. | . | . | . | . | . | . | ses . | monotone . |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Simulation Study | 1) | 2.015 | 0 | 1.592 | 0.79 | Yes | ||
1 | 1.592 | 0.79 | Yes | |||||
2) | 0.319 | 0 | 1.203 | 3.77 | No | |||
1 | 1.203 | 3.77 | No | |||||
3) | 1 | 0 | 0 | None | None | 0 | No | |
0 | 1 | 1 | 1 | No | ||||
1 | 0 | 3.77 | 3.77 | No | ||||
1 | 1 | 0.79 | 0.79 | Yes | ||||
Implant | 1) | 5 | 0 | 5 | 1 | No | ||
1 | 10 | 2 | No |
. | . | . | . | . | . | . | ses . | monotone . |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Simulation Study | 1) | 2.015 | 0 | 1.592 | 0.79 | Yes | ||
1 | 1.592 | 0.79 | Yes | |||||
2) | 0.319 | 0 | 1.203 | 3.77 | No | |||
1 | 1.203 | 3.77 | No | |||||
3) | 1 | 0 | 0 | None | None | 0 | No | |
0 | 1 | 1 | 1 | No | ||||
1 | 0 | 3.77 | 3.77 | No | ||||
1 | 1 | 0.79 | 0.79 | Yes | ||||
Implant | 1) | 5 | 0 | 5 | 1 | No | ||
1 | 10 | 2 | No |
Note. The data-generating mechanism for each scenario is where . The table columns contain the location of the optimal dose combination (), the optimal value of the efficacy function (), the standardized effect size (ses), and whether or not the dose-efficacy surface is monotonically increasing with respect to each dosing dimension (monotone). Note that for represents the value of a bivariate normal density function with specific mean vector and covariance matrix evaluated at as defined in the text. The subtraction of 2 in under the Implant scenario corresponds to a base level of drug response outside the regions of optimality.
. | . | . | . | . | . | . | ses . | monotone . |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Simulation Study | 1) | 2.015 | 0 | 1.592 | 0.79 | Yes | ||
1 | 1.592 | 0.79 | Yes | |||||
2) | 0.319 | 0 | 1.203 | 3.77 | No | |||
1 | 1.203 | 3.77 | No | |||||
3) | 1 | 0 | 0 | None | None | 0 | No | |
0 | 1 | 1 | 1 | No | ||||
1 | 0 | 3.77 | 3.77 | No | ||||
1 | 1 | 0.79 | 0.79 | Yes | ||||
Implant | 1) | 5 | 0 | 5 | 1 | No | ||
1 | 10 | 2 | No |
. | . | . | . | . | . | . | ses . | monotone . |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Simulation Study | 1) | 2.015 | 0 | 1.592 | 0.79 | Yes | ||
1 | 1.592 | 0.79 | Yes | |||||
2) | 0.319 | 0 | 1.203 | 3.77 | No | |||
1 | 1.203 | 3.77 | No | |||||
3) | 1 | 0 | 0 | None | None | 0 | No | |
0 | 1 | 1 | 1 | No | ||||
1 | 0 | 3.77 | 3.77 | No | ||||
1 | 1 | 0.79 | 0.79 | Yes | ||||
Implant | 1) | 5 | 0 | 5 | 1 | No | ||
1 | 10 | 2 | No |
Note. The data-generating mechanism for each scenario is where . The table columns contain the location of the optimal dose combination (), the optimal value of the efficacy function (), the standardized effect size (ses), and whether or not the dose-efficacy surface is monotonically increasing with respect to each dosing dimension (monotone). Note that for represents the value of a bivariate normal density function with specific mean vector and covariance matrix evaluated at as defined in the text. The subtraction of 2 in under the Implant scenario corresponds to a base level of drug response outside the regions of optimality.
This PDF is available to Subscribers Only
View Article Abstract & Purchase OptionsFor full access to this pdf, sign in to an existing account, or purchase an annual subscription.