From: Hu, Chuanpu [CNTUS] 
Sent: Monday, August 30, 2010 8:46 AM
To: 'Mark Sale'
Cc: 'nmusers'
Subject: RE: [NMusers] Block versus diagonal omega

 

Mark,

 

Nice thought – the test can be conducted, but the devil is in the details. This 
has to do with the intricacies of the role alternative hypothesis plays in 
hypothesis testing:

For the original parameterization testing OMEGA, the hypothesis test is

H0: OMEGA=0, vs. H1: OMEGA>0

For the THETA parameterization testing OMEGA, the hypothesis test is

H0: THETA=0, vs. H1: THETA<>0

So without getting into the math, the intuitive argument is that the 
alternative hypotheses in the 2 situations are different, therefore it is 
logical that the testing criteria must change. The world of math does not 
contain contradictions even though it may appear so at times. J

 

Chuanpu

 

From: Mark Sale [mailto:[email protected]] 
Sent: Sunday, August 29, 2010 9:19 AM
To: Hu, Chuanpu [CNTUS]
Cc: nmusers
Subject: RE: [NMusers] Block versus diagonal omega

 

Chuanpu,
  Do I extrapolate correctly then that:

V = THETA(1)*EXP(THETA(2)*ETA(1))
.
.
.
$OMEGA
(1,FIXED).

Can be tested (THETA(2) <> 0), since it is not a truncated distribution?
might be an interesting exercise to do this with LRT and compare to the 
randomization test with the usual specification.


Mark


--- On Fri, 8/27/10, Hu, Chuanpu [CNTUS] <[email protected]> wrote:


From: Hu, Chuanpu [CNTUS] <[email protected]>
Subject: RE: [NMusers] Block versus diagonal omega
To: "Mark Sale - Next Level Solutions" <[email protected]>, "Eleveld,DJ" 
<[email protected]>
Cc: "nmusers" <[email protected]>
Date: Friday, August 27, 2010, 4:33 PM

Theoretically, the NONMEM objective function drop for adding a diagonal element 
follows a mixture chi-square distribution, from which follows that using the 
“usual” chi-square distribution would be conservative. This has to do with 0 
being on the boundary of possible values. (See Pinheiro and Bates, Mixed 
Effects Models in S and S-PLUS, Springer, 2000.) As this boundary issue does 
not apply to off-diagonal elements, the “usual” chi-square distribution should 
be fine (with the usual statistical asymptotic caveats). 

 

I’d like to mention that, while the “find the best fit” mindset may be suitable 
for the typical exploratory setting, the p-values from repeated (e.g., 
stepwise) tests are not statistically interpretable. To have valid p-values, 
confirmatory analyses would be needed, which in my mind deserves a wider use. J

 

Chuanpu 

~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*

Chuanpu Hu, Ph.D.

Director, Pharmacometrics 

Pharmacokinetics 

Biologics Clinical Pharmacology

Janssen Pharmaceutical Companies of Johnson & Johnson 

C-3-3

200 Great Valley Parkway  

Malvern, PA 19355 

Tel: 610-651-7423 

Fax: (610) 993-7801 

E-mail: [email protected] 

~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*

 

Reply via email to