SwePub
Sök i LIBRIS databas

  Extended search

L773:1567 567X OR L773:1573 8744
 

Search: L773:1567 567X OR L773:1573 8744 > Comparison of covar...

  • Chasseloup, EstelleUppsala universitet,Institutionen för farmaceutisk biovetenskap,Uppsala Univ, Fac Pharm, Dept Pharmaceut Biosci, Room BMC B3 4 Biomed Ctr BMC,Husargatan 3,Box 591, S-75124 Uppsala, Sweden. (author)

Comparison of covariate selection methods with correlated covariates : prior information versus data information, or a mixture of both?

  • Article/chapterEnglish2020

Publisher, publication year, extent ...

  • 2020-07-13
  • SPRINGER/PLENUM PUBLISHERS,2020
  • printrdacarrier

Numbers

  • LIBRIS-ID:oai:DiVA.org:uu-439275
  • https://urn.kb.se/resolve?urn=urn:nbn:se:uu:diva-439275URI
  • https://doi.org/10.1007/s10928-020-09700-5DOI

Supplementary language notes

  • Language:English
  • Summary in:English

Part of subdatabase

Classification

  • Subject category:ref swepub-contenttype
  • Subject category:art swepub-publicationtype

Notes

  • The inclusion of covariates in population models during drug development is a key step to understanding drug variability and support dosage regimen proposal, but high correlation among covariates often complicates the identification of the true covariate. We compared three covariate selection methods balancing data information and prior knowledge: (1) full fixed effect modelling (FFEM), with covariate selection prior to data analysis, (2) simplified stepwise covariate modelling (sSCM), data driven selection only, and (3) Prior-Adjusted Covariate Selection (PACS) mixing both. PACS penalizes the a priori less likely covariate model by adding to its objective function value (OFV) a prior probability-derived constant: 2(*) ln(Pr(X)/(1 - Pr(X))), Pr(X) being the probability of the more likely covariate. Simulations were performed to compare their external performance (average OFV in a validation dataset of 10,000 subjects) in selecting the true covariate between two highly correlated covariates: 0.5, 0.7, or 0.9, after a training step on datasets of 12, 25 or 100 subjects (increasing power). With low power data no method was superior, except FFEM when associated with highly correlated covariates (r = 0.9), sSCM and PACS suffering both from selection bias. For high power data, PACS and sSCM performed similarly, both superior to FFEM. PACS is an alternative for covariate selection considering both the expected power to identify an anticipated covariate relation and the probability of prior information being correct. A proposed strategy is to use FFEM whenever the expected power to distinguish between contending models is < 80%, PACS when > 80% but < 100%, and SCM when the expected power is 100%.

Subject headings and genre

Added entries (persons, corporate bodies, meetings, titles ...)

  • Yngman, GunnarUppsala universitet,Institutionen för farmaceutisk biovetenskap,Uppsala Univ, Fac Pharm, Dept Pharmaceut Biosci, Room BMC B3 4 Biomed Ctr BMC,Husargatan 3,Box 591, S-75124 Uppsala, Sweden.(Swepub:uu)gunyn322 (author)
  • Karlsson, MatsUppsala universitet,Institutionen för farmaceutisk biovetenskap,Institutionen för farmaci(Swepub:uu)matskarl (author)
  • Uppsala universitetInstitutionen för farmaceutisk biovetenskap (creator_code:org_t)

Related titles

  • In:Journal of Pharmacokinetics and Pharmacodynamics: SPRINGER/PLENUM PUBLISHERS47:5, s. 485-4921567-567X1573-8744

Internet link

Find in a library

To the university's database

Find more in SwePub

By the author/editor
Chasseloup, Este ...
Yngman, Gunnar
Karlsson, Mats
About the subject
MEDICAL AND HEALTH SCIENCES
MEDICAL AND HEAL ...
and Basic Medicine
and Pharmacology and ...
Articles in the publication
Journal of Pharm ...
By the university
Uppsala University

Search outside SwePub

Kungliga biblioteket hanterar dina personuppgifter i enlighet med EU:s dataskyddsförordning (2018), GDPR. Läs mer om hur det funkar här.
Så här hanterar KB dina uppgifter vid användning av denna tjänst.

 
pil uppåt Close

Copy and save the link in order to return to this view