A Bayesian framework for virtual comparative trials and bioequivalence assessments

被引:1
|
作者
Bois, Frederic Y. [1 ]
Brochot, Celine [1 ]
机构
[1] Certara UK Ltd, Certara Predict Technol Div, Sheffield, England
关键词
Bayesian inference; comparative clinical trials; virtual bioequivalence assessment; paliperidone; sensitivity analysis; PALIPERIDONE PALMITATE; POPULATION PHARMACOKINETICS; FORMULATION;
D O I
10.3389/fphar.2024.1404619
中图分类号
R9 [药学];
学科分类号
1007 ;
摘要
Introduction In virtual bioequivalence (VBE) assessments, pharmacokinetic models informed with in vitro data and verified with small clinical trials' data are used to simulate otherwise unfeasibly large trials. Simulated VBE trials are assessed in a frequentist framework as if they were real despite the unlimited number of virtual subjects they can use. This may adequately control consumer risk but imposes unnecessary risks on producers. We propose a fully Bayesian model-integrated VBE assessment framework that circumvents these limitations.Methods We illustrate our approach with a case study on a hypothetical paliperidone palmitate (PP) generic long-acting injectable suspension formulation using a validated population pharmacokinetic model published for the reference formulation. BE testing, study power, type I and type II error analyses or their Bayesian equivalents, and safe-space analyses are demonstrated.Results The fully Bayesian workflow is more precise than the frequentist workflow. Decisions about bioequivalence and safe space analyses in the two workflows can differ markedly because the Bayesian analyses are more accurate.Discussion A Bayesian framework can adequately control consumer risk and minimize producer risk . It rewards data gathering and model integration to make the best use of prior information. The frequentist approach is less precise but faster to compute, and it can still be used as a first step to narrow down the parameter space to explore in safe-space analyses.
引用
收藏
页数:14
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [21] Gender analysis of bioequivalence trials.
    Chen, ML
    Lee, SC
    Ng, MJ
    Schuirmann, D
    CLINICAL PHARMACOLOGY & THERAPEUTICS, 1998, 63 (02) : 145 - 145
  • [22] Detection of data manipulation in bioequivalence trials
    Fuglsang, Anders
    EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF PHARMACEUTICAL SCIENCES, 2021, 156
  • [23] Interval estimation for ratios in bioequivalence trials
    Chen, KW
    Li, G
    Sun, YQ
    Chow, SC
    BIOMETRICAL JOURNAL, 1997, 39 (08) : 989 - 1002
  • [24] On sample size calculation in bioequivalence trials
    Chow, SC
    Wang, HS
    JOURNAL OF PHARMACOKINETICS AND PHARMACODYNAMICS, 2001, 28 (02) : 155 - 169
  • [25] A survey of the likelihood approach to bioequivalence trials
    Choi, Leena
    Caffo, Brian
    Rohde, Charles
    STATISTICS IN MEDICINE, 2008, 27 (24) : 4874 - 4894
  • [27] A scientific and technological framework for evaluating comparative risk in ecological risk assessments
    Johnston, JM
    MODELLING OF ENVIRONMENTAL CHEMICAL EXPOSURE AND RISK, 2001, 2 : 133 - 150
  • [28] A methodological framework for comparative assessments of equipment energy efficiency policy measures
    Blum, Helcio
    Atkinson, Barbara
    Lekov, Alex B.
    ENERGY EFFICIENCY, 2013, 6 (01) : 65 - 90
  • [29] Simulation assessments of statistical aspects of bioequivalence in the pharmaceutical industry
    Patterson, SD
    Jones, B
    PHARMACEUTICAL STATISTICS, 2004, 3 (01) : 13 - 23
  • [30] On Bayesian Analysis and Hypothesis Testing in the Determination of Bioequivalence
    Schuirmann, Donald J.
    Grosser, Stella
    Chattopadhyay, Somesh
    Chow, Shein-Chung
    CLINICAL PHARMACOLOGY & THERAPEUTICS, 2019, 105 (02) : 304 - 306