A physiological approach to renal clearance: From premature neonates to adults

AIMS

We propose using glomerular filtration rate (GFR) as the physiological basis for distinguishing components of renal clearance.

METHODS

Gentamicin, amikacin and vancomycin are thought to be predominantly excreted by the kidneys. A mixed-effects joint model of the pharmacokinetics of these drugs was developed, with a wide dispersion of weight, age and serum creatinine. A dataset created from 18 sources resulted in 27,338 drug concentrations from 9,901 patients. Body size and composition, maturation and renal function were used to describe differences in drug clearance and volume of distribution.

RESULTS

This study demonstrates that GFR is a predictor of two distinct components of renal elimination clearance: (1) GFR clearance associated with normal GFR and (2) non-GFR clearance not associated with normal GFR. All three drugs had GFR clearance estimated as a drug-specific percentage of normal GFR (gentamicin 39%, amikacin 90% and vancomycin 57%). The total clearance (sum of GFR and non-GFR clearance), standardized to 70 kg total body mass, 176 cm, male, renal function 1, was 5.58 L/h (95% confidence interval [CI] 5.50-5.69) (gentamicin), 7.77 L/h (95% CI 7.26-8.19) (amikacin) and 4.70 L/h (95% CI 4.61-4.80) (vancomycin).

CONCLUSIONS

GFR provides a physiological basis for renal drug elimination. It has been used to distinguish two elimination components. This physiological approach has been applied to describe clearance and volume of distribution from premature neonates to elderly adults with a wide dispersion of size, body composition and renal function. Dose individualization has been implemented using target concentration intervention.

Joint longitudinal model-based meta-analysis of FEV1 and exacerbation rate in randomized COPD trials

Model-based meta-analysis (MBMA) is an approach that integrates relevant summary level data from heterogeneously designed randomized controlled trials (RCTs). This study not only evaluated the predictability of a published MBMA for forced expiratory volume in one second (FEV₁) and its link to annual exacerbation rate in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) but also included data from new RCTs. A comparative effectiveness analysis across all drugs was also performed. Aggregated level data were collected from RCTs published between July 2013 and November 2020 (n = 132 references comprising 156 studies) and combined with data used in the legacy MBMA (published RCTs up to July 2013 - n = 142). The augmented data (n = 298) were used to evaluate the predictive performance of the published MBMA using goodness-of-fit plots for assessment. Furthermore, the model was extended including drugs that were not available before July 2013, estimating a new set of parameters. The legacy MBMA model predicted the post-2013 FEV₁ data well, and new estimated parameters were similar to those of drugs in the same class. However, the exacerbation model overpredicted the post-2013 mean annual exacerbation rate data. Inclusion of year when the study started on the pre-treatment placebo rate improved the model predictive performance perhaps explaining potential improvements in the disease management over time. The addition of new data to the legacy COPD MBMA enabled a more robust model with increased predictability performance for both endpoints FEV₁ and mean annual exacerbation rate.

Improved Confidence in a Confirmatory Stage by Application of Item-Based Pharmacometrics Model: Illustration with a Phase III Active Comparator-Controlled Trial in COPD Patients

PURPOSE

The current study aimed to illustrate how a non-linear mixed effect (NLME) model-based analysis may improve confidence in a Phase III trial through more precise estimates of the drug effect.

METHODS

The FULFIL clinical trial was a Phase III study that compared 24 weeks of once daily inhaled triple therapy with twice daily inhaled dual therapy in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). Patient reported outcome data, obtained by using The Evaluating Respiratory Symptoms in COPD (E-RS:COPD) questionnaire, from the FULFIL study were analyzed using an NLME item-based response theory model (IRT). The change from baseline (CFB) in E-RS:COPD total score over 4-week intervals for each treatment arm was obtained using the IRT and compared with published results obtained with a mixed model repeated measures (MMRM) analysis.

RESULTS

The IRT included a graded response model characterizing item parameters and a Weibull function combined with an offset function to describe the COPD symptoms-time course in patients receiving either triple therapy (n = 907) or dual therapy (n = 894). The IRT improved precision of the estimated drug effect compared to MMRM, resulting in a sample size of at least 3.64 times larger for the MMRM analysis to achieve the IRT precision in the CFB estimate.

CONCLUSION

This study shows the advantage of IRT over MMRM with a direct comparison of the same primary endpoint for the two analyses using the same observed clinical trial data, resulting in an increased confidence in Phase III.

Improved Decision-Making Confidence Using Item-Based Pharmacometric Model: Illustration with a Phase II Placebo-Controlled Trial

This study aimed to illustrate how a new methodology to assess clinical trial outcome measures using a longitudinal item response theory–based model (IRM) could serve as an alternative to mixed model repeated measures (MMRM). Data from the EXACT (Exacerbation of chronic pulmonary disease tool) which is used to capture frequency, severity, and duration of exacerbations in COPD were analyzed using an IRM. The IRM included a graded response model characterizing item parameters and functions describing symptom-time course. Total scores were simulated (month 12) using uncertainty in parameter estimates. The 50th (2.5th, 97.5th) percentiles of the resulting simulated differences in average total score (drug minus placebo) represented the estimated drug effect (95%CI), which was compared with published MMRM results. Furthermore, differences in sample size, sensitivity, specificity, and type I and II errors between approaches were explored. Patients received either oral danirixin 75 mg twice daily (n = 45) or placebo (n = 48) on top of standard of care over 52 weeks. A step function best described the COPD symptoms-time course in both trial arms. The IRM improved precision of the estimated drug effect compared to MMRM, resulting in a sample size of 2.5 times larger for the MMRM analysis to achieve the IRM precision. The IRM showed a higher probability of a positive predictive value (34%) than MMRM (22%). An item model–based analysis data gave more precise estimates of drug effect than MMRM analysis for the same endpoint in this one case study.