Advertisement

Statistical Aspects of Radioimmunoassay

  • D. Rodbard
  • V. Guardabasso
  • P. J. Munson
Part of the Handbook of Experimental Pharmacology book series (HEP, volume 82)

Abstract

The logit-log method (Rodbard and Lewald 1970) remains the most popular method for RIA data reduction in use today (Fig. 1). It has the virtue of simplicity (Rodbard 1979). The method can be implemented graphically, using special logit-log graph paper. It can be implemented using a small programmable handheld calculator or computer (Davis et al. 1980). Even the smallest microcomputers can easily perform this method with proper weighting and detailed statistical analysis. A weighted linear regression can even be performed by special “macro” programs for popular spreadsheet programs. The logit-log method has been incorporated into numerous commercial systems (β- and γ-counters). When the logit-log method “works” (which is probably about 90%–95% of the time) everything is fine. Unfortunately, in about 5%–10% of assays, the logit-log method fails to provide an adequate description of the RIA dose-response curve. What should the assayist do when the logit-log method fails? Since numerous alternatives are available, each with its own advantages and limitations, the assayist is often faced with a bewildering situation (Rodbard 1979). Are we to try all possible methods, using a trial-and-error approach? When will we be able to say that we have a “good” method, an “adequate” or “optimal” method? Is there a systematic approach? Are we to be restricted to the curve-fitting methods implemented in commercial, turnkey, “black box” approaches to data analysis? This chapter will attempt to provide a simple, rational approach to the question, “what should I do when the logit-log method fails?”

