Skip to main content
Log in

Estimation of Confidence Intervals for Area Under the Curve from Destructively Obtained Pharmacokinetic Data

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

Abstract

The area under the curve (AUC) of the concentration–time curve for a drug or metabolite, and the variation associated with the AUC, are primary results of most pharmacokinetic (PK) studies. In nonclinical PK studies, it is often the case that experimental units contribute data for only a single time point. In such cases, it is straightforward to apply noncompartmental methods to determine an estimate of the AUC. In this report, we investigate noncompartmental estimation of the AUC using the log-trapezoidal rule during the elimination phase of the concentration–time profile, and we account for the underlying distribution of data at each sampling time. For data that follow a normal distribution, the log-trapezoidal rule is applied to arithmetic means at each time point of the elimination phase of the concentration–time profile. For data that follow a lognormal distribution, as is common with PK data, the log-trapezoidal rule is applied to geometric means at each time point during elimination. Since the log-trapezoidal rule incorporates nonlinear combinations of mean concentrations at each sampling time, obtaining an estimate of the corresponding variation about theAUC is not straightforward. Estimation of this variance is further complicated by the occurrence of lognormal data. First-order approximations to the variance of AUC estimates are derived under the assumptions of normality, and lognormality, of concentrations at each sampling time. AUC estimates and variance approximations are utilized to form confidence intervals. Accuracies of confidence intervals are tested using simulation studies.

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, 2nd ed., Marcel Dekker, New York, 1982.

    Google Scholar 

  2. K. C. Yeh and K. C. Kwan. A comparison of numerical integrating algorithms by trapezoidal, Lagrange, and spline approximation. J. Pharmacokin. Biopharm. 6:79–98 (1978).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. W. L. Chiou. Critical evaluation of the potential error in pharmacokinetic studies using the linear trapezoidal rule method for the calculation of the area under the plasma level-time curve. J. Pharmacokin. Biopharm. 6:539–546 (1978).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. A. J. Bailer. Testing for equality of area under the curves when using destructive measurement techniques. J. Pharmacokin. Biopharm. 16:303–309 (1988).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. J. R. Nedelman, E. Gibiansky, and D. T. W. Lau. Applying Bailer's method for AUC confidence intervals to sparse sampling. Pharm. Res. 12:124–128 (1995).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. S. M. Pai, J. R. Nedelman, G. Hajian, E. Gabiansky, and V. K. Batra. Performance of Bailer's method for AUC confidence intervals from sparse non-normally distributed drug concentrations in toxicokinetic studies. Pharm. Res. 13:1280–1282 (1996).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. J. Yuan. Estimation of variance for AUC in animal studies. J. Pharm. Sci. 82:761–763 (1993).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. J. R. Nedelman and E. Gibiansky. The variance of a better AUC estimator for sparse, destructive sampling in toxicokinetics. J. Pharm. Sci. 85:884–886 (1996).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. H. Heinzl. A note on testing areas under the curve when using destructive measurement techniques. J. Pharmacokin. Biopharm. 24:651–655 (1996).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. A. J. Bailer and S. J. Ruberg. Randomization tests for assessing the equality of area under curves for studies using destructive sampling. J. Applied Toxicol. 16:391–395 (1995).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Y. M. Bishop, M. Feinberg, and P. Holland. Discrete Multivariate Analysis: Theory and Practice, MIT Press, Cambridge, MA, 1975.

    Google Scholar 

  12. B. J. Winer. Statistical Principles in Experimental Design, 2nd ed., McGraw-Hill, New York, 1971.

    Google Scholar 

  13. SAS/STAT Users Guide, Version 6 Edition, SAS Institute, Inc., Cary, NC, 1990.

  14. R. J. Serfling. Approximation Theorems of Mathematical Statistics. Wiley, New York, 1980.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  15. A. C. Cohen and B. J. Whitten. Estimation of the three-parameter lognormal distribution. J. Am. Statist. Assoc. 75:399–404 (1980).

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Gagnon, R.C., Peterson, J.J. Estimation of Confidence Intervals for Area Under the Curve from Destructively Obtained Pharmacokinetic Data. J Pharmacokinet Pharmacodyn 26, 87–102 (1998). https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1023228925137

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1023228925137

Navigation