Purves R D
Department of Pharmacology, Medical School, University of Otago, Dunedin, New Zealand.
J Pharmacokinet Biopharm. 1992 Jun;20(3):211-26. doi: 10.1007/BF01062525.
Eleven numerical methods for estimation of AUC (including 4 new methods) and 22 methods for AUMC (including 8 new methods) were tested on large simulated noisy datasets representing bolus, oral and infusion concentration-time profiles. Some methods were unacceptable because their mean error was large; these included a commonly recommended form of the linear trapezoidal rule for AUMC. Others, notably Lagrange and cubic spline methods, were unacceptable because the variance of their estimates was large. These methods should be abandoned. A simple and easily programmed new method, parabolas-through-the-origin then log-trapezoidal rule, performed especially well.
在代表大剂量注射、口服和输注浓度-时间曲线的大型模拟噪声数据集上,测试了11种用于估计AUC的数值方法(包括4种新方法)和22种用于估计AUMC的方法(包括8种新方法)。一些方法不可接受,因为它们的平均误差很大;其中包括一种通常推荐的用于AUMC的线性梯形法则形式。其他方法,特别是拉格朗日方法和三次样条方法,不可接受是因为它们估计值的方差很大。这些方法应该被摒弃。一种简单且易于编程的新方法,即原点抛物线然后对数梯形法则,表现特别出色。