OT: keep TTT! [PK / PD]

posted by Helmut Homepage – Vienna, Austria, 2013-07-22 16:21 (4369 d 21:35 ago) – Posting: # 11031
Views: 22,190

Dear Yung-jin,

❝ […] I just wondered why you did not respond at that moment.


I was giving a workshop and had limited spare time…

❝ As illustrated, TTT rule may cause extreme bias for λz estimation when the study drug exhibits more than one-compartment PK model, i.e., when it has more than one exponential terms mathematically.


Yes. But still slightly better than R²adj alone – the only one available in commercial software. ;-)

❝ Should I consider to remove TTT from bear first since it is a model-dependent approach?


Please no! Contrary to R²adj TTT is based on PK-grounds. I would not call it model-dependent. OK, it is based on a one-compartment model but the estimation of λz is within the boundaries of NCA, IMHO. For multiple distribution / elimination phases it is the responsibility of the user to select the last loglinear phase visually.

❝ And then we can add it back again when we have clear picture about it.


I think that you should keep it. If we find a reasonable automatic method for >1 compartment you can add it.

Anyhow, I’m not overly optimistic yet – especially if at least one of the following conditions applies:
I started a new thread over there.

Dif-tor heh smusma 🖖🏼 Довге життя Україна! [image]
Helmut Schütz
[image]

The quality of responses received is directly proportional to the quality of the question asked. 🚮
Science Quotes

Complete thread:

UA Flag
Activity
 Admin contact
23,428 posts in 4,929 threads, 1,687 registered users;
56 visitors (0 registered, 56 guests [including 11 identified bots]).
Forum time: 13:56 CEST (Europe/Vienna)

If I’d observed all the rules,
I’d never have got anywhere.    Marilyn Monroe

The Bioequivalence and Bioavailability Forum is hosted by
BEBAC Ing. Helmut Schütz
HTML5