• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

作为基于模型的Meta分析中综合模型诊断工具的偏残差图

Partial Residual Plots as an Integrated Model Diagnostic Tool in Model-Based Meta-Analysis.

作者信息

Maringwa John, Diderichsen Paul Matthias, Valiathan Chandni

机构信息

Clinical Pharmacology and Pharmacometrics, Janssen-Cilag BV, Breda, The Netherlands.

Certara USA Inc, Radnor, Pennsylvania, USA.

出版信息

Clin Pharmacol Ther. 2025 Jan;117(1):153-161. doi: 10.1002/cpt.3418. Epub 2024 Sep 8.

DOI:10.1002/cpt.3418
PMID:39245866
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC11652818/
Abstract

The use of partial residual plots (PRPs) was explored as a model diagnostic tool in Model-based Meta-Analysis (MBMA). Mathematical derivations illustrating the concepts were followed by an MBMA example using publicly available literature data of anti-depressive treatments with fluoxetine and venlafaxine. An E dose-response model was identified for venlafaxine while a constant drug effect combining all dose levels vs. placebo was identified for fluoxetine. The larger the mean baseline Hamilton Depression Rating (HAMD) score, the larger the expected drug effect (P = 0.0122), based on the likelihood ratio test. Mean baseline HAMD score (range) was 25.4 (23.5, 29.4) and 20.8 (15, 26) while mean placebo change from baseline (range) was -9.02 (-12.2, -4.8) and - 6.22 (-10.9, -1.3) for venlafaxine and fluoxetine, respectively. Average baseline HAMD score appeared larger for venlafaxine compared to fluoxetine, albeit a wider range for fluoxetine. Placebo response seemed lower but also more variable in fluoxetine compared to venlafaxine studies. Observed data points tended to deviate from model predictions when the mean baseline HAMD and placebo response values associated with those data points differed substantially from the corresponding values used for the model prediction. Normalizing observed data addressed this, providing a "like-to-like" comparison with model predictions in PRP when assessing the effect of one covariate (dose) after normalizing for other covariates/effects (placebo response and mean baseline). PRPs provide a robust integrated diagnostic tool in MBMA that uses all data to show the correlation between response and any covariate while controlling for other covariates included in the model.

摘要

在基于模型的荟萃分析(MBMA)中,探索了使用部分残差图(PRP)作为一种模型诊断工具。在给出说明这些概念的数学推导之后,是一个MBMA实例,该实例使用了有关氟西汀和文拉法辛抗抑郁治疗的公开文献数据。为文拉法辛确定了一个E剂量反应模型,而对于氟西汀,确定了一个将所有剂量水平与安慰剂相结合的恒定药物效应。基于似然比检验,平均基线汉密尔顿抑郁量表(HAMD)评分越高,预期的药物效应越大(P = 0.0122)。文拉法辛和氟西汀的平均基线HAMD评分(范围)分别为25.4(23.5,29.4)和20.8(15,26),而从基线开始的平均安慰剂变化(范围)分别为-9.02(-12.2,-4.8)和-6.22(-10.9,-1.3)。与氟西汀相比,文拉法辛的平均基线HAMD评分似乎更高,尽管氟西汀的范围更广。与文拉法辛研究相比,氟西汀的安慰剂反应似乎更低,但变化也更大。当与这些数据点相关的平均基线HAMD和安慰剂反应值与用于模型预测的相应值有很大差异时,观察到的数据点往往会偏离模型预测。对观察到的数据进行归一化解决了这个问题,在对其他协变量/效应(安慰剂反应和平均基线)进行归一化之后,在PRP中提供了与模型预测的“同类对同类”比较。PRP在MBMA中提供了一种强大的综合诊断工具,该工具使用所有数据来显示反应与任何协变量之间的相关性,同时控制模型中包含的其他协变量。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/4ac6/11652818/5ba2184febd5/CPT-117-153-g001.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/4ac6/11652818/486aed47f4b1/CPT-117-153-g003.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/4ac6/11652818/b159860ba17e/CPT-117-153-g004.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/4ac6/11652818/b43e452194fd/CPT-117-153-g002.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/4ac6/11652818/5ba2184febd5/CPT-117-153-g001.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/4ac6/11652818/486aed47f4b1/CPT-117-153-g003.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/4ac6/11652818/b159860ba17e/CPT-117-153-g004.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/4ac6/11652818/b43e452194fd/CPT-117-153-g002.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/4ac6/11652818/5ba2184febd5/CPT-117-153-g001.jpg

