Checking distributional assumptions for pharmacokinetic summary statistics based on simulations with compartmental models
Related Experiment Video
Updated: Mar 14, 2026
![Quantitative [18F]-Naf-PET-MRI Analysis for the Evaluation of Dynamic Bone Turnover in a Patient with Facetogenic Low Back Pain](/_next/image?url=https%3A%2F%2Fcloudfront.jove.com%2FCDNSource%2Fteasers%2F58491.jpg&w=3840&q=50)
Quantitative [18F]-Naf-PET-MRI Analysis for the Evaluation of Dynamic Bone Turnover in a Patient with Facetogenic Low Back Pain
Published on: August 8, 2019
Meiyu Shen1, Estelle Russek-Cohen2, Eric V Slud3,4
1a Center for Drug Evaluation and Research , U.S. Food and Drug Administration , Silver Spring , Maryland , USA.
Abstract:
Bioequivalence (BE) studies are an essential part of the evaluation of generic drugs. The most common in vivo BE study design is the two-period two-treatment crossover design. AUC (area under the concentration-time curve) and Cmax (maximum concentration) are obtained from the observed concentration-time profiles for each subject from each treatment under each sequence. In the BE evaluation of pharmacokinetic crossover studies, the normality of the univariate response variable, e.g. log(AUC)1 or log(Cmax), is often assumed in the literature without much evidence. Therefore, we investigate the distributional assumption of the normality of response variables, log(AUC) and log(Cmax), by simulating concentration-time profiles from two-stage pharmacokinetic models (commonly used in pharmacokinetic research) for a wide range of pharmacokinetic parameters and measurement error structures. Our simulations show that, under reasonable distributional assumptions on the pharmacokinetic parameters, log(AUC) has heavy tails and log(Cmax) is skewed. Sensitivity analyses are conducted to investigate how the distribution of the standardized log(AUC) (or the standardized log(Cmax)) for a large number of simulated subjects deviates from normality if distributions of errors in the pharmacokinetic model for plasma concentrations deviate from normality and if the plasma concentration can be described by different compartmental models.
More Related Videos
Related Concept Videos
Model Approaches for Pharmacokinetic Data: Compartment Models
Two primary types of compartment models are recognized: mammillary and catenary. The more...
Mechanistic Models: Overview of Compartment Models
Model-Independent Approaches for Pharmacokinetic Data: Noncompartmental Analysis
One important characteristic of noncompartmental analyses is that drug exposure increases proportionally with increasing doses. This...
Pharmacokinetic Models: Comparison and Selection Criterion
Physiological models take a detailed approach by considering specific molecular processes. They can predict drug distribution, metabolism, and elimination changes, providing a comprehensive understanding of how drugs interact with the body.
Pharmacokinetic Models: Overview
There are three primary types of models: empirical, compartment, and physiological. Empirical models, with minimal...
Model Approaches for Pharmacokinetic Data: Distributed Parameter Models
The distributed parameter models are specifically designed to account for variations and differences in some drug classes. This model is particularly useful for assessing regional concentrations of anticancer or...

