IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bla/biomet/v64y2008i3p877-885.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Stepwise Confidence Intervals for Monotone Dose–Response Studies

Author

Listed:
  • Jianan Peng
  • Chu‐In Charles Lee
  • Karelyn A. Davis
  • Weizhen Wang

Abstract

Summary In dose–response studies, one of the most important issues is the identification of the minimum effective dose (MED), where the MED is defined as the lowest dose such that the mean response is better than the mean response of a zero‐dose control by a clinically significant difference. Dose–response curves are sometimes monotonic in nature. To find the MED, various authors have proposed step‐down test procedures based on contrasts among the sample means. In this article, we improve upon the method of Marcus and Peritz (1976, Journal of the Royal Statistical Society, Series B38, 157–165) and implement the dose–response method of Hsu and Berger (1999, Journal of the American Statistical Association94, 468–482) to construct the lower confidence bound for the difference between the mean response of any nonzero‐dose level and that of the control under the monotonicity assumption to identify the MED. The proposed method is illustrated by numerical examples, and simulation studies on power comparisons are presented.

Suggested Citation

  • Jianan Peng & Chu‐In Charles Lee & Karelyn A. Davis & Weizhen Wang, 2008. "Stepwise Confidence Intervals for Monotone Dose–Response Studies," Biometrics, The International Biometric Society, vol. 64(3), pages 877-885, September.
    • Handle: RePEc:bla:biomet:v:64:y:2008:i:3:p:877-885
    DOI: 10.1111/j.1541-0420.2007.00958.x
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1541-0420.2007.00958.x
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/j.1541-0420.2007.00958.x?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
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Miwa, Tetsuhisa & Hayter, A. J. & Liu, Wei, 2000. "Calculations of level probabilities for normal random variables with unequal variances with applications to Bartholomew's test in unbalanced one-way models," Computational Statistics & Data Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 34(1), pages 17-32, July.
    2. Charles W. Dunnett, 1989. "Multivariate Normal Probability Integrals with Product Correlation Structure," Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series C, Royal Statistical Society, vol. 38(3), pages 564-579, November.
    3. M. Hellmich & W. Lehmacher, 2005. "Closure Procedures for Monotone Bi-Factorial Dose–Response Designs," Biometrics, The International Biometric Society, vol. 61(1), pages 269-276, March.
    4. F. Bretz & J. C. Pinheiro & M. Branson, 2005. "Combining Multiple Comparisons and Modeling Techniques in Dose-Response Studies," Biometrics, The International Biometric Society, vol. 61(3), pages 738-748, September.
    5. Lee, Chu-In Charles & Peng, Jianan & Liu, Lin, 2006. "Statistical Inference for the Difference Between the Best Treatment Mean and a Control Mean," Journal of the American Statistical Association, American Statistical Association, vol. 101, pages 1050-1058, September.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Wright, F.T. & Nashimoto, Kane, 2011. "One-sided multiple comparisons for treatment means with a control mean," Computational Statistics & Data Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 55(4), pages 1530-1539, April.
    2. Kathrin Möllenhoff & Frank Bretz & Holger Dette, 2020. "Equivalence of regression curves sharing common parameters," Biometrics, The International Biometric Society, vol. 76(2), pages 518-529, June.
    3. Dette, Holger & Bretz, Frank, 2007. "Optimal designs for dose finding studies," Technical Reports 2007,01, Technische Universität Dortmund, Sonderforschungsbereich 475: Komplexitätsreduktion in multivariaten Datenstrukturen.
    4. Francesco De Pretis & Barbara Osimani, 2019. "New Insights in Computational Methods for Pharmacovigilance: E-Synthesis , a Bayesian Framework for Causal Assessment," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 16(12), pages 1-19, June.
    5. C. Baayen & P. Hougaard & C. B. Pipper, 2015. "Testing effect of a drug using multiple nested models for the dose–response," Biometrics, The International Biometric Society, vol. 71(2), pages 417-427, June.
