Methods and applications of percentile estimation

References

• Chakraborti, S., and J. Li. 2007. Confidence interval estimation of a normal percentile. The American Statistician 61 (4):331–336. doi:10.1198/000313007X244457.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dong, X., Y. Bian, Y. Tsong, and T. Wang. 2017. Exact test-based approach for equivalence test with parameter margin. Journal of Biopharmaceutical Statistics 27 (2):317–330. doi:10.1080/10543406.2016.1265546.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Donner, A., and G. Zou. 2012. Closed-form confidence intervals for functions of the normal mean and standard deviation. Statistical Methods in Medical Research 21 (4):347–359. doi:10.1177/0962280210383082.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Food and Drug Administration. 2016. Draft guidance for industry: Assay development for immunogenicity testing of therapeutic protein. Center for Drug Evaluation and Research, Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research, Food and Drug Administration, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. Rockville, MD, USA: U.S. Food and Drug Administration.
   Google Scholar
• Hoffman, D., and M. Berger. 2011. Statistical considerations for calculation of immunogenicity screening assay cut points. Journal of Immunological Methods 373 (1):200–208. doi:10.1016/j.jim.2011.08.019.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Howe, W. G. 1974. Approximate Confidence Limits on the Mean of X + Y where X and Y are two tabled independent random variables. Journal of the American Statistical Association 69 (347):789–794.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hyslop, T., F. Hsuan, and D. J. Holder. 2000. A small sample confidence interval approach to assess individual bioequivalence. Statistics in Medicine 19 (20):2885–2897.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schaarschmidt, F., M. Hofmann, T. Jaki, B. Grün, and L. A. Hothorn. 2015. Statistical approaches for the determination of cut points in anti-drug antibody bioassays. Journal of Immunological Methods 418:84–100. doi:10.1016/j.jim.2015.02.004.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Shankar, G., V. Devanarayan, L. Amaravadi, Y. C. Barrett, R. Bowsher, D. Finco-Kent, M. Fiscella, B. Gorovits, S. Kirschner, M. Moxness, et al. 2008. Recommendations for the validation of immunoassays used for detection of host antibodies against biotechnology products. Journal of Pharmaceutical and Biomedical Analysis 48 (5):1267–1281. doi:10.1016/j.jpba.2008.09.020.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Shen, M., X. Dong, and Y. Tsong. 2015. Statistical evaluation of several methods for cut-point determination of immunogenicity screening assay. Journal of Biopharmaceutical Statistics 25 (2):269–279. doi:10.1080/10543406.2014.979196.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tsong, Y., X. Dong, and M. Shen. 2017. Development of statistical methods for analytical similarity assessment. Journal of Biopharmaceutical Statistics 27 (2):197–205. doi:10.1080/10543406.2016.1272606.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Weng, Y.-T., Y. Tsong, M. Shen, and C. Wang. 2018. Improved wald tests for reference scaled equivalence assessment of analytical biosimilarity. International Journal of Clinical Biostatistics and Biometrics. doi:10.23937/2469-5831/1510016.
   Google Scholar
• Weng, Y.-T., Y. Tsong, M. Shen, and C. Wang. 2019. A modified wald test for reference scaled equivalence assessment of analytical equivalence. JBS. doi:10.1080/10543406.2019.1584206.
   Google Scholar
• Zhang, J., B. Yu, L. Zhang, L. Roskos, L. Richman, and H. Yang. 2015. Non-normal random effects models for immunogenicity assay cut point determination. Journal of Biopharmaceutical Statistics 25 (2):295–306. doi:10.1080/10543406.2014.972515.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zhang, L., J. J. Zhang, R. J. Kubiak, and H. Yang. 2013. Statistical methods and tool for cut point analysis in immunogenicity assays. Journal of Immunological Methods 389 (1):79–87. doi:10.1016/j.jim.2012.12.008.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zou, G. Y. 2008. On the estimation of additive interaction by use of the four-by-two table and beyond. American Journal of Epidemiology 168 (2):212–224. doi:10.1093/aje/kwn104.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar