Comparison of nonlinear mixed-effect and non-parametric expectation maximisation modelling for Bayesian estimation of carboplatin clearance in children
A. Patoux et al., Comparison of nonlinear mixed-effect and non-parametric expectation maximisation modelling for Bayesian estimation of carboplatin clearance in children, EUR J CL PH, 57(4), 2001, pp. 297-303
Objective: The pharmacodynamic-pharmacokinetic relationships for carboplati
n involve the area under the curve of ultrafiltrable plasma concentrations
versus time (AUC). The objective of the study was to compare two specific p
opulation pharmacokinetic methodologies, nonlinear mixed-effect model (NON-
MEM) and non-parametric expectation maximisation (NPEM), when they are appl
ied to sparse carboplatin pharmacokinetic data in order to obtain an indivi
dual value for carboplatin clearance by Bayesian estimation.
Methods: The data from 117 patients (from 1 month to 18 years old) were ava
ilable. For 20 patients randomly selected, the carboplatin clearance obtain
ed by Bayesian estimation using two plasma ultrafiltrable concentrations wa
s compared with that obtained by individual analysis using all concentratio
ns.
Results: Both methodologies were unbiased with mean relative percentage err
ors (95%CI) of -1.9% (-7.8; + 4.1%) and + 6.4% (-2.1; + 14.9%) for NONMEM a
nd NPEM, respectively. A comparison of precision between the two methods sh
owed that they were not significantly different (12.5% for NONMEM, and 18.9
% for NPEM), but the percentage error ranged between -21% and +19% for NONM
EM, and -35% and +42% for NPEM. A NONMEM analysis was also performed with a
ll the data available (117 children) in order to update an equation describ
ing the relationship between carboplatin clearance and the patients' covari
ates. The best relationship corresponded to the equation: clearance (ml/min
) = [4.47 x body weight x (1 -0.22 x Np)/(1 + 0.0156 x Scr)] + 6.4, with bo
dy weight in kilograms and where Scr is serum creatinine in micromoles per
litre and Np = 1 or 0 for unilateral nephrectomy or not, respectively.
Conclusion: These methodologies may be useful for dose individualisation an
d drug monitoring of carboplatin in paediatric patients. Since the mode of
administration of carboplatin in paediatric practice in some protocols is d
aily 1-h i.v. infusion repeated up to five times, dose individualisation ma
y be performed from the clearance observed after the first administration,
given an overall target AUC.