Vågerö M, Sundberg R
Department of Biostatistics and Data Management, Pharmacia & Upjohn AB, Stockholm, Sweden.
J Biopharm Stat. 1999 Aug;9(3):499-519. doi: 10.1081/BIP-100101190.
Standard maximum likelihood logistic or probit regression has been used in biopharmaceutical practice for inference about tolerance threshold distributions in situations where subjects (patients) have been allocated doses according to an up-and-down design. For example, a steeper dose-response curve than expected was reported in one such study. This article demonstrates that the maximum likelihood estimator systematically and considerably exaggerates the regression parameter with moderately large sample sizes. Thus a probable explanation for finding a steeper curve than expected is the method used to analyze the experiment, that is, the bias in the maximum likelihood estimator. An additional consequence of this bias is that the mean/median/ED50 are estimated with a misleading precision. In particular, confidence intervals are much too narrow. As a conclusion, we warn against conventional logistic or probit regression in combination with up-and-down designs.
在生物制药实践中,当受试者(患者)根据序贯法设计分配剂量时,标准最大似然逻辑回归或概率回归已被用于推断耐受阈值分布。例如,在一项此类研究中报告了比预期更陡峭的剂量反应曲线。本文表明,在样本量适中较大时,最大似然估计器会系统性地且相当程度地夸大回归参数。因此,发现比预期更陡峭曲线的一个可能解释是用于分析实验的方法,即最大似然估计器中的偏差。这种偏差的另一个后果是,均值/中位数/半数有效剂量(ED50)的估计精度具有误导性。特别是,置信区间过于狭窄。总之,我们警告不要将传统逻辑回归或概率回归与序贯法设计结合使用。