ISSN:
1432-1041
Keywords:
Key words Methotrexate
;
Rheuma; Bayesian estimation
;
pharmacokinetic parameters
;
P-PHARM software
Source:
Springer Online Journal Archives 1860-2000
Topics:
Chemistry and Pharmacology
,
Medicine
Notes:
Abstract This paper describes a methodology to calculate methotrexate (MTX) pharmacokinetic parameters after intramuscular administration using two samples and the population parameters. Total and free MTX were measured over a 36-h period in 56 rheumatoid arthritis patients; 14 patients were studied after a two-dose scheme at 15-day intervals. The Hill equation was used to relate the free MTX to the total MTX changes in plasma concentrations, and a two-compartment open model was used to fit the total MTX plasma concentrations. A non-linear mixed effect procedure was used to estimate the population parameters and to explore the interindividual variability in relation to the following covariables: age, weight, height, haemoglobin, erythrocyte sedimentation rate, platelet count, creatinine clearance, rheumatoid factor, C-reactive protein, swelling joint count, and Ritchie’s articular index. Population parameters were evaluated for 40 patients using a three-step approach. The population average parameters and the interindividual variabilities expressed as coefficients of variation (CV%) were: CL, 6.94 l ⋅ h−1 (20.5%); V, 34.8 l (32.2%); k12, 0.0838 h−1 (47.7%); k21, 0.0769 h−1 (61.6%); ka, 4.31 h−1 (58%); Emax, 1.12 μmol ⋅ l−1 (19.7%); γ, 0.932 (12.3%); and EC50, 2.14 μmol ⋅ l−1 (27.3%). Thirty additional data sets (16 new patients and 14 patients of the previous population but treated on a separate occasion) were used to evaluate the predictive performance of the population parameters. Twelve blood samples were collected from each individual in order to calculate individual parameters using standard fitting procedures. These values were compared to the ones estimated using a Bayesian approach with population parameters as a priori information together with two samples, selected from the individual observations. The results show that the bias was not statistically different from zero and the precision of these parameters was excellent.
Type of Medium:
Electronic Resource
URL:
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/BF00226329
Permalink
