IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bla/jorssc/v71y2022i2p331-351.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Gaussian process modeling for dissolution curve comparisons

Author

Listed:
  • Tony Pourmohamad
  • Cristian M. Oliva Avilés
  • Robert Richardson

Abstract

Dissolution studies are an integral part of pharmaceutical drug development, yet standard methods for analysing dissolution data are inadequate for capturing the true underlying shapes of the dissolution curves. Methods based on similarity factors, such as the f2 statistic, have been developed to demonstrate comparability of dissolution curves, however, this inability to capture the shapes of the dissolution curves can lead to substantial bias in comparability estimators. In this article, we propose two novel semi‐parametric dissolution curve modeling strategies for establishing the comparability of dissolution curves. The first method relies upon hierarchical Gaussian process regression models to construct an f2 statistic based on continuous time modeling that results in significant bias reduction. The second method uses a Bayesian model selection approach for creating a framework that does not suffer from the limitations of the f2 statistic. Overall, these two methods are shown to be superior to their comparator methods and provide feasible alternatives for similarity assessment under practical limitations. Illustrations highlighting the success of our methods are provided for two motivating real dissolution data sets from the literature, as well as extensive simulation studies.

Suggested Citation

  • Tony Pourmohamad & Cristian M. Oliva Avilés & Robert Richardson, 2022. "Gaussian process modeling for dissolution curve comparisons," Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series C, Royal Statistical Society, vol. 71(2), pages 331-351, March.
  • Handle: RePEc:bla:jorssc:v:71:y:2022:i:2:p:331-351
    DOI: 10.1111/rssc.12535
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/rssc.12535
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/rssc.12535?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:bla:jorssc:v:71:y:2022:i:2:p:331-351. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/rssssea.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.