RE: Error model

From: James G Wright Date: October 05, 2007 technical Source: mail-archive.com
In regard to Navin's original problem, the most likely cause (in most datasets) is that you have some very small F's (NONMEM predictions) at the late time-points, e.g. log (.0001)=-9.2. If your observed value was say .01, this is a hundred-fold difference so the residual is equal to about -4.6. A few of these can inflate your sigma estimate substantially. The next question is not can you fix it, but whether you should. The fix is simply to reset these F to a higher level (e.g half BQL) but this involves creating a discontinuity in the first derivative (e.e a sudden change in the relationship between F and the weighting of a data point, which slightly compromises the original purpose of the log-transformation). If there is significant additive error, then it is better to estimate the model on the absolute scale. In Navin's case the pre-dose time-points (96h post-dose for a drug with a "4h half-life") should be zero unless there is a second compartment. If they are all BQL, it would not be unreasonable to discard them (set MDV=1). The dataset sound very sparse, particularly as end-of-infusion time-points are notoriously noisy in practise. Best regards, James James G Wright PhD Scientist Wright Dose Ltd Tel: 44 (0) 772 5636914 www.wright-dose.com http://www.wright-dose.com/
Quoted reply history
-----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of navin goyal Sent: 04 October 2007 21:20 To: nmusers Subject: [NMusers] Error model Dear Nonmem users, I am analysing a POPPK data with sparse sampling The dosing is an IV infusion over one hour and we have data for time points 0 (predose), 1 (end of infusion) and 2 (one hour post infusion) The drug has a half life of approx 4 hours. The dose is given once every fourth day When I ran my control stream and looked at the output table, I got some IPREDs at time predose time points where the DV was 0 the event ID EVID for these time points was 4 (reset) (almost 20 half lives) I was wondering why did NONMEM predict concentrations at these time points ?? there were a couple of time points like this. I started with untransformed data and fitted my model. but after bootstrapping the errors on etas and sigma were very high. I log transformed the data , which improved the etas but the sigma shot upto more than 100% ( is it because the data is very sparse ??? or I need to use a better error model ???) Are there any other error models that could be used with the log transformed data, apart from the Y=Log(f)+EPS(1) Any suggestions would be appreciated thanks -- --Navin
Oct 04, 2007 Navin Goyal Error model
Oct 05, 2007 Nidal . Alhuniti Re: Error model
Oct 05, 2007 James G Wright RE: Error model
Oct 05, 2007 Leonid Gibiansky Re: Error model
Oct 05, 2007 Matt Fidler Re: Error model
Oct 08, 2007 James G Wright RE: Error model
Oct 09, 2007 Nidal . Alhuniti Re: Error model
Oct 10, 2007 Matt Fidler Re: Error model
Oct 10, 2007 Navin Goyal Re: Error model
Oct 11, 2007 Matt Fidler Re: Error model