IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bla/biomet/v76y2020i2p518-529.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Equivalence of regression curves sharing common parameters

Author

Listed:
  • Kathrin Möllenhoff
  • Frank Bretz
  • Holger Dette

Abstract

In clinical trials, the comparison of two different populations is a common problem. Nonlinear (parametric) regression models are commonly used to describe the relationship between covariates, such as concentration or dose, and a response variable in the two groups. In some situations, it is reasonable to assume some model parameters to be the same, for instance, the placebo effect or the maximum treatment effect. In this paper, we develop a (parametric) bootstrap test to establish the similarity of two regression curves sharing some common parameters. We show by theoretical arguments and by means of a simulation study that the new test controls its significance level and achieves a reasonable power. Moreover, it is demonstrated that under the assumption of common parameters, a considerably more powerful test can be constructed compared with the test that does not use this assumption. Finally, we illustrate the potential applications of the new methodology by a clinical trial example.

Suggested Citation

  • 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.
    • Handle: RePEc:bla:biomet:v:76:y:2020:i:2:p:518-529
    DOI: 10.1111/biom.13149
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/biom.13149
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/biom.13149?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. Long Feng & Changliang Zou & Zhaojun Wang & Lixing Zhu, 2015. "Robust comparison of regression curves," TEST: An Official Journal of the Spanish Society of Statistics and Operations Research, Springer;Sociedad de Estadística e Investigación Operativa, vol. 24(1), pages 185-204, March.
    2. Holger Dette & Kathrin Möllenhoff & Stanislav Volgushev & Frank Bretz, 2018. "Equivalence of Regression Curves," Journal of the American Statistical Association, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 113(522), pages 711-729, April.
    3. 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.
    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. Kathrin Möllenhoff & Kirsten Schorning & Franziska Kappenberg, 2023. "Identifying alert concentrations using a model‐based bootstrap approach," Biometrics, The International Biometric Society, vol. 79(3), pages 2076-2088, September.
    2. 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.
    3. 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.
    4. 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.
    5. 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.
    6. 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.
    7. Cuizhen Niu & Lixing Zhu, 2018. "A robust adaptive-to-model enhancement test for parametric single-index models," Annals of the Institute of Statistical Mathematics, Springer;The Institute of Statistical Mathematics, vol. 70(5), pages 1013-1045, October.
    8. Jun Zhang & Zhenghui Feng & Xiaoguang Wang, 2018. "A constructive hypothesis test for the single-index models with two groups," Annals of the Institute of Statistical Mathematics, Springer;The Institute of Statistical Mathematics, vol. 70(5), pages 1077-1114, October.
    9. Miller, Frank & Dette, Holger & Guilbaud, Olivier, 2007. "Optimal designs for estimating the interesting part of a dose-effect curve," Technical Reports 2007,21, Technische Universität Dortmund, Sonderforschungsbereich 475: Komplexitätsreduktion in multivariaten Datenstrukturen.
    10. Dette, Holger & Scheder, Regine, 2008. "A finite sample comparison of nonparametric estimates of the effective dose in quantal bioassay," Technical Reports 2008,05, Technische Universität Dortmund, Sonderforschungsbereich 475: Komplexitätsreduktion in multivariaten Datenstrukturen.
    11. 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.
    12. Nairanjana Dasgupta & Monte J. Shaffer, 2012. "Many-to-one comparison of nonlinear growth curves for Washington's Red Delicious apple," Journal of Applied Statistics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 39(8), pages 1781-1795, April.
    13. Qiqi Deng & Xiaofei Bai & Dacheng Liu & Dooti Roy & Zhiliang Ying & Dan‐Yu Lin, 2019. "Power and sample size for dose‐finding studies with survival endpoints under model uncertainty," Biometrics, The International Biometric Society, vol. 75(1), pages 308-314, March.
    14. Yu, Jun & Kong, Xiangshun & Ai, Mingyao & Tsui, Kwok Leung, 2018. "Optimal designs for dose–response models with linear effects of covariates," Computational Statistics & Data Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 127(C), pages 217-228.
    15. Dette, Holger & Bretz, Frank, 2007. "Optimal designs for dose finding studies," Technical Reports 2007,01, Technische Universität Dortmund, Sonderforschungsbereich 475: Komplexitätsreduktion in multivariaten Datenstrukturen.
    16. 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.
    17. 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.
    18. 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.
    19. 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).
    20. repec:jss:jstsof:29:i07 is not listed on IDEAS
    21. Eustasio del Barrio & Hristo Inouzhe & Carlos Matrán, 2020. "Box-Constrained Monotone Approximations to Lipschitz Regularizations, with Applications to Robust Testing," Journal of Optimization Theory and Applications, Springer, vol. 187(1), pages 65-87, October.

    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:76:y:2020:i:2:p:518-529. 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.