Search

Informative dropout can lead to bias in statistical analyses if not handled appropriately. The objective of this simulation study was to investigate the performance of nonlinear mixed effects models with regard to bias and precision, with and without handling informative dropout. An efficacy variable and dropout depending on that efficacy variable were simulated and model parameters were reestimated, with or without including a dropout model. The Laplace and FOCE-I estimation methods in NONMEM 7, and the stochastic simulations and estimations (SSE) functionality in PsN, were used in the analysis. For the base scenario, bias was low, less than 5% for all fixed effects parameters, when a dropout model was used in the estimations. When a dropout model was not included, bias increased up to 8% for the Laplace method and up to 21% if the FOCE-I estimation method was applied. The bias increased with decreasing number of observations per subject, increasing placebo effect and increasing dropout rate, but was relatively unaffected by the number of subjects in the study. This study illustrates that ignoring informative dropout can lead to biased parameters in nonlinear mixed effects modeling, but even in cases with few observations or high dropout rate, the bias is relatively low and only translates into small effects on predictions of the underlying effect variable. A dropout model is, however, crucial in the presence of informative dropout in order to make realistic simulations of trial outcomes.

BACKGROUND: AZD3043 is a positive allosteric modulator of the γ-aminobutyric acid type A receptor, with sedative and anesthetic properties. We describe a population pharmacokinetic (PK) model of arterial and venous concentrations of AZD3043 and the pharmacodynamic effects on bispectral index (BIS) in healthy volunteers. METHODS: Arterial and venous plasma concentrations of AZD3043 and BIS were measured in 2 clinical studies in 125 healthy volunteers, where AZD3043 was given as a 1-minute bolus (1-6 mg/kg), a 30-minute infusion (1-81 mg/kg/h), or 0.8 + 10, 1 + 15, 3 + 30, and 4 + 40 (mg/kg bolus + mg/kg/h infusion for 30 minutes). Population PK/pharmacodynamic analysis was performed with NONMEM. RESULTS: A recirculatory model, comprising a series of 5 compartments for the transit of drug between venous and arterial plasma, 2 peripheral distribution compartments, and 1 compartment for the nondistributive transit of drug from arterial to venous plasma, described the PK of AZD3043. Systemic clearance was high (2.2 L/min; 95% confidence interval, 2.12-2.25), and apparent volumes of distribution were low, leading to a short elimination half-life. The apparent volumes of distribution of the arterial and peripheral compartments increased with increasing administered dose, giving a total apparent volume of distribution of 15 L after the lowest dose and 37 L after the greatest dose. A sigmoid maximum effect (Emax) model with an EC50 of 15.6 µg/mL and a γ of 1.7 described the relationship between AZD3043 effect-site concentrations and BIS. The between-subject variability in EC50 was 37%. An effect compartment model, with a half-life of the equilibration rate constant ke0 of 1.1 min, described the delay in effect in relation to the arterial plasma concentrations. CONCLUSIONS: AZD3043 had a high clearance and a low apparent volume of distribution, leading to a short half-life. However, the apparent volume of distribution was dose dependent (P < 0.001), leading to an increased

Dose-finding studies in non-oncology areas are usually conducted in Phase II of the development process of a new potential medicine and it is key to choose a good design for such a study, as the results will decide if and how to proceed to Phase III. The present article has focus on the design of a dose-finding study for pain in osteoarthritis patients treated with the TRPV1 antagonist AZD1386. We describe different design alternatives in the planning of this study, the reasoning for choosing the adaptive design and experiences with conduct and interim analysis. Three alternatives were proposed: one single dose-finding study with parallel design, a programme with a smaller Phase Ila study followed by a Phase Ilb dose-finding study, and an adaptive dose-finding study. We describe these alternatives in detail and explain why the adaptive design was chosen for the study. We give insights in design aspects of the adaptive study, which need to be pre-planned, like interim decision criteria, statistical analysis method and setup of a Data Monitoring Committee. Based on the interim analysis it was recommended to stop the study for futility since AZD1386 showed no significant pain decrease based on the primary variable. We discuss results and experiences from the conduct of the study with the novel design approach. Huge cost savings have been done compared to if the option with one dose-finding design for Phase II had been chosen. However, we point out several challenges with this approach., AuthorCount:4