臺灣博碩士論文加值系統

根據歐盟委員會 (European Commission)，植物或動物經由人工進行基因轉植之後，使其擁有新的特性或性質者，稱為基因改造生物 (genetically modified organisms, GMOs)。然而，隨著基改作物的發展，基改作物的安全性評估成為一大重要議題。基改作物的成分、基因型、外表型皆需要接受評估與鑑定。
歐盟食品安全管理局 (European Food Safety Authority, EFSA) 提出了針對基因改造作物安全性的統計考量評估方法。基改作物團隊 (GMO Panel) 建議同時利用差異性檢定 (proof of difference) 以及對等性檢定 (proof of equivalence) 來進行評估，並建立其信賴區間 (confidence interval)與對等性限度 (equivalence limit) 。
歐盟食品安全管理局 (European Food Safety Authority, EFSA) 對於安全性評估之科學統計考量建議，基改作物與其傳統作物之平均差異值應落於商業品種之自然變異中。因此，我們提出一項新的標準，亦即利用基改作物與其相對應之傳統作物的平均平方差異，與商業品種變異的比例，來進行基改作物安全性之對等性評估。
在混和效應的模式 (mixed-effects model) 之下，我們採用大樣本修正法 (Modified Large-Sample Method, MLS) 建立線性化指標的95% 信賴上限，作為基改作物與其相對應傳統作物的安全性對等性評估之檢定程序。最後利用模擬資料，以經驗型Ⅰ錯誤率和經驗檢定力來評估此一檢定程序。並以一個例子介紹本方法之應用。

According to the European Commission, genetically modified organisms (GMOs) are organisms, such as plants and animals, whose genetic characteristics are being modified artificially in order to give them a new property. However, with the development of genetically modified organisms, the assessment of GMOs for safety is an important issue. The components, genotype and phenotype of GM plants should be identified and evaluated.
The Panel on GMOs of the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) issued a guideline of scientific opinion on the statistical considerations for safety evaluation of GMOs in 2010. The GMO Panel of the EFSA indicated that both the proof of difference and the proof of equivalence are required for evaluation of the safety of GMOs.
The EFSA’s scientific opinion on statistical considerations for the safety evaluation suggests that the difference in average between the GM crop and its conventional counterpart lie within the natural variability which can be estimated from the commercial varieties. Therefore, we propose a new criterion for assessment of equivalence of the safety profile between the GM crop and conventional crop which is the scaled square mean difference between the GM crop and its conventional crop with the variance of commercial crops as the scaled factor.
Under the mixed-effects model, we applied the modified large-sample (MLS) method to derive the 95% upper confidence limit of the linearized criterion as the testing procedure for evaluation of equivalence in the safety profile between the GMO and its conventional crop. A simulation was conducted to investigate the performance, in terms of size and power, for the proposed procedure. A numerical example illustrates the applications of the proposed method.

口試委員會審定書 #
誌謝 i
摘要 ii
ABSTRACT iii
CONTENTS v
LIST OF FIGURES vii
LIST OF TABLES ix
Chapter 1 Introduction 1
1.1 Global Development of GM Crops 1
1.2 Issues of GM Crops 3
Chapter 2 Safety Assessment of GM Crops 9
2.1 Design of Field Experiments 9
2.2 Concepts of Statistical Considerations of EFSA for GMOs 11
2.3 Two One-sided Tests (TOST) Procedure 13
2.4 The EFSA’s Approach 15
Chapter 3 Proposed Method 23
3.1 The Linear Statistical Model for Mixed Effects Methods 23
3.2 The Criteria and Hypotheses 26
3.3 The Modified Large Sample (MLS) Approach 27
3.4 The MLS Upper Confidence Bound 28
Chapter 4 Numerical Examples 34
4.1 Design of the Example 34
4.2 The 95% Upper Confidence Bound 35
4.3 The EFSA’s Approach 37
Chapter 5 Simulations 49
5.1 Specifications of Combinations of Parameters for Simulation Designs 49
5.2 Simulation Results 50
5.2.1 Empirical Size 50
5.2.2 Empirical Power 51
Chapter 6 Discussion and Conclusions 73
Reference 76
Appendix 78