相似文献

1
Partial Residual Plots as an Integrated Model Diagnostic Tool in Model-Based Meta-Analysis.作为基于模型的Meta分析中综合模型诊断工具的偏残差图
Clin Pharmacol Ther. 2025 Jan;117(1):153-161. doi: 10.1002/cpt.3418. Epub 2024 Sep 8.
2
Venlafaxine XR demonstrates higher rates of sustained remission compared to fluoxetine, paroxetine or placebo.与氟西汀、帕罗西汀或安慰剂相比,文拉法辛缓释剂显示出更高的持续缓解率。
Int Clin Psychopharmacol. 2005 Jul;20(4):233-8. doi: 10.1097/00004850-200507000-00007.
3
A double-blind, placebo-controlled study of venlafaxine and fluoxetine in geriatric outpatients with major depression.一项关于文拉法辛和氟西汀治疗老年重度抑郁症门诊患者的双盲、安慰剂对照研究。
Am J Geriatr Psychiatry. 2006 Apr;14(4):361-70. doi: 10.1097/01.JGP.0000194645.70869.3b.
4
Once-daily venlafaxine extended release (XR) compared with fluoxetine in outpatients with depression and anxiety. Venlafaxine XR 360 Study Group.每日一次的文拉法辛缓释剂(XR)与氟西汀治疗抑郁和焦虑门诊患者的比较。文拉法辛XR 360研究组。
J Clin Psychiatry. 1999 Jan;60(1):22-8. doi: 10.4088/jcp.v60n0105.
5
Venlafaxine extended-release: a review of its use in the management of major depression.文拉法辛缓释剂:用于治疗重度抑郁症的综述
CNS Drugs. 2001;15(8):643-69. doi: 10.2165/00023210-200115080-00007.
6
Duloxetine compared with fluoxetine and venlafaxine: use of meta-regression analysis for indirect comparisons.度洛西汀与氟西汀和文拉法辛的比较:使用Meta回归分析进行间接比较。
BMC Psychiatry. 2006 Jul 24;6:30. doi: 10.1186/1471-244X-6-30.
7
A double-blind comparison of venlafaxine and fluoxetine in patients hospitalized for major depression and melancholia. The Venlafaxine French Inpatient Study Group.文拉法辛与氟西汀治疗重度抑郁和 melancholia 住院患者的双盲对照研究。文拉法辛法国住院患者研究组。
Int Clin Psychopharmacol. 1994 Sep;9(3):139-43. doi: 10.1097/00004850-199409000-00001.
8
The effect of venlafaxine compared with other antidepressants and placebo in the treatment of major depression: a meta-analysis.文拉法辛与其他抗抑郁药及安慰剂相比治疗重度抑郁症的疗效:一项荟萃分析。
Eur Arch Psychiatry Clin Neurosci. 2009 Apr;259(3):172-85. doi: 10.1007/s00406-008-0849-0. Epub 2009 Jan 22.
9
Randomized, double-blind comparison of venlafaxine and fluoxetine in outpatients with major depression.文拉法辛与氟西汀治疗门诊重性抑郁症的随机双盲对照研究
J Clin Psychiatry. 1998 Jul;59(7):352-7. doi: 10.4088/jcp.v59n0703.
10
Comparing venlafaxine extended release and fluoxetine for preventing the recurrence of major depression: results from the PREVENT study.比较文拉法辛缓释剂和氟西汀预防复发性重度抑郁症:PREVENT 研究结果。
J Psychiatr Res. 2011 Mar;45(3):412-20. doi: 10.1016/j.jpsychires.2010.07.009.

