Back to the Top
The following message was posted to: PharmPK
TO: PharmPK
On May 19, 2005, I asked Nick Holford (Department of Pharmacology &
Clinical Pharmacology at the University of Auckland in New Zealand) and
Hans Proost (Department of Pharmacokinetics and Drug Delivery at the
University Centre for Pharmacy in the Netherlands) what they meant by a
"standard two-stage" (STS) model? I appreciated their efforts in
sharing information with viewers of PharmPK, but they started a
discussion that I could not follow, in part because of nomenclature.
"STS" in a risk assessment context (more my field), implies the use of a
filtered Poisson model (e.g., Suresh Moolgavkar's "two-stage" model).
However, their comments suggested that my inference was incorrect.
They kindly replied individually with messages, which I edited and will
share with the note group as follows:
(A) Nick Holford:
If you search with Google for "standard two stage pharmacokinetic" gives
many hits illustrating its wide spread use in the PK field. I believe
this name was first proposed here Rowland M, Sheiner LB, Steimer JL.
Variability in drug therapy: description, estimation, and control. New
York: Raven Press; 1985.
The two stage method is:
1. Estimate parameters from each individual, e.g., Clearance (CL) and
volume (V)
2. Calculate the average and standard deviation for each parameter
across the sample of individuals.
The average is an estimate of the population mean CL and the standard
deviation is an estimate of the population parameter variability (PPV)
(both between and within subject).
The standard two stage method stops at this point. The estimates of the
means are expected to be OK, but the PPV is upwardly biased because it
includes the (wanted) between and within subject variability and the
(unwanted) uncertainty arising from the imprecision of the individual
estimates.
Details of this and other methods can be found here: Racine-Poon A,
Wakefield J. Statistical methods for population pharmacokinetic
modeling. Stat Methods Med Res 1998;7(1):63-84.
http://www.ingentaconnect.com/content/arn/sm/1998/00000007/00000001/art00006
(B) Hans Proost:
The PharmPK group often uses terms and abbreviations without explaining
what is meant. This is quite practical and efficient as long as
everybody understands the same. Of course this is not always the case,
and a question like yours may be helpful to be more clear.
In my view, the 'standard two-stage' (STS) approach (or method; not
'model') in population analysis (or shortly 'STS analysis') is the
following. We have data (in PK: drug concentration measurements) from a
number of individuals, and we want to make a description of the
pharmacokinetic behavior of a drug in this 'population', i.e., to derive
'typical' values (usually mean values) for the parameters of a
pharmacokinetic (mathematical) model describing (in PK) the time course
of drug concentration in plasma, and their interindividual standard
deviation. In addition, correlation between parameters and influence of
patient covariate (weight, age, gender etcetera) can be investigated.
STS works as follows:
Step 1: Analyse the data for each individual separately, and estimate
(calculate, fit) the parameters of the model for each individual without
taking into account the data from other individuals.
Step 2: Calculate 'typical' values (usually mean values; or geometric
mean in case a lognormal distribution is assumed), standard deviations,
correlations, etcetera from the set of individual parameters obtained in
step 1.
STS is what one would do without any knowledge of 'population analysis',
and this was indeed the way population analysis was done until around
1980, when mixed effect modeling was introduced by Sheiner and Beal. In
the same period also more refined two-stage methods were derived,
including the Iterative Two-Stage Bayesian approach (Steimer JL, Mallet
A, Golmard JL, Boisvieux JF. Alternative approaches to estimation of
population pharmacokinetic parameters: comparison with the nonlinear
mixed-effect model. Drug Metab. Rev. 1984; 15:265-292).
So, my use of the term STS refers to population pharmacokinetics (and
pharmacodynamics).
---
Daniel M. Byrd III, Ph.D., D.A.B.T.
Deputy Director
Life Sciences Research Office
9650 Rockville Pike
Bethesda, MD 20814-3998
(301)634-7034 phone
(301)634-7876 fax
byrdd.-at-.lsro.org email
at home:
8370 Greensboro Drive
McLean, VA 22102-3500
(703)848-0100
byrdd.-at-.cox.net
Back to the Top
The following message was posted to: PharmPK
Daniel,
It seems that Hans and I share the same view of what STS means in the
field of PK.
Would you like to inform us about your statement:
"STS" in a risk assessment context (more my field), implies the use of a
filtered Poisson model (e.g., Suresh Moolgavkar's "two-stage" model)."
What do you mean by:
1. Risk assessment
2. Poisson model
3. Filtered Poisson model
4. Suresh Moolgavkar's "two-stage" model
5. So, my use of the term STS refers to population pharmacokinetics (and
pharmacodynamics).
?
Statement 5 is particularly puzzling because STS (as defined by Hans and
me) can be applied in any field so what is the point of saying it refers
to population PK and PD?
Nick
PharmPK Discussion List Archive Index page
Copyright 1995-2010 David W. A. Bourne (david@boomer.org)