Volume 23, Issue 1 pp. 53-57

Discrepancies in pharmacokinetic analysis results obtained by using two standard population pharmacokinetics software programs

Yaron Finkelstein

Corresponding Author

Yaron Finkelstein

Division of Clinical Pharmacology and Toxicology, Department of Pediatrics, The Hospital for Sick Children, 555 University Avenue, Toronto, Ontario, M5G 1X8, Canada

Division of Emergency Medicine, Department of Pediatrics, The Hospital for Sick Children, 555 University Avenue, Toronto, Ontario, M5G 1X8, Canada

Department of Pediatrics, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada

Clinical Pharmacology Unit, Children’s Hospital Boston, 300 Longwood Avenue, Boston, MA, USA

These authors have made an equal contribution.

*Correspondence and reprints: [email protected]Search for more papers by this author
Alejandro A. Nava-Ocampo

Alejandro A. Nava-Ocampo

Division of Clinical Pharmacology and Toxicology, Department of Pediatrics, The Hospital for Sick Children, 555 University Avenue, Toronto, Ontario, M5G 1X8, Canada

Department of Pharmacology & Toxicology, Faculty of Medicine, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada

PharmaReasons, Toronto, Ontario, Canada

These authors have made an equal contribution.

Search for more papers by this author
Tal Schechter

Tal Schechter

Division of Clinical Pharmacology and Toxicology, Department of Pediatrics, The Hospital for Sick Children, 555 University Avenue, Toronto, Ontario, M5G 1X8, Canada

Department of Pediatrics, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada

Division of Hematology/Oncology, Department of Pediatrics, The Hospital for Sick Children, 555 University Avenue, Toronto, Ontario, M5G 1X8, Canada

Search for more papers by this author
M.D. Ronald Grant

M.D. Ronald Grant

Division of Clinical Pharmacology and Toxicology, Department of Pediatrics, The Hospital for Sick Children, 555 University Avenue, Toronto, Ontario, M5G 1X8, Canada

Department of Pediatrics, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada

Division of Hematology/Oncology, Department of Pediatrics, The Hospital for Sick Children, 555 University Avenue, Toronto, Ontario, M5G 1X8, Canada

Search for more papers by this author
Edith St Pierre

Edith St Pierre

Division of Clinical Pharmacology and Toxicology, Department of Pediatrics, The Hospital for Sick Children, 555 University Avenue, Toronto, Ontario, M5G 1X8, Canada

Search for more papers by this author
Ran Goldman

Ran Goldman

Division of Clinical Pharmacology and Toxicology, Department of Pediatrics, The Hospital for Sick Children, 555 University Avenue, Toronto, Ontario, M5G 1X8, Canada

Division of Emergency Medicine, Department of Pediatrics, The Hospital for Sick Children, 555 University Avenue, Toronto, Ontario, M5G 1X8, Canada

Department of Pediatrics, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada

Search for more papers by this author
Scott Walker

Scott Walker

Division of Clinical Pharmacology and Toxicology, Department of Pediatrics, The Hospital for Sick Children, 555 University Avenue, Toronto, Ontario, M5G 1X8, Canada

Search for more papers by this author
Gideon Koren

Gideon Koren

Division of Clinical Pharmacology and Toxicology, Department of Pediatrics, The Hospital for Sick Children, 555 University Avenue, Toronto, Ontario, M5G 1X8, Canada

Department of Pediatrics, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada

Search for more papers by this author
First published: 24 February 2009
Citations: 4

Abstract

Multiple standard software packages for population pharmacokinetics (PK) modeling are currently available. These programs may significantly vary in the algorithms used for modeling plasma concentrations as a function of time course. We compared the population PK parameters obtained by using two standard software packages, p-pharm and saam ii, for analysis of a similar data set of serum samples of doxorubicin obtained from 11 infants and children with malignant diseases. Plasma drug concentrations were fitted to time by a two-compartment intra-vascular PK model by saam ii and p-pharm programs. The population parameters obtained from the analysis by the two software programs were substantially different. For example, Vd was almost five times larger when using saam ii compared with p-pharm (9.6 L/kg vs. 2.0 L/kg, respectively), whereas t½β was about 30 times larger in the latter (7.7 h vs. 206.9 h, respectively). When considering the results reported from a population PK analysis, validation of the results by different software should be considered, especially when extreme, unexpected values are obtained.

The full text of this article hosted at iucr.org is unavailable due to technical difficulties.