Mahmood I
Division of Pharmaceutical Evaluation I, Office of Clinical Pharmacology and Biopharmaceutics, Food and Drug Administration, Rockville, MD 20852, USA.
Int J Clin Pharmacol Ther. 2002 Feb;40(2):53-9. doi: 10.5414/cpp40053.
To compare 3 different reduced sampling approaches (truncated area, population and Bayesian; sampling schedule till 48 or 72 hours) with the extensive sampling for the estimation of pharmacokinetic parameters for long half-life drugs in healthy subjects and in patients with renal or hepatic impairment.
Two drugs (extensively metabolized or extensively excreted) whose half-lives were greater than 30 hours were used in this analysis. Pharmacokinetic parameters such as maximum plasma concentration, clearance and half-life were estimated in healthy subjects and in patients using the above-mentioned 3 reduced sampling approaches and then compared with the extensive sampling.
The truncated area method failed to detect the same magnitude of difference in pharmacokinetic parameters between healthy subjects and patient populations that was determined using extensive sampling. On the other hand, the population or Bayesian approach provided the same magnitude of difference in pharmacokinetic parameters between the 2 populations that was observed with extensive sampling.
This study indicates that the truncated area method may be a less suitable method to accurately characterize the pharmacokinetics of a long half-life drug either in healthy subjects or in patients with renal or hepatic impairment compared to a population or Bayesian approach.