本文引用的文献

1
Applications of Model-Based Meta-Analysis in Drug Development.基于模型的荟萃分析在药物研发中的应用。
Pharm Res. 2022 Aug;39(8):1761-1777. doi: 10.1007/s11095-022-03201-5. Epub 2022 Feb 16.
2
Model-Based Meta-Analysis of Relapsing Mouse Model Studies from the Critical Path to Tuberculosis Drug Regimens Initiative Database.基于模型的抗结核药物方案关键路径数据库复发小鼠模型研究的荟萃分析。
Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2022 Mar 15;66(3):e0179321. doi: 10.1128/AAC.01793-21. Epub 2022 Jan 31.
3
V ACHER: Visualization of complex trial data in pharmacometric analyses with covariates.
VACHER:协变量的药代动力学分析中复杂试验数据的可视化。
CPT Pharmacometrics Syst Pharmacol. 2021 Sep;10(9):1092-1106. doi: 10.1002/psp4.12679. Epub 2021 Aug 6.
4
Characterizing Effects of Antidiabetic Drugs on Heart Rate, Systolic and Diastolic Blood Pressure.描述抗糖尿病药物对心率、收缩压和舒张压的影响。
Clin Pharmacol Ther. 2021 Jun;109(6):1583-1592. doi: 10.1002/cpt.2130. Epub 2020 Dec 23.
5
Meta-Analyses of Clinical Efficacy of Risankizumab and Adalimumab in Chronic Plaque Psoriasis: Supporting Evidence of Risankizumab Superiority.利纳西珠单抗和阿达木单抗治疗慢性斑块型银屑病的临床疗效的荟萃分析:利纳西珠单抗优势的支持证据。
Clin Pharmacol Ther. 2020 Feb;107(2):435-442. doi: 10.1002/cpt.1624. Epub 2019 Nov 8.
6
Quantitative Evaluations of Time-Course and Treatment Effects of Systemic Agents for Psoriasis: A Model-Based Meta-Analysis.银屑病全身用药的时间进程和治疗效果的定量评估:基于模型的荟萃分析
Clin Pharmacol Ther. 2017 Dec;102(6):1006-1016. doi: 10.1002/cpt.732. Epub 2017 Jun 21.
7
Utilization of model-based meta-analysis to delineate the net efficacy of taspoglutide from the response of placebo in clinical trials.利用基于模型的荟萃分析,从临床试验中安慰剂的反应来描绘塔司葡萄糖的净疗效。
Saudi Pharm J. 2015 Jul;23(3):241-9. doi: 10.1016/j.jsps.2014.11.008. Epub 2014 Nov 24.
8
Pharmacometric Approaches to Guide Dose Selection of the Novel GPR40 Agonist TAK-875 in Subjects With Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus.用于指导新型 GPR40 激动剂 TAK-875 在 2 型糖尿病患者中剂量选择的药物代谢动力学方法。
CPT Pharmacometrics Syst Pharmacol. 2013 Jan 9;2(1):e22. doi: 10.1038/psp.2012.23.
9
A novel model-based meta-analysis to indirectly estimate the comparative efficacy of two medications: an example using DPP-4 inhibitors, sitagliptin and linagliptin, in treatment of type 2 diabetes mellitus.一种新的基于模型的荟萃分析方法,用于间接估计两种药物的比较疗效:以 DPP-4 抑制剂西他列汀和利格列汀治疗 2 型糖尿病为例。
BMJ Open. 2013 Mar 5;3(3):e001844. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2012-001844.
10
Model-based meta-analysis for comparative efficacy and safety: application in drug development and beyond.基于模型的疗效和安全性比较的荟萃分析:在药物开发及其他领域的应用。
Clin Pharmacol Ther. 2011 Dec;90(6):766-9. doi: 10.1038/clpt.2011.242.