Altman D. and Bland J.M. (1995) Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence. British Medical Journal, 311:485
Altman D. and Bland J.M. (2004) Confidence intervals illuminate absence of evidence. British Medical Journal, 328:1016-1017
Chow S. C., Liu J. P. (2010) Design and Analysis of Bioavailability and Bioequivalence Studies, 3th Ed., CRC/Chapman and Hall, Taylor and France, New York.
Chow S. C., Shao J., Wang H. (2003) Individual bioequivalence testing under 2x3 designs. Statistics in Medicine 2002; 21:629-648
European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) (2010). EFSA GMO Panel opinion on Statistical considerations for the safety evaluation of GMOs. European Food Safety Authority, Parma, Italy
European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) (2001) Directive 2001/18/EC. European Food Safety Authority, Parma, Italy
European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) (2010) EFSA GMO Panel opinion on Statistical considerations for the Safety Evaluation of GMOs. Presentation of the full statistical code used for the example. European Food Safety Authority, Parma, Italy
European Agency for the Evaluation of Medicinal Products (EMEA). 2001. Note for guidance on the investigation of bioavailability and bioequivalence. Document CPMP/EWP/QWP/1401/98, European Agency for the Evaluation of Medicinal Products, Committee for Proprietary Medicinal Products, London, UK.
Food and Drug Administration (FDA). (2001). Guidance for Industry - Statistical approaches to establishing bioequivalence. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Center for Drug Evaluation and Research. Food and Drug Administration, Rockville, Maryland, 2001.
Hyslop T., Hsuan F., Holder D.J. (2000) Asmall sample confidence interval approach to assess individual bioequivalence. Statistics in Medicine; 19:2885-2897
Hsu, J.C., Hwang, J.T.G., Liu, H.K., and Ruberg, S.J. (1994) Confidence intervals associated with tests for bioequivalence. Biometrika, 81, 103-114.
James, C. (2012) Global Status of Commercialized Biotech/GM Crops: 2012. ISAAA Brief No. 44. ISAAA: Ithaca, NY
Julious, S. A., McIntyre, N. E.. (2012) Sample sizes for trials involving multiple correlated must-win comparisons. Pharmaceutical Statistics, 11 (2):177-85
Kenward M.G. and Roger J.H. 1997. Small sample inference for fixed effects from restricted maximum likelihood. Biometrics, 53: 983-997.
Lee, A.F.S. and Fineberg, N.S. 1991. A fitted test for the Behrens-Fisher problem. Communications in Statistics-Theory and Methods, 20, 653-666.
Lee Y.H, Shao J. and Chow S.C. (2004). Modified large-sample confidence intervals for linear combinations of variance components: extension, theory, and application. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 99, 467-478
Patterson S.D., Jones B. (2012) Observations on scaled average bioequivalence. Pharmaceutical Statistics. 11,1-7
Schuirmann D.J. (1987) A comparison of the two one-sided tests procedure and the power approach for assessing the equivalence of average bioavailability. Journal of Pharmacokinetics and Biopharmaceutics, 15: 657-680.
Tang F.W. (2009) A study on application of Hotelling T-squared to statistical evaluation of genetically modified products. Master thesis, National Taiwan University
Tsai P.Y. (2009) A study on statistical evaluation of in vitro bioequivalence with consideration of variance components. Master thesis, National Taiwan University
World Health Organization (WHO) (2005) World Health Organization Draft Revision on Multisource (Generic) Pharmaceutical Products: Guidelines on Registration Requirements to Establish Interchangeability, Geneva, Switzerland.
World Health Organization (WHO) (2002) 20 questions on genetically modified foods, Geneva, Switzerland.