Hi Matthew,

Very large standard error and bias of Vd suggest that Vd is not well 
identified. Or in other word, your data didn't contain sufficient information 
to fit Vd. Loosely speaking it is a problem of over-parameterization, because 
you have only one measurement point, but you try to fit 2 parameters (Vd and 
clearance).


Zheng

​

________________________________
From: [email protected] <[email protected]> on behalf of 
HUI, Ka Ho <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, 10 November 2015 3:12 PM
To: Kaila, Nitin; Abu Helwa, Ahmad Yousef Mohammad - abuay010; felix 
boakye-agyeman; [email protected]
Subject: [NMusers] RE: Large errors in the estimation of volume of distribution 
(Vd) for sparse data

Thanks for your responses!

Nitin, I encountered an error when generating VPC by PsN. It says “No DV values 
found after filtering original data. At lib/tool/npc.subs.pm line 2215.” What 
does it mean?

Felix, Past published data suggested similar parameter estimates and models 
compared to my final model. This is PO and I fixed Ka at a pre-estimated value 
(So no estimation of fixed or random effect).

Ahmad, Yes. The CV is even larger.

Matthew



From: Abu Helwa, Ahmad Yousef Mohammad - abuay010 
[mailto:[email protected]]
Sent: Tuesday, November 10, 2015 5:34 AM
To: HUI, Ka Ho <[email protected]>; [email protected]
Subject: RE: Large errors in the estimation of volume of distribution (Vd) for 
sparse data

Hi Mathew,

Have you tried using an exponential model for vd ? like this:  Vd = 
TEHTA(1)*EXP(ETA(1))

Ahmad.


From: felix boakye-agyeman [mailto:[email protected]]
Sent: Tuesday, November 10, 2015 12:41 AM
To: HUI, Ka Ho <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: [NMusers] Large errors in the estimation of volume of distribution 
(Vd) for sparse data

Hello,
   Do you have historical data to compare you data to? (Do you know if you are 
hitting a local minimum)
Is this iv or po,  if its po how is your Ka?
You may also be over-parameterized due to your data

From: Kaila, Nitin [mailto:[email protected]]
Sent: Tuesday, November 10, 2015 12:14 AM
To: HUI, Ka Ho <[email protected]>
Subject: RE: Large errors in the estimation of volume of distribution (Vd) for 
sparse data

Matthew.

Construct visual predictive check (VPC) plots, using all the estimates of the 
bootstrap runs, as that will be a more true estimate of overall variability in 
the Cp predictions.

Use the –rawres option in PsN to perform the VPC, and then compare your 
original final model VPC plot with the VPC plot with all estimates of the 
bootstrap.

Nitin

From: [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> 
[mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of HUI, Ka Ho
Sent: Monday, November 9, 2015 9:43 AM
To: [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>
Subject: [NMusers] Large errors in the estimation of volume of distribution 
(Vd) for sparse data


Dear all,

I have some population PK data which are in general very sparse (95% have only 
1 blood sample between 2 successive doses). I developed a population PK model 
with the one-compartment model with 1st order absorption. The progress is 
generally okay except that whenever a random effect, i.e. *(1+ETA(1)), is used 
to describe distribution of Vd, OMEGA would be estimated to be very large 
(around 45% in terms of CV, with 80% Shrinkage), despite statistical 
significance (dOF approx. -5.5). So I dropped the random effect and expressed 
Vd in terms of a single fixed effect. When the final model has come out, I 
performed bootstrap and found that most estimates are accurate except Vd, which 
has a very large standard error and bias (mean 232, bias 49, SE 156), while the 
estimates for CL and other parameters look normal. I then constructed the 
predictive plots for the developed model using both the original estimates 
(i.e. estimates using my original dataset) (#1) and estimates from one of the 
bootstrap runs which has an extreme estimate of Vd (9xx) (#2), and found out 
that the two plots of plasma profiles are quite different in terms of the shape 
(#1 is “taller”, #2 is much flatter) but have similar average Cp.

These seem to be suggesting that given my sparse data, it is impossible to 
require accurate estimations of both CL and Vd. Apart from fixing Vd to a fixed 
value, is there any other possible solutions? Or is there anything that I might 
have overlooked?

Thanks and regards,
Matthew

Reply via email to