Mats,

A VPC relies on simulation alone - there is no estimation step. Presumably if the population estimate of the % of poor metabolizers is 5% then NONMEM will simulate 5% of the population as a poor metaboliser. There is no Bayesian 'posthoc' step hidden in the way that NONMEM does simulations is there? I had assumed (but have never checked) that if one tabulates the value of MIXEST obtained when using $SIM that the proportion of MIXEST values would not be biased compared to the population value.

Nck

Mats Karlsson wrote:
Hi Leonid,

I would not do it for just the reason you mention. I would not want to
condition my VPC on the model results. Especially as we know that the
subpopulation assignment suffer from the same problems as other empirical
Bayes estimates. "Shrinkage" when it comes to subpopulation assignment will
have the consequence that the larger of (two) subpopulations having a higher
fraction of POSTHOC assignments than the Pmix estimate for that
subpopulation. This is expected and I have often seen it. So you may well
have a situation when the population estimate of poor metabolizers is 5%,
but only 2% are allocated to this subpopulation by the EBE step.

Best regards,
Mats


Mats Karlsson, PhD
Professor of Pharmacometrics
Dept of Pharmaceutical Biosciences
Uppsala University
Box 591
751 24 Uppsala Sweden
phone: +46 18 4714105
fax: +46 18 471 4003


-----Original Message-----
From: Leonid Gibiansky [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Tuesday, April 14, 2009 9:06 PM
To: Mats Karlsson
Cc: 'Satyendra Suryawanshi'; [email protected]
Subject: Re: [NMusers] VPC with Mixture Model

Hi Mats,

Could you elaborate why you would not stratify based on the subpopulations? It seems perfectly reasonable for me to simulate from the model (including random assignment of subpopulations), and then compare "apples to apples": observed subpopulation versus simulated subpopulations. In your example of 5% poor metabolizers, I would plot observed poor metabolizers (as assigned by the model) versus simulated poor metabolizers (as simulated from the model). Indeed, poor metabolizers assignment would be defined by the model, so this VPC will be conditioned on the model posthoc EST prediction, but the remaining parts of the model would be tested by this procedure. If the model is good, VPC should provide good results. It is unclear to me how sensitive this procedure is to model misspecification (in general, I think VPC is less sensitive to model misspecification than other model diagnostics)

Thanks
Leonid

--------------------------------------
Leonid Gibiansky, Ph.D.
President, QuantPharm LLC
web:    www.quantpharm.com
e-mail: LGibiansky at quantpharm.com
tel:    (301) 767 5566




Mats Karlsson wrote:
Dear Satyendra,

Interesting question. I don't think there is much written about this, but I may be wrong. What I would not do is to try to stratify based on estimated subpopulation allocation ("EST"). Rather I would use the same VPCs as if there had been no mixture model. Possibly what you could do is be more careful in your choice of prediction intervals to display. For example, if you have a subpopulation of poor metabolizers of about 5%, displaying only median and interquartile range PIs may not be a good idea.

Best regards,

Mats

Mats Karlsson, PhD

Professor of Pharmacometrics

Dept of Pharmaceutical Biosciences

Uppsala University

Box 591

751 24 Uppsala Sweden

phone: +46 18 4714105

fax: +46 18 471 4003

*From:* [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] *On Behalf Of *Satyendra Suryawanshi
*Sent:* Tuesday, April 14, 2009 6:50 PM
*To:* [email protected]
*Subject:* [NMusers] VPC with Mixture Model

Dear all,

I have a Mixture Model with 2 subpopulation. Now I want to check its prediction. One way to see this is a Visual Predictive Check. My question is, How to perform visual predictive check with mixture model?
I will be thankful for your suggestion and references.

Best regards

Satyendra Suryawanshi, PhD

University of Tennessee Health Science Center



--
Nick Holford, Dept Pharmacology & Clinical Pharmacology
University of Auckland, 85 Park Rd, Private Bag 92019, Auckland, New Zealand
[email protected] tel:+64(9)923-6730 fax:+64(9)373-7090
mobile: +33 64 271-6369 (Apr 6-Jul 17 2009)
http://www.fmhs.auckland.ac.nz/sms/pharmacology/holford


Reply via email to