PubMed HealthSearch

Biomedical subjects

M C Matthews

Publications and source records attributed to M C Matthews.

2 recordsLinked to original sources

Stagewise, adaptive dose allocation for quantal response dose-response studies.

A principal design objective of many dose-response studies is to estimate extreme percentiles of a dose-response distribution, e.g., the ED95 dose for a particular drug therapy, as precisely as feasible using the smallest number of experimental subjects possible. Such a design requirement necessitates that allocation of subjects to drug doses be carried out in a stagewise fashion to maximize the information obtained from each subsequent experimental observation in light of what has previously been determined. This paper describes and illustrates specialized methods and associated computer programs to evaluate, on a stagewise basis, the anticipated relative sensitivities of alternative experimental plans in the case of dichotomous responses. Following each stage of experimentation, the current estimates of the dose-response distribution parameters, as well as the uncertainties in these estimates, are updated and are used to assign subjects to experimental dose levels for the next stage of testing. Competing dose allocations are compared with respect to anticipated improvement in estimation precision. The adoption of such a stagewise dose allocation strategy is illustrated by example.

Animals

Stagewise, group sequential experimental designs for quantal responses. one-sample and two-sample comparisons.

The use of stagewise, group sequential experimental designs with dichotomous responses in toxicity or drug screening programs is discussed. Such designs represent a compromise between the standard, fixed sample size designs and fully sequential designs. Stagewise group sequential designs place specified numbers of animals on test at each stage, up to a maximum number of stages. The greatest increases in sample size efficiency occur with small numbers of stages, particularly when going from one stage to two. Two-stage designs can result in a 15 to 20 percent reduction in average sample size. Five-stage designs can result in a 30 to 40 percent reduction in average sample size, with no appreciable decrease in Type 1 error or power. Examples of the efficiencies that arose in actual screening programs are given. This paper demonstrates that the routine use of stagewise, group sequential designs in standardized screening protocols can result in substantial savings in animal use with virtually no sacrifice of statistical sensitivity.

Animals