Search

When used in real-world conditions, substantial interindividual variations in direct oral anticoagulant (DOAC) plasma concentrations are observed for a given dose, leading to a risk of over- or under-exposure and clinically significant adverse events. Physiologically-based pharmacokinetic (PBPK) models could help physicians to tailor DOAC prescriptions in vulnerable patient populations, such as those in the hospital setting. The present study aims to validate prospectively PBPK models for rivaroxaban and apixaban in a large cohort of elderly, polymorbid, and hospitalized patients. In using a model of geriatric population integrating appropriate physiological parameters into models first optimized with healthy volunteer data, observed plasma concentration collected in hospitalized patients on apixaban (n = 100) and rivaroxaban (n = 100) were adequately predicted (ratio predicted/observed area under the concentration curve for a dosing interval [AUC tau ] = 0.97 [0.96-0.99] geometric mean, 90% confidence interval, ratio predicted/observed AUC tau  = 1.03 [1.02-1.05]) for apixaban and rivaroxaban, respectively. Validation of the present PBPK models for rivaroxaban and apixaban in in-patients represent an additional step toward the feasibility of bedside use., (© 2023 The Authors. CPT: Pharmacometrics & Systems Pharmacology published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of American Society for Clinical Pharmacology and Therapeutics.)

Population pharmacokinetics consists of analyzing pharmacokinetic (PK) data collected in groups of individuals. Population PK is widely used to guide drug development and to inform dose adjustment via therapeutic drug monitoring and model-informed precision dosing. There are 2 main types of population PK methods: parametric (P) and nonparametric (NP). The characteristics of P and NP population methods have been previously reviewed. The aim of this article is to answer some frequently asked questions that are often raised by scholars, clinicians, and researchers about P and NP population PK methods. The strengths and limitations of both approaches are explained, and the characteristics of the main software programs are presented. We also review the results of studies that compared the results of both approaches in the analysis of real data. This opinion article may be informative for potential users of population methods in PK and guide them in the selection and use of those tools. It also provides insights on future research in this area., (© 2021, The American College of Clinical Pharmacology.)

Population pharmacokinetic (popPK) approaches have spread widely throughout clinical pharmacology research, and every clinician should have some understanding of them. After a general introduction on the fundamentals and fields of application of these approaches, this review focuses on parametric popPK methods to provide the clinicians with the conceptual tools to interpret appropriately the results of parametric popPK analyses and to understand their clinical utility. The emphasis is put on the clinical questions that popPK methods are best suited to address. The basic principles of the methodology are introduced first, and then the main algorithms and reference software programs used in such analyses are presented. The description of data analysis and clinical applications of the parametric popPK approach (ie, use in simulations and therapeutic drug monitoring) are illustrated with the example of the antiretroviral drug efavirenz., (© 2020, The American College of Clinical Pharmacology.)

Objective: The reverse transcriptase inhibitor efavirenz is currently used at a fixed dose of 600 mg/d. However, dosage individualization based on plasma concentration monitoring might be indicated. This study aimed to assess the efavirenz pharmacokinetic profile and interpatient versus intrapatient variability in patients who are positive for human immunodeficiency virus, to explore the relationship between drug exposure, efficacy, and central nervous system toxicity and to build up a Bayesian approach for dosage adaptation., Methods: The population pharmacokinetic analysis was performed by use of NONMEM based on plasma samples from a cohort of unselected patients receiving efavirenz. With the use of a 1-compartment model with first-order absorption, the influence of demographic and clinical characteristics on oral clearance and oral volume of distribution was examined. The average drug exposure during 1 dosing interval was estimated for each patient and correlated with markers of efficacy and toxicity. The population kinetic parameters and the variabilities were integrated into a Bayesian equation for dosage adaptation based on a single plasma sample., Results: Data from 235 patients with a total of 719 efavirenz concentrations were collected. Oral clearance was 9.4 L/h, oral volume of distribution was 252 L, and the absorption rate constant was 0.3 h(-1). Neither the demographic covariates evaluated nor the comedications showed a clinically significant influence on efavirenz pharmacokinetics. A large interpatient variability was found to affect efavirenz relative bioavailability (coefficient of variation, 54.6%), whereas the intrapatient variability was small (coefficient of variation, 26%). An inverse correlation between average drug exposure and viral load and a trend with central nervous system toxicity were detected. This enabled the derivation of a dosing adaptation strategy suitable to bring the average concentration into a therapeutic target from 1000 to 4000 microg/L to optimize viral load suppression and to minimize central nervous system toxicity., Conclusions: The high interpatient and low intrapatient variability values, as well as the potential relationship with markers of efficacy and toxicity, support the therapeutic drug monitoring of efavirenz. However, further evaluation is needed before individualization of an efavirenz dosage regimen based on routine drug level monitoring should be recommended for optimal patient management.