    6. Johan Verbeeck & Martin Geroldinger & Konstantin Thiel & Andrew Craig Hooker & Sebastian Ueckert & Mats Karlsson & Arne Cornelius Bathke & Johann Wolfgang Bauer & Geert Molenberghs & Georg Zimmermann, 2023. "How to analyze continuous and discrete repeated measures in small‐sample cross‐over trials?," Biometrics, The International Biometric Society, vol. 79(4), pages 3998-4011, December.
    7. Paul Kabaila & Nishika Ranathunga, 2021. "Computation of the expected value of a function of a chi-distributed random variable," Computational Statistics, Springer, vol. 36(1), pages 313-332, March.
    8. Qiqi Deng & Kun Wang & Xiaofei Bai & Naitee Ting, 2019. "A Cautionary Note When a Dose-Ranging Study is Used for Proving the Concept," Statistics in Biosciences, Springer;International Chinese Statistical Association, vol. 11(1), pages 127-140, April.
    9. Beibei Guo & Ying Yuan, 2023. "DROID: dose‐ranging approach to optimizing dose in oncology drug development," Biometrics, The International Biometric Society, vol. 79(4), pages 2907-2919, December.
    10. Frank Schaarschmidt & Christian Ritz & Ludwig A. Hothorn, 2022. "The Tukey trend test: Multiplicity adjustment using multiple marginal models," Biometrics, The International Biometric Society, vol. 78(2), pages 789-797, June.
    11. Björn Bornkamp & Katja Ickstadt, 2009. "Bayesian Nonparametric Estimation of Continuous Monotone Functions with Applications to Dose–Response Analysis," Biometrics, The International Biometric Society, vol. 65(1), pages 198-205, March.
    12. Kwong, Koon Shing & Cheung, Siu Hung, 2012. "Optimal design for p-value consistent step-up procedures for multiple comparisons with a control in direction-mixed families," Computational Statistics & Data Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 56(12), pages 4157-4164.
    13. Per A. Brodtkorb, 2006. "Evaluating Nearly Singular Multinormal Expectations with Application to Wave Distributions," Methodology and Computing in Applied Probability, Springer, vol. 8(1), pages 65-91, March.
    14. Bornkamp, Björn & Pinheiro, José & Bretz, Frank, 2009. "MCPMod: An R Package for the Design and Analysis of Dose-Finding Studies," Journal of Statistical Software, Foundation for Open Access Statistics, vol. 29(i07).
    15. Nashimoto, Kane & Wright, F.T., 2010. "Marcus-Talpaz simultaneous lower confidence bounds for contrasts between treatment and control means," Statistics & Probability Letters, Elsevier, vol. 80(2), pages 128-133, January.
    16. Liu, W. & Ah-Kine, P. & Bretz, F. & Hayter, A.J., 2013. "Exact simultaneous confidence intervals for a finite set of contrasts of three, four or five generally correlated normal means," Computational Statistics & Data Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 57(1), pages 141-148.
    17. J. Peng & C. I. C. Lee & L. Liu, 2006. "Max-min multiple comparison procedure for comparing several dose levels with a zero dose control," Journal of Applied Statistics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 33(5), pages 549-555.
    18. repec:jss:jstsof:29:i07 is not listed on IDEAS
    19. Grechanovsky, Eugene & Pinsker, Ilia, 1995. "Conditional p-values for the F-statistic in a forward selection procedure," Computational Statistics & Data Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 20(3), pages 239-263, September.
    20. Georg Gutjahr & Björn Bornkamp, 2017. "Likelihood ratio tests for a dose-response effect using multiple nonlinear regression models," Biometrics, The International Biometric Society, vol. 73(1), pages 197-205, March.
    21. Wenqing Jiang & Jiangjie Zhou & Baosheng Liang, 2023. "An Improved Dunnett’s Procedure for Comparing Multiple Treatments with a Control in the Presence of Missing Observations," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 11(14), pages 1-16, July.

    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:biomet:v:64:y:2008:i:3:p:877-885. 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.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with 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: http://www.blackwellpublishing.com/journal.asp?ref=0006-341X .

    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.