Re: a potential bug
Hello Leonid,
I checked the data several times. The rates look fine. I'll send the modified
data to Tom.
Thanks,
Pavel
Quoted reply history
----- Original Message -----
From: Leonid Gibiansky
Date: Monday, September 29, 2008 6:31 pm
Subject: Re: [NMusers] a potential bug
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: nmusers
> Pavel,
> It is hard to tell what is going one without seeing the data
> file. The
> first idea is that RATE is incorrectly computed (e.g., incorrect
> time
> units).
> The controls stream and the data files with 1 dose and few
> observed data
> points would allow to check it.
> Thanks
> Leonid
>
> --------------------------------------
> Leonid Gibiansky, Ph.D.
> President, QuantPharm LLC
> web: www.quantpharm.com
> e-mail: LGibiansky at quantpharm.com
> tel: (301) 767 5566
>
>
>
>
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > Hello NONMEM Users,
> >
> >
> >
> > Subjects received IV infusion (study 2), IV injection or SQ
> injection
> > (study1). In addition, I had to inject a dummy (amt=1) dose
> into the
> > 3^rd compartment, which describes the target. 2 studies were
> > integrated. The time-concentration plots looked good for one
> study (IV
> > injection or SC infusion) and meaningless/really bad for the
> other one
> > (IV infusion; population-predicted values were a few-fold
> different
> > from the observed ones). The data look correct. The rate,
> dose, and
> > times look fine (rate=amt/infusion_duration; the first measure
> is taken
> > after the end off infusion). When I set Rate=0 for the second
> study,
> > the outcome looks perfect for both studies; the objective
> function
> > decreased a lot. Because I do not feel comfortable using
> Rate=0, I
> > tried to change the order of the dummy and real doses, set
> time of the
> > real dose to 1 second, etc. Nothing works. It looks like a
> NONMEM bug.
> >
> >
> >
> > Thank you,
> >
> > Pavel
> >
> >
> >
>