Skip to main content
Log in

Generalized Fiducial Inference for Threshold Estimation in Dose–Response and Regression Settings

  • Published:
Journal of Agricultural, Biological and Environmental Statistics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

In many biomedical experiments, such as toxicology and pharmacological dose–response studies, one primary goal is to identify a threshold value such as the minimum effective dose. This paper applies Fisher’s fiducial idea to develop an inference method for these threshold values. In addition to providing point estimates, this method also offers confidence intervals. Another appealing feature of the proposed method is that it allows the use of multiple parametric relationships to model the underlying pattern of the data and hence, reduces the risk of model mis-specification. All these parametric relationships satisfy the qualitative assumption that the response and dosage relationship is monotonic after the threshold value. In practice, this assumption may not be valid but is commonly used in dose–response studies. The empirical performance of the proposed method is illustrated with synthetic experiments and real data applications. When comparing to existing methods in the literature, the proposed method produces superior results in most synthetic experiments and real data sets. Supplementary materials accompanying this paper appear on-line.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Agathokleous E, Belz RG, Calatayud V, De Marco A, Hoshika Y, Kitao M, Saitanis CJ, Sicard P, Paoletti E, Calabrese EJ (2019) Predicting the effect of ozone on vegetation via linear non-threshold (lnt), threshold and hormetic dose-response models. Sci Total Environ 649:61–74

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bretz F, Dette H, Pinheiro JC (2010) Practical considerations for optimal designs in clinical dose finding studies. Stat Med 29:731–742

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Bretz F, Hsu J, Pinheiro J, Liu Y (2008) Dose finding-a challenge in statistics. Biom J 50:480–504

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Cheng JQ, Liu RY, Xie M-G (2014) Fusion learning. Statistics Reference Online, Wiley StatsRef, pp 1–8

  • Coffey T, Gennings C (2007) The simultaneous analysis of mixed discrete and continuous outcomes using nonlinear threshold models. J Agric Biol Environ Stat 12:55

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Cox C (1987) Threshold dose-response models in toxicology. Biometrics 43:511–523

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cui Y, Hannig J (2019) Nonparametric generalized fiducial inference for survival functions under censoring. Biometrika 106:501–518. https://doi.org/10.1093/biomet/asz016

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Dempster AP (2008) The Dempster–Shafer calculus for statisticians. Int J Approx Reason 48:365–377

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Efron B (2013) Bayes’ theorem in the 21st century. Science 340:1177–1178

  • Fisher RA (1930) Inverse probability. In: Mathematical proceedings of the Cambridge philosophical society, vol 26. Cambridge University Press, pp 528–535

  • Gao Q, Lai RCS, Lee TCM, Li Y (2020) Uncertainty quantification for high-dimensional sparse nonparametric additive models. Technometrics 62:513–524

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Guo B, Li Y (2014) Bayesian designs of phase II oncology trials to select maximum effective dose assuming monotonic dose-response relationship. BMC Med Res Methodol 14:95

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hannig J (2013) Generalized fiducial inference via discretization. Stat Sin 23:489–514

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Hannig J, Iyer H, Lai RCS, Lee TCM (2016) Generalized fiducial inference: a review and new results. J Am Stat Assoc 111:1346–1361

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Hannig J, Lai RCS, Lee TCM (2014) Computational issues of generalized fiducial inference. Comput Stat Data Anal 71:849–858

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Hannig J, Lee TCM (2009) Generalized fiducial inference for wavelet regression. Biometrika 96:847–860

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Holst U, Hossjer O, Bjorklund C, Ragnarson P, Edner H (1996) Locally weighted least squared kernel regression and statistical evaluation of lidar measurements. Environmetrics 7:401–416

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hsu JC, Berger RL (1999) Stepwise confidence intervals without multiplicity adjustment for dose response and toxicity studies. J Am Stat Assoc 94:468–482

    Google Scholar 

  • Kim SB, Bartell SM, Gillen DL (2016) Inference for the existence of hormetic dose-response relationships in toxicology studies. Biostatistics 17:523–536. https://doi.org/10.1093/biostatistics/kxw004

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Lai RCS, Hannig J, Lee TCM (2015) Generalized fiducial inference for ultrahigh-dimensional regression. J Am Stat Assoc 110:760–772

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Lutz WK, Lutz RW (2009) Statistical model to estimate a threshold dose and its confidence limits for the analysis of sublinear dose-response relationships, exemplified for mutagenicity data. Mutat Res Genetic Toxicol Environ Mutagenesis 678:118–122

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mallik A, Sen B, Banerjee M, Michailidis G (2011) Threshold estimation based on a p-value framework in dose-response and regression settings. Biometrika 98:887–900

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Martin R, Liu C (2015) Inferential models: reasoning with uncertainty, vol 145. CRC Press, Boca Raton

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Muggeo VM (2003) Estimating regression models with unknown break-points. Stat Med 22:3055–3071

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Otava M, Shkedy Z, Hothorn LA, Talloen W, Gerhard D, Kasim A (2017) Identification of the minimum effective dose for normally distributed data using a Bayesian variable selection approach. J Biopharm Stat 27:1073–1088

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pinheiro JC, Bretz F, Branson M (2006) Analysis of dose–response studies–modeling approaches. In: Dose finding in drug development. Springer, pp 146–171

  • Plummer M, Best N, Cowles K, Vines K (2006) CODA: convergence diagnosis and output analysis for MCMC. R news 6:7–11

    Google Scholar 

  • Ranke J, Mölter K, Stock F, Bottin-Weber U, Poczobutt J, Hoffmann J, Ondruschka B, Filser J, Jastorff B (2004) Biological effects of imidazolium ionic liquids with varying chain lengths in acute vibrio fischeri and WST-1 cell viability assays. Ecotoxicol Environ Saf 58:396–404

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ruberg SJ (1989) Contrasts for identifying the minimum effective dose. J Am Stat Assoc 84:816–822

  • Schwartz PF, Gennings C, Teuschler LK, Fariss MW (2001) Optimizing the precision of toxicity threshold estimation using a two-stage experimental design. J Agric Biol Environ Stat 6:409

  • Tamhane AC, Logan BR (2002) Multiple test procedures for identifying the minimum effective and maximum safe doses of a drug. J Am Stat Assoc 97:293–301

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • West RW, Kodell RL (2005) Changepoint alternatives to the noael. J Agric Biol Environ Stat 10:197

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Williams DA (1972) The comparison of several dose levels with a zero dose control. Biometrics 28:519–531

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Xie M-G, Singh K (2013) Confidence distribution, the frequentist distribution estimator of a parameter: A review. Int Stat Rev 81:3–39

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

The authors are most grateful to the reviewers, the associate editor, and the editor for their constructive and helpful comments that led to a much improved version of the paper. The fund was provided by National Science Foundation (Grant Nos. DMS-1811405, DMS-1811661, DMS-1916125 and CCF-1934568)

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Thomas C. M. Lee.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The author declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Human and animal rights

The work presented in this article does not involve human participants and/or animals.

Informed consent

No informed consent is needed as the data sets used in the paper are publicly available.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Supplementary Information

Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.

Supplementary material 1 (pdf 223 KB)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Hwang, S., Lai, R.C.S. & Lee, T.C.M. Generalized Fiducial Inference for Threshold Estimation in Dose–Response and Regression Settings. JABES 27, 109–124 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/s13253-021-00472-0

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s13253-021-00472-0

Keywords

Navigation