Skip to main content

Advertisement

Log in

Performance of Nonlinear Mixed Effects Models in the Presence of Informative Dropout

  • Research Article
  • Published:
The AAPS Journal Aims and scope Submit manuscript

ABSTRACT

Informative dropout can lead to bias in statistical analyses if not handled appropriately. The objective of this simulation study was to investigate the performance of nonlinear mixed effects models with regard to bias and precision, with and without handling informative dropout. An efficacy variable and dropout depending on that efficacy variable were simulated and model parameters were reestimated, with or without including a dropout model. The Laplace and FOCE-I estimation methods in NONMEM 7, and the stochastic simulations and estimations (SSE) functionality in PsN, were used in the analysis. For the base scenario, bias was low, less than 5% for all fixed effects parameters, when a dropout model was used in the estimations. When a dropout model was not included, bias increased up to 8% for the Laplace method and up to 21% if the FOCE-I estimation method was applied. The bias increased with decreasing number of observations per subject, increasing placebo effect and increasing dropout rate, but was relatively unaffected by the number of subjects in the study. This study illustrates that ignoring informative dropout can lead to biased parameters in nonlinear mixed effects modeling, but even in cases with few observations or high dropout rate, the bias is relatively low and only translates into small effects on predictions of the underlying effect variable. A dropout model is, however, crucial in the presence of informative dropout in order to make realistic simulations of trial outcomes.

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.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Heyting A, Tolboom JT, Essers JG. Statistical handling of drop-outs in longitudinal clinical trials. Stat Med. 1992;11(16):2043–61.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Siddiqui O, Hung HM, O'Neill R. MMRM vs. LOCF: a comprehensive comparison based on simulation study and 25 NDA datasets. J Biopharm Stat. 2009;19(2):227–46.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Laird NM. Missing data in longitudinal studies. Stat Med. 1988;7(1–2):305–15.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Rubin DB. Inference and missing data. Biometrika. 1976;63:581–92.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Little RJA, Rubin DB. Statistical analysis with missing data. New York: Wiley; 1987.

    Google Scholar 

  6. Gastonguay MR, French JL, Heitjan DF, Rogers JA, Ahn JE, Ravva P. Missing data in model-based pharmacometric applications: points to consider. J Clin Pharmacol. 2010;50(9 Suppl):63S–74.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Hu C, Sale ME. A joint model for nonlinear longitudinal data with informative dropout. J Pharmacokinet Pharmcodyn. 2003;30(1):83–103.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Gomeni R, Lavergne A, Merlo-Pich E. Modelling placebo response in depression trials using a longitudinal model with informative dropout. Eur J Pharm Sci. 2009;36(1):4–10.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Hu C, Szapary PO, Yeilding N, Zhou H. Informative dropout modeling of longitudinal ordered categorical data and model validation: application to exposure-response modeling of physician's global assessment score for ustekinumab in patients with psoriasis. J Pharmacokinet Pharmacodyn. 2011;38(2):237–60.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Friberg LE, de Greef R, Kerbusch T, Karlsson MO. Modeling and simulation of the time course of asenapine exposure response and dropout patterns in acute schizophrenia. Clin Pharmacol Ther. 2009;86(1):84–91.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Bjornsson MA, Simonsson USH. Modelling of pain intensity and informative dropout in a dental pain model after naproxcinod, naproxen and placebo administration. Br J Clin Pharmacol. 2011;71(6):899–906.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Beal SLSL, Boeckmann AJ. NONMEM users guides. Ellicott City: ICON Development Solutions; 1989–2006.

    Google Scholar 

  13. Lindbom L, Pihlgren P, Jonsson EN. PsN-Toolkit—a collection of computer intensive statistical methods for non-linear mixed effect modeling using NONMEM. Comput Methods Programs Biomed. 2005;79(3):241–57.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Jonsson EN, Karlsson MO. Xpose—an S-PLUS based population pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic model building aid for NONMEM. Comput Methods Programs Biomed. 1999;58(1):51–64.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

AstraZeneca is gratefully thanked for supporting this work.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Marcus A. Björnsson.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Björnsson, M.A., Friberg, L.E. & Simonsson, U.S.H. Performance of Nonlinear Mixed Effects Models in the Presence of Informative Dropout. AAPS J 17, 245–255 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1208/s12248-014-9700-x

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1208/s12248-014-9700-x

KEY WORDS

Navigation