Keywords

International Atomic Energy Agency Logistic Method Statistical Aspect Weighted Linear Regression Label Ligand 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Bard Y (1974) Nonlinear parameter estimation. Academic, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  2. Bennett CA, Franklin NL (1954) Statistical analysis in chemistry and the chemical industry. Wiley, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  3. Davis SE, Jaffe ML, Munson PJ, Rodbard D (1980) Radioimmunoassay data processing with a small programmable calculator. J Immunoassay. 1 (1): 15–25PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. DeLean A, Munson PJ, Rodbard D (1978) Simultaneous analysis of families of sigmoidal curves: applications to bioassay, radioligand assay and physiological dose-response curves. Am J Physiol. 235: E97–E102Google Scholar
  5. Draper NR, Smith H (1966) Applied regression analysis. Wiley, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  6. Ehrlich PH, Moyle WR (1983) Cooperative immunoassays: ultrasensitive assays with mixed monoclonal antibodies. Science. 221: 279–281PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Feldman HA, Rodbard D (1971) Mathematical theory of radioimmunoassay. In: Odell WD, Daughaday WH (eds) Competitive protein binding assays. Lippincott, Philadelphia, chap 7, pp 158–203Google Scholar
  8. Finney DJ (1983) Response curves for radioimmunoassay. Clin Chem 29: 1762–1766PubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. Guardabasso V, Rodbard D, Munson PJ (1987) A model-free approach to estimation of relative potency in dose-response curve analysis. Am J Physiol: Endocrinology and Metabolism 252 (15): E357–E364Google Scholar
  10. Magar ME (1972) Data analysis in biochemistry and biophysics. Academic, New York Mcintosh JEA (1984) Overview of mathematical modeling with computers in endocrinology. In: Rodbard D, Forti G (eds) Computers in endocrinology. Raven, New York, p 37Google Scholar
  11. Mcintosh JEA (1984) Overview of mathematical modeling with computers in endocrinology. In: Rodbard D, Forti G (eds) Computers in endocrinology. Raven, New York, p 37Google Scholar
  12. Munson PJ, Rodbard D (1980) Ligand: characterization of ligand binding systems: a versatile computerized approach. Anal Biochem. 107: 220–239PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Munson PJ, Rodbard D (1984) Computerized analysis of ligand binding data: basic principles and recent developments. In: Rodbard D, Forti G (eds) Computers in endocrinology. Raven, New York, pp 117–145Google Scholar
  14. Prentice RL (1976) A generalization of the probit and logit methods for dose-response curves. Biometrics. 32: 761–768PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Raab GM (1983) Comparison of a logistic and a mass-action curve for radioimmunoassay. Clin Chem. 29: 1757–1761PubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. Rodbard D (1974) Statistical quality control and routine data processing for radioimmu-noassays (RIA) and immunoradiometric assays (IRMA). Clin Chem. 20: 1255–1270PubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. Rodbard D (1979) Dose interpolation for radioimmunoassays: an overview. In: Natelson S, Pesce AJ, Dietz AA (eds) Clinical immunochemistry, chemical and cellular bases and applications in disease, vol 3. American Association for Clinical Chemistry, Washington, DC, pp 477–494Google Scholar
  18. Rodbard D (1980) Mathematics and statistics of immunoassay. In: Langan J (ed) Proceedings of a symposium on the use of non-isotopic methods in immunoassay. Masson, New York, chap 3, pp 45–101Google Scholar
  19. Rodbard D (1984) Lessons from the computerization of radioimmunoassays: an introduction to the basic principles of modeling. In: Rodbard D, Forti G (eds) Computers in endocrinology. Raven, New York, pp 75–99Google Scholar
  20. Rodbard D, Hutt DM (1974) Statistical analysis of radioimmunoassays and immunoradio¬metric (labeled antibody assays: a generalized, weighted, iterative least squares method for logistic curve fitting. In: Proceedings, symposium on radioimmunoassay and related procedures in medicine. International Atomic Energy Agency, Vienna, pp 165–192 ( Unipub, New York )Google Scholar
  21. Rodbard D, Lewald JE (1970) Computer analysis of radio-ligand assay and radioimmunoassay data. Karolinsky symposia, research methods reproductive endocrinology, Geneva, March 1970. Acta Endocr. 64, Suppl 147: 79–103Google Scholar
  22. Rodbard D, Tacey RL (1978) Radioimmunoassay dose interpolation based on the mass action law with antibody heterogeneity. Anal Biochem. 90: 13–21PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Rodbard D, Munson PJ, DeLean A ( 1978 a) Improved curve-fitting, parallelism testing, characterization of sensitivity and specificity, validation, and optimization for radioligand assays. In: Radioimmunoassay and related procedures in medicine. International Atomic Energy Agency, Vienna, vol 1, pp 496–504 ( Unipub, New York )Google Scholar
  24. Rodbard D, Feldman Y, Jaffe ML, Miles LEM (1978 b) Kinetics of two-site immunoradiometric (“sandwich”) assays. II. Studies on the nature of the “high dose hook effect.” Immunochemistry. 15: 77–82Google Scholar
  25. Rodbard D, Munson PJ, Thakur AK (1980) Quantitative characterization of hormone receptors. Cancer. 46 (12): 2907–2918PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Rodbard D, Cole BR, Munson PJ (1983) Development of a friendly, self-teaching, inter-active statistical package for analysis of clinical research data: the Bright Stat- Pack. In: Dayhoff RE (ed) Proceedings of the seventh annual symposium on computers in medical care. IEEE Computer Society, Silver Spring, MD, pp 701–704CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Rodbard D, Foy J, Munson P, Zweig M, Lewis T (1985) A personal-computer-based system for acquisition and analysis of radioimmunoassay data. Proceedings, symposium on computer applications in medical care. IEEE Computer Society Press, Silver Spring, MD, pp 455–459Google Scholar
  28. Wilkins TA, Chadney DC, Bryant J, Palmstrom SH, Winder RL (1978) Nonlinear least- squares curve-fitting of a simple theoretical model to radioimmunoassay dose-response data using a minicomputer. In: Radioimmunoassay and related procedures in medicine, vol 1. International Atomic Energy Agency, Vienna, pp 399–423 ( Unipub, New York )Google Scholar
  29. Wold S (1974) Spline function in data analysis. Technometrics 16: 1–11CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 1987

Authors and Affiliations

  • D. Rodbard
  • V. Guardabasso
  • P. J. Munson

There are no affiliations available

Personalised recommendations