Combining multiple comparisons and modeling techniques in dose-response studies

Biometrics

Volumn 61, Issue 3, 2005, Pages 738-748

  Bretz, F ^a   Pinheiro, J C ^a   Branson, M ^a  

^a NOVARTIS PHARMA AG   (Switzerland)

Author keywords

Contrast test; Dose finding; Minimum effective dose; Multiple testing

Indexed keywords

ANALYSIS OF DATA; COMPARISON TECHNIQUES; CONTRAST TESTS; DOSE FINDING; DOSE-RESPONSE STUDY; MINIMUM EFFECTIVE DOSE; MODELLING TECHNIQUES; MULTIPLE COMPARISON; MULTIPLE TESTING; MULTIPLE-MODELING;

INFORMATION ANALYSIS;

DOSE-RESPONSE RELATIONSHIP; STATISTICAL ANALYSIS;

ARTICLE; DATA ANALYSIS; DOSE CALCULATION; DOSE RESPONSE; MATHEMATICAL ANALYSIS; NONBIOLOGICAL MODEL; PARAMETRIC TEST; COMPUTER SIMULATION; HUMAN; METHODOLOGY; PHASE 2 CLINICAL TRIAL; STATISTICAL MODEL;

CLINICAL TRIALS, PHASE II; COMPUTER SIMULATION; DOSE-RESPONSE RELATIONSHIP, DRUG; HUMANS; MODELS, STATISTICAL;

EID: 27744573697     PISSN: 0006341X     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1541-0420.2005.00344.x     Document Type: Article

References (18)

1. Abelson, R. and Tukey, J. (1963). Efficient utilisation of non-numerical information in quantitative analysis: General theory and the case of simple order. Annals of Mathematical Statistics 34, 1347-1369.
2. Bates, D. and Chambers, J. (1992). Nonlinear models. In Statistical Models, S. J. M. Chambers and T. J. Hastie (eds), 421-454. Pacific Grove, California: Wadsworth & Brooks/Cole.
3. Bates, D. and Watts, D. (1988). Nonlinear Regression Analysis and Its Applications. New York: Wiley.
4. Bauer, P. and Hackl, P. (1985). The application of Hunter's inequality in simultaneous testing. Biometrical Journal 27, 25-38.
5. Branson, M., Pinheiro, J., and Bretz, F. (2003). Searching for an adequate dose: Combining multiple comparisons and modeling techniques in dose-response studies. Technical Report No. 2003-08-20, Novartis Pharmaceuticals. Available at http://www.bioinf.uni-hannover. de/~bretz/paper/TR_MCPMod.pdf.
6. Buckland, S., Burham, K., and Augustin, N. (1997). Model selection: An integral part of inference. Biometrics 53, 603-618.
7. Cox, D. (1977). The role of significance tests. Scandinavian Journal of Statistics 4, 49-70.
8. Genz, A. and Bretz, F. (2002). Comparison of methods for the computation of multivariate t-probabilities. Journal of Computational and Graphical Statistics 11, 950-971.
9. Hochberg, Y. and Tamhane, A. (1987). Multiple Comparison Procedures. New York: Wiley.
10. Pinheiro, J. and Bates, D. (1996). Unconstrained parameterizations for variance-covariance matrices. Statistics and Computing 6, 289-296.
11. Pinheiro, J. and Bates, D. (2000). Mixed-Effects Models in S and S-PLUS. New York: Springer.
12. Robertson, T., Wright, F., and Dykstra, R. (1988). Order Restricted Statistical Inference. New York: Wiley.
13. Ruberg, S. J. (1995). Dose response studies. I. Some design considerations. Journal of Biopharmaceutical Statistics 5, 1-14.
14. Scheffé, H. (1953). A method for judging all contrasts in analysis of variance. Biometrika 40, 87-104.
15. Shimodaira, H. (1998). An application of multiple comparison techniques to model selection. Annals of the Institute of Statistical Mathematics 50, 1-13.
16. Tamhane, A., Dunnett, C., and Hochberg, Y. (1996). Multiple test procedures for dose finding. Biometrics 52, 21-37.
17. Tukey, J., Ciminera, J., and Heyse, J. (1985). Testing the statistical certainty of a response to increasing dose of a drug. Biometrics 41, 295-301.
18. Westfall, P. and Krishen, A. (2001). Optimally weighted, fixed sequence and gatekeeping multiple testing procedures. Journal of Statistical Planning and Inference 99, 25-40.