Skip to main content
Log in

Comparison of some control strategies for three-compartment PK/PD models

  • Published:
Journal of Pharmacokinetics and Biopharmaceutics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

In drug therapy, effective dosage strategies are needed to maintain target drug effects. The relationship between drug dose and drug effect is often described by pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic (PK/PD) models where typically the PK model has a multicompartment form and the PD model is the sigmoidal Emax model. The parameters in the PK/PD model are generally unknown in the individual patient, although prior knowledge may be available and can be updated after measurements of drug effect are taken during the therapy. This fact, together with the complexity of the PK/PD model, makes the control problem complex. This paper investigates several control strategies in the framework of a three-compartment PK model plus an effect site with a PD model. Using computer simulations under different assumptions, we show that a MAP (maximum a posteriori) Bayesian type of strategy is effective, nevertheless in high-risk situations a stochastic control strategy hedging against estimation errors provides better performance at computational cost.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. M. Gibaldi and D. Perrier.Pharmacokinetics, Marcel Dekker, New York, 1982.

    Google Scholar 

  2. C. J. Hull, H. B., Van Beem, K. McLeod, A. Sibbald, and M. J. Watson. A pharmacodynamic model for pancuronium.Br. J. Anaesth. 50:1113–1123 (1978).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. L. B. Sheiner, D. R. Stanski, S. Vozeh, R. D. Miller, and J. Ham. Simultaneous modelling of pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics: Application to d-tubocurarine.Clin. Pharmacol. Ther. 25:358–371 (1979).

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. S. L. Shafer and K. M. Gregg. Algorithms to rapidly achieve and maintain stable drug concentrations at the site of drug effect with a computer-controlled infusion pump.J. Pharmacokin. Biopharm. 20:147–169 (1992).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. P. O. Maitre and D. R. Stanski. Bayesian forecasting improves the prediction of intraoperative plasma concentration of alfentanil.Anesthesiology,69:652–659 (1988).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. L. B. Sheiner, S. Beal, B. Rosenberg, and V. V. Marathe. Forecasting individual pharmacokinetics.Clin. Pharmacol. Ther. 26:294–305 (1979).

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. S. Vozeh, M. Berger, M. Wenk, R. Ritz, and F. Follath. Rapid prediction of individual dosage requirements for lignocaine.Clin. Pharmacokin. 9:353–363 (1984).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. S. Vozeh, R. Hillman, M. Wandell, T. Ludden and L. Sheiner. Computer-assisted drug assay interpretation based on Bayesian estimation of individual pharmacokinetics: Application to lidocaine.Ther. Drug Monit. 7:66–73 (1985).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. S. Vozeh and C. Steiner. Estimates of the population pharmacokinetic parameters and performance of Bayesian feedback: A sensitivity analysis.J. Pharmacokin. Biopharm. 15:511–528 (1987).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. D. P. Heyman and M. J. Sobel.Stochastic Models in Operations Research, McGraw-Hill, New York, 1984.

    Google Scholar 

  11. D. Z. D'Argenio and J. H. Rodman. Targeting the systemic exposure of teniposide in the population and the individual using a stochastic therapeutic objective.J. Pharmacokin. Biopharm. 21:223–251 (1993).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. D. Z. D'Argenio and K. Park. Stochastic control of pharmacodynamic processes with application to terbutaline.Proceedings of the IFAC Symposium, Galveston, TX, 1994, pp. 246–247.

  13. C. Hu, W. S. Lovejoy, and S. L. Shafer. Comparison of some suboptimal control policies in medical drug therapy.Operations Res.

  14. P. O. Maitre, S. Vozeh, J. Heykants, D. A. Thomson, and D. R. Stanski. Population pharmacokinetics of alfentanil: The average dose-plasma concentration relationship and interindividual variability in patients.Anesthesiology 66:3–12 (1987).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. H. Schwilden. A general method for calculating the dosage scheme in linear pharmacokinetics.Eur. J. Clin. Pharmacol. 20:379–383 (1981).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. D. Z. D'Argenio and D. Katz. Application of stochastic control methods to the problem of individualising intravenous thephylline therapy.Biomed. Meas. Inform. Contr. 2(3) (1988).

  17. C. Hu, W. S. Lovejoy, and S. L. Shafer. An efficient control strategy for dosage regimens.J. Pharmocokin. Biopharm. 22:73–94 (1994).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  18. D. P. Bertsekas and S. E. Shreve.Stochastic Optimal Control: The Discrete Time Case, Academic Press, New York, 1978.

    Google Scholar 

  19. K. M. Van Hee,Bayesian control of Markov chains, Mathematical Centre Tract 95, Amsterdam, 1978.

  20. W. S. Lovejoy. Suboptimal policies, with bounds, for parameter adaptive decision processes.Operations Res. 41:583–599 (1993).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. R. W. Jelliffe and A. Schumitzky. Modeling, adaptive control, and optimal drug therapy.Med. Prog. Technol. 16:95–100 (1990).

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. P. E. Gill, W. Murray, and M. H. Wright.Practical Optimization, Academic Press, London, 1981.

    Google Scholar 

  23. S. E. Kern and D. R. Westenskow. Development of a closed loop system for neuromuscular blocking agents given in intensive care.Proceedings of the IFAC Symposium, Galveston, TX, 1994, pp. 172–173.

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Additional information

Partially funded by Palo Alto Institute for Research and Education Inc., and the Veterans Administration Merit Review Program.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Hu, C., Lovejoy, W.S. & Shafer, S.L. Comparison of some control strategies for three-compartment PK/PD models. Journal of Pharmacokinetics and Biopharmaceutics 22, 525–550 (1994). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02353793

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02353793

Key Words

Navigation