Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2000 May;38(5):449-59.
doi: 10.2165/00003088-200038050-00005.

Impact of population pharmacokinetic-pharmacodynamic analyses on the drug development process: experience at Parke-Davis

Affiliations

Impact of population pharmacokinetic-pharmacodynamic analyses on the drug development process: experience at Parke-Davis

S C Olson et al. Clin Pharmacokinet. 2000 May.

Abstract

Background: Continued scepticism about the benefits of population pharmacokinetics and/or population pharmacodynamics, here referred to collectively as the population approach, hampers its widespread application in drug development. At the same time the sources of this scepticism have not been clearly defined. In an attempt to capture and clearly define these concerns and to help communicate the value of the population approach in drug development at Parke-Davis we conducted a survey of customers within the company. The results of this survey are presented here.

Methods: All drug development programmes conducted over the past 10 years that included a population approach in data analysis and interpretation were identified. A brief description of the population analysis was prepared together with a brief description of how the resulting information was used in each drug development programme. These synopses were forwarded to relevant members of each drug development team together with a survey designed to solicit opinions as to the relevance and impact of these analyses.

Results: The most frequent use of information derived from population-based analysis was in labelling. In all cases of drugs making to New Drug Application (NDA) submission the analyses resulted in information that was included in approved or proposed labelling. In almost half of the cases summarised here (5 of 12), population-based analysis was perceived to have resulted in information that influenced the direction of individual development programmes. In many of these cases the information was serendipitous. It is also noted that most of these analyses were not the result of clearly defined objectives and prospective analysis plans.

Conclusions: Use of the population approach, even when applied retrospectively, may have value in complementing or supporting interpretation of other data collected during the course of a trial. Atypical systemic exposure is quickly and easily assessed for correlation with adverse events or exceptional efficacy in retrospective or ad hoc evaluation. Although we know of no direct evidence, it is possible that such use of population pharmacokinetic data has facilitated NDA review and approval by providing insight into the role of atypical systemic drug exposure in otherwise spurious events.

PubMed Disclaimer

References

    1. Clin Pharmacokinet. 1997 Aug;33(2):142-52 - PubMed
    1. Pharmacotherapy. 1996 Jul-Aug;16(4):638-45 - PubMed
    1. Clin Pharmacokinet. 1997 Apr;32(4):294-312 - PubMed
    1. Pharmacol Ther. 1980;10(1):65-101 - PubMed
    1. J Pharmacokinet Biopharm. 1977 Oct;5(5):445-79 - PubMed

LinkOut - more resources