONS: Based on the studied scenarios and theoretical expectations, the best approach to handle IOV in model-based dose individualization is to include IOV in the generation of the EBEs but exclude the portion of unexplained variability related to IOV in the individual parameters used to calculate the future dose.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Abrantes et al. (2019) studied Pharmacokinetic modeling (coagulation factor VIII). Model-based therapeutic drug monitoring approaches handling interoccasion variability vs. Conventional weight-based dosing was evaluated on Predictive performance assessed with prediction error percentiles. Including interoccasion variability (IOV) in generating empirical Bayes estimates but excluding it when calculating future doses was the most precise forecasting method for dose individualization.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: