Scaling Dose-Exposure-Response from Adults to Children

Author(s):  
Ine Skottheim Rusten ◽  
Anna Nordmark ◽  
Susan Cole ◽  
Joseph F. Standing ◽  
Sofia Friberg Hietala ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kaajal Gupta ◽  
Anzar Zulfiqar ◽  
Pushpa Ramu ◽  
Tilak Purohit ◽  
V. Ramasubramanian

Author(s):  
Makoto Morinaga ◽  
Thu Lan Nguyen ◽  
Shigenori Yokoshima ◽  
Koji Shimoyama ◽  
Takashi Morihara ◽  
...  

Since the development of the 5-point verbal and 11-point numerical scales for measuring noise annoyance by the ICBEN Team 6, these scales have been widely used in socio-acoustic surveys worldwide, and annoyance responses have been easily compared internationally. However, both the top two categories of the 5–point verbal scale and the top three ones of the 11-point numerical scale are correspond to high annoyance, so it is difficult to precisely compare annoyance responses. Therefore, we calculated differences in day–evening–night-weighted sound pressure levels (Lden) by comparing values corresponding to 10% highly annoyed (HA) on Lden_%HA curves obtained from measurements in 40 datasets regarding surveys conducted in Japan and Vietnam. The results showed that the Lden value corresponding to 10% HA using the 5-point verbal scale was approximately 5 dB lower than that of the 11-point numerical scale. Thus, some correction is required to compare annoyance responses measured by the 5-point verbal and the 11-point numerical scales. The results of this study were also compared with those of a survey in Switzerland.


BMC Medicine ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 19 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
R. D. McDowell ◽  
C. Hughes ◽  
P. Murchie ◽  
C. Cardwell

Abstract Background Studies systematically screening medications have successfully identified prescription medicines associated with cancer risk. However, adjustment for confounding factors in these studies has been limited. We therefore investigated the association between frequently prescribed medicines and the risk of common cancers adjusting for a range of confounders. Methods A series of nested case-control studies were undertaken using the Primary Care Clinical Informatics Unit Research (PCCIUR) database containing general practice (GP) records from Scotland. Cancer cases at 22 cancer sites, diagnosed between 1999 and 2011, were identified from GP records and matched with up to five controls (based on age, gender, GP practice and date of registration). Odds ratios (OR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) comparing any versus no prescriptions for each of the most commonly prescribed medicines, identified from prescription records, were calculated using conditional logistic regression, adjusting for comorbidities. Additional analyses adjusted for smoking use. An association was considered a signal based upon the magnitude of its adjusted OR, p-value and evidence of an exposure-response relationship. Supplementary analyses were undertaken comparing 6 or more prescriptions versus less than 6 for each medicine. Results Overall, 62,109 cases and 276,580 controls were included in the analyses and a total of 5622 medication-cancer associations were studied across the 22 cancer sites. After adjusting for comorbidities 2060 medicine-cancer associations for any prescription had adjusted ORs greater than 1.25 (or less than 0.8), 214 had a corresponding p-value less than or equal to 0.01 and 118 had evidence of an exposure-dose relationship hence meeting the criteria for a signal. Seventy-seven signals were identified after additionally adjusting for smoking. Based upon an exposure of 6 or more prescriptions, there were 118 signals after adjusting for comorbidities and 82 after additionally adjusting for smoking. Conclusions In this study a number of novel associations between medicine and cancer were identified which require further clinical and epidemiological investigation. The majority of medicines were not associated with an altered cancer risk and many identified signals reflected known associations between medicine and cancer.


2015 ◽  
Vol 73 (3) ◽  
pp. 780-789 ◽  
Author(s):  
Robert Benson ◽  
David Berry ◽  
James Lockey ◽  
William Brattin ◽  
Timothy Hilbert ◽  
...  

Rheumatology ◽  
2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Yen Lin Chia ◽  
Linda Santiago ◽  
Bing Wang ◽  
Denison Kuruvilla ◽  
Shiliang Wang ◽  
...  

Abstract Objectives The randomized, double-blind, phase 2 b MUSE study evaluated the efficacy and safety of the type I interferon receptor antibody anifrolumab (300 mg or 1000 mg every 4 weeks) compared with placebo for 52 weeks in patients with chronic, moderate to severe SLE. Characterizing the exposure–response relationship of anifrolumab in MUSE will enable selection of its optimal dosage regimen in two phase 3 studies in patients with SLE. Methods The exposure–response relationship, pharmacokinetics (PK), and SLE Responder Index (SRI[4]) efficacy data were analysed using a population approach. A dropout hazard function was also incorporated into the SRI(4) model to describe the voluntary patient withdrawals during the 1-year treatment period. Results The population PK model found that type I IFN test–high patients, and patients with a higher body weight, had significantly greater clearance of anifrolumab. Stochastic clinical simulations demonstrated that doses <300 mg would lead to a greater-than-proportional reduction in drug exposure owing to type I interferon alpha receptor–mediated drug clearance (antigen-sink effect, more rapid drug clearance at lower concentrations) and suboptimal SRI(4) responses with wider confidence intervals. Conclusions Based on PK, efficacy, and safety considerations, anifrolumab 300 mg every 4 weeks was recommended as the optimal dosage for pivotal phase 3 studies in patients with SLE.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document