Mark,

When you use EVID =3, you reset the system. Time should be set to whatever time 
appears at the new event.(0 in your case).  This option is usually used in 
inter occasion study within an individual record. 

If you use EVID=4, you reset the system and introduce an new dose record. It is 
identical to EVID=3 plus EVID=1.

ID    TIME    EVID...
1    0    1
1    1    0
...   ...   ...
1    0    4



is the same as

 

ID    TIME    EVID...
1    0    1
1    1    0
...   ...   ...
1    0    3
1    0    1



Xia Li

 

 

 

Xia Li

Department of Mathematical Science

University of Cincinnati 

 

 

From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Mark Gutierrez
Sent: 2008年9月24日 14:11
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: [NMusers] dataset codification

 

Dear all, 

 

First of all, thank you for your prompt reply. 

 

 

Following with my doubts. In my case where the time between first and second 
dose is two months, I understand that I could substitute in Time column the 
real time (24hours * 2 months) by 0 when the second dose is administered. Is 
that correct? Or as you mentioned I should include the real time

 

ID    TIME    EVID...
1    0    1
1    1    0
...   ...   ...
1    0    4
...   ...   ...

On the other hand,
In the help guide, when the interoccasion variability example is described, the 
dataset is arranged with EVID = 3 including an extra line previous to the 
second dose (second occasion) and restarting TIME with 0

 

ID    TIME    EVID...
1    0    1
1    1    0
...   ...   ...
1    0    3
1    0    1

1    1    0
...   ...   ...

This could be another solution to my problem. Isn’t it?

 

Thank you again.

Mark

 

 

 

 

 

 

----- Mensaje original ----
De: Sébastien Bihorel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Para: "Willavize, Susan A" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
CC: Mark Gutierrez <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; [email protected]
Enviado: miércoles, 24 de septiembre, 2008 19:03:43
Asunto: Re: [NMusers] dataset codification

You are right Susan: the Time values have to increase within a subject. Using 
EVID=4 allows you to use a more convenient time scale
ex:

ID    TIME    EVID...
1    0    1
1    1    0
...   ...   ...
1    24  4
...   ...   ...

instead of 

ID    TIME    EVID...
1    0    1
1    1    0
...   ...   ...
1    26546    1
...   ...   ...

Assuming you don't have any measurement after 24h during the first period of 
your study.

Willavize, Susan A a écrit : 

I have seen EVID=4 used, but don’t remember the details.  How does the time 
variable look?  I always convert Date and time to a time counting variable that 
starts at 0 time (time of first dose) and always increases within each subject. 
 I recall that when EVID= 4 is used, the time variable does NOT need to restart 
with the second dose.  Do I remember correctly?

 

 

Note I do not include DATE and clock TIME in my NONMEM input, since I have seen 
NONMEM do nefarious things with these.

 

Susan

  _____  

From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Sébastien Bihorel
Sent: Wednesday, September 24, 2008 5:52 AM
To: Mark Gutierrez
Cc: [email protected]
Subject: Re: [NMusers] dataset codification

 

Dear Mark,

You may want to read about "EVID" in the html help. EVID = 4 is what you mean. 
It is a dosing event but implies that the system is reset before the dose is 
introduced into the system.

Sebastien

Mark Gutierrez a écrit : 

Dear all,

 

I am modeling some PK data from one rabbit. And I have some doubts how to 
codify the dataset. The rabbit received different single doses of a drug at 
different times.

 

E.g, 

First of May it received a 100 mg dose i.v. , 

Then, 2 months latter (enough washout period), the first of July, it received 
and oral dose of 100mg..

Finally, after other two months the rabbit received the last oral dose 200mg.

 

I could codify in the TIME column the real times, including the jumps of two 
months, but I think that there is an option in Nonmem to “restart” the dose 
through the dataset.  

 

Could somebody clarify me this point? and perhaps include a simple example of 
dataset.

 

Thank you in advance

Mark

 

 

Reply via email to