Performance in population models for count data, part II: A new SAEM algorithm

Analysis of count data from clinical trials using mixed effect analysis has recently become widely used. However, algorithms available for the parameter estimation, including LAPLACE and Gaussian quadrature (GQ), are associated with certain limitations, including bias in parameter estimates and the long analysis runtime. The stochastic approximation expectation maximization (SAEM) algorithm has proven to be a very efficient and powerful tool in the analysis of continuous data. The aim of this study was to implement and investigate the performance of a new SAEM algorithm for application to count data. A new SAEM algorithm was implemented in MATLAB for estimation of both, parameters and the Fisher information matrix. Stochastic Monte Carlo simulations followed by re-estimation were performed according to scenarios used in previous studies (part I) to investigate properties of alternative algorithms (Plan et al., 2008, Abstr 1372 [http://wwwpage-meetingorg/?abstract=1372]). A single scenario was used to explore six probability distribution models. For parameter estimation, the relative bias was less than 0.92% and 4.13% for fixed and random effects, for all models studied including ones accounting for over- or under-dispersion. Empirical and estimated relative standard errors were similar, with distance between them being <1.7% for all explored scenarios. The longest CPU time was 95 s for parameter estimation and 56 s for SE estimation. The SAEM algorithm was extended for analysis of count data. It provides accurate estimates of both, parameters and standard errors. The estimation is significantly faster compared to LAPLACE and GQ. The algorithm is implemented in Monolix 3.1, (beta-version available in July 2009).

[1]  France Mentré,et al.  Metrics for External Model Evaluation with an Application to the Population Pharmacokinetics of Gliclazide , 2006, Pharmaceutical Research.

[2]  Yaning Wang,et al.  Derivation of various NONMEM estimation methods , 2008, Journal of Pharmacokinetics and Pharmacodynamics.

[3]  Mats O. Karlsson,et al.  Modelling overdispersion and Markovian features in count data , 2009, Journal of Pharmacokinetics and Pharmacodynamics.

[4]  Mats O. Karlsson,et al.  Performance in population models for count data, part I: maximum likelihood approximations , 2009, Journal of Pharmacokinetics and Pharmacodynamics.

[5]  Siv Jönsson,et al.  Estimating Bias in Population Parameters for Some Models for Repeated Measures Ordinal Data Using NONMEM and NLMIXED , 2004, Journal of Pharmacokinetics and Pharmacodynamics.

[6]  Marc Lavielle,et al.  Maximum likelihood estimation in nonlinear mixed effects models , 2005, Comput. Stat. Data Anal..

[7]  R. Savic,et al.  Importance of Shrinkage in Empirical Bayes Estimates for Diagnostics: Problems and Solutions , 2009, The AAPS Journal.

[8]  Marc Lavielle,et al.  Estimation of Population Pharmacokinetic Parameters of Saquinavir in HIV Patients with the MONOLIX Software , 2007, Journal of Pharmacokinetics and Pharmacodynamics.

[9]  Mats O. Karlsson,et al.  Assessment of Actual Significance Levels for Covariate Effects in NONMEM , 2001, Journal of Pharmacokinetics and Pharmacodynamics.

[10]  Evaluation of Mixture Modeling with Count Data Using NONMEM , 2003, Journal of Pharmacokinetics and Pharmacodynamics.

[11]  Robert J. Bauer,et al.  A survey of population analysis methods and software for complex pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic models with examples , 2007, The AAPS Journal.

[12]  Xh Huang,et al.  Pharmacometrics: The Science of Quantitative Pharmacology. , 2007 .

[13]  Comprar Pharmacometrics: The Science of Quantitative Pharmacology | Paul J. Williams | 9780471677833 | Wiley , 2007 .