{"title":"评估风险评估中贝叶斯基准剂量方法中剂量-反应关系模型的边际似然近似","authors":"Sota Minewaki , Tomohiro Ohigashi , Takashi Sozu","doi":"10.1016/j.comtox.2025.100347","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Benchmark dose (BMD; a dose associated with a specified change in response) is used to determine the point of departure for the acceptable daily intake of substances for humans. Multiple dose–response relationship models are considered in the BMD method. The Bayesian model averaging (BMA) method is commonly used, where several models are averaged based on their posterior probabilities, which are determined by calculating the marginal likelihood (ML). Several ML approximation methods are employed in standard software packages, such as BBMD, <span>ToxicR</span>, and the EFSA platform for the BMD method, because the ML cannot be analytically calculated. Although ML values differ among approximation methods, resulting in BMD estimates, this phenomenon is neither widely recognized nor quantitatively evaluated. In this study, we evaluated the agreement of BMD estimates among five ML approximation methods in the BMA method. The five ML approximation methods are (1) maximum likelihood estimation (MLE)-based Schwarz criterion, (2) Markov chain Monte Carlo (MCMC)-based Schwarz criterion, (3) Laplace approximation, (4) density estimation, and (5) bridge sampling. We used eight dose–response relationship models and three prior distributions used in BBMD and <span>ToxicR</span> for 518 experimental datasets. The agreement among the approximation methods tended to be low in the non-informative prior distribution. Although the agreements tended to be high in the informative prior distribution, they were low in some approximation methods. Since the approximation method and the prior distribution affect the agreement, their selection should be carefully considered when implementing BMD methods.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":37651,"journal":{"name":"Computational Toxicology","volume":"34 ","pages":"Article 100347"},"PeriodicalIF":3.1000,"publicationDate":"2025-05-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Evaluating marginal likelihood approximations of dose–response relationship models in Bayesian benchmark dose methods for risk assessment\",\"authors\":\"Sota Minewaki , Tomohiro Ohigashi , Takashi Sozu\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.comtox.2025.100347\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><div>Benchmark dose (BMD; a dose associated with a specified change in response) is used to determine the point of departure for the acceptable daily intake of substances for humans. Multiple dose–response relationship models are considered in the BMD method. The Bayesian model averaging (BMA) method is commonly used, where several models are averaged based on their posterior probabilities, which are determined by calculating the marginal likelihood (ML). Several ML approximation methods are employed in standard software packages, such as BBMD, <span>ToxicR</span>, and the EFSA platform for the BMD method, because the ML cannot be analytically calculated. Although ML values differ among approximation methods, resulting in BMD estimates, this phenomenon is neither widely recognized nor quantitatively evaluated. In this study, we evaluated the agreement of BMD estimates among five ML approximation methods in the BMA method. The five ML approximation methods are (1) maximum likelihood estimation (MLE)-based Schwarz criterion, (2) Markov chain Monte Carlo (MCMC)-based Schwarz criterion, (3) Laplace approximation, (4) density estimation, and (5) bridge sampling. We used eight dose–response relationship models and three prior distributions used in BBMD and <span>ToxicR</span> for 518 experimental datasets. The agreement among the approximation methods tended to be low in the non-informative prior distribution. Although the agreements tended to be high in the informative prior distribution, they were low in some approximation methods. Since the approximation method and the prior distribution affect the agreement, their selection should be carefully considered when implementing BMD methods.</div></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":37651,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Computational Toxicology\",\"volume\":\"34 \",\"pages\":\"Article 100347\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-05-10\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Computational Toxicology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2468111325000076\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"TOXICOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Computational Toxicology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2468111325000076","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"TOXICOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
Evaluating marginal likelihood approximations of dose–response relationship models in Bayesian benchmark dose methods for risk assessment
Benchmark dose (BMD; a dose associated with a specified change in response) is used to determine the point of departure for the acceptable daily intake of substances for humans. Multiple dose–response relationship models are considered in the BMD method. The Bayesian model averaging (BMA) method is commonly used, where several models are averaged based on their posterior probabilities, which are determined by calculating the marginal likelihood (ML). Several ML approximation methods are employed in standard software packages, such as BBMD, ToxicR, and the EFSA platform for the BMD method, because the ML cannot be analytically calculated. Although ML values differ among approximation methods, resulting in BMD estimates, this phenomenon is neither widely recognized nor quantitatively evaluated. In this study, we evaluated the agreement of BMD estimates among five ML approximation methods in the BMA method. The five ML approximation methods are (1) maximum likelihood estimation (MLE)-based Schwarz criterion, (2) Markov chain Monte Carlo (MCMC)-based Schwarz criterion, (3) Laplace approximation, (4) density estimation, and (5) bridge sampling. We used eight dose–response relationship models and three prior distributions used in BBMD and ToxicR for 518 experimental datasets. The agreement among the approximation methods tended to be low in the non-informative prior distribution. Although the agreements tended to be high in the informative prior distribution, they were low in some approximation methods. Since the approximation method and the prior distribution affect the agreement, their selection should be carefully considered when implementing BMD methods.
期刊介绍:
Computational Toxicology is an international journal publishing computational approaches that assist in the toxicological evaluation of new and existing chemical substances assisting in their safety assessment. -All effects relating to human health and environmental toxicity and fate -Prediction of toxicity, metabolism, fate and physico-chemical properties -The development of models from read-across, (Q)SARs, PBPK, QIVIVE, Multi-Scale Models -Big Data in toxicology: integration, management, analysis -Implementation of models through AOPs, IATA, TTC -Regulatory acceptance of models: evaluation, verification and validation -From metals, to small organic molecules to nanoparticles -Pharmaceuticals, pesticides, foods, cosmetics, fine chemicals -Bringing together the views of industry, regulators, academia, NGOs