Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 277

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

Derivation and application of relative potency estimates based on in vitro bioassay results

Villeneuve, Daniel L, Blankenship, Alan L, Giesy, John P·2000·Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry

Abstract

Relative potency (REP) estimates are widely used to characterize and compare the potency of a wide variety of samples analyzed using in vitro bioassays. Relative potency estimates are generally calculated as a simple ratio: the EC50 of a well-characterized standard divided by the EC50 of a sample. Such estimates are valid only when the dose-response curves for the sample and standard are parallel and exhibit the same maximum achievable response (efficacy). These conditions are often either violated or cannot be demonstrated. As a result, there is a need to calculate and present REPs in a manner that addresses the potential uncertainties caused by violation of the assumptions of parallelism and equal efficacy. Multiple point estimates, over the range of responses from EC20 to EC80, can be used to derive relative potency ranges (REP20–80 range). The width of a REP20–80 range is directly proportional to the degree of deviation from parallelism between sample and standard dose-response curves. Thus, REP20–80 ranges both test the assumption of parallelism and characterize the amount of uncertainty in an REP estimate resulting from deviation from parallelism. Although uncertainties due to unequal efficacy cannot be easily characterized mathematically, a systematic method for evaluating sample efficacy has been developed into a framework to guide the derivation and application of REP estimates based on in vitro bioassay results. Use of the systematic framework and REP20–80 ranges was illustrated using three sample data sets. It is hoped that the framework and discussion presented will facilitate the use of bioassay-derived REP estimates to characterize samples of both known and unknown composition without ignoring the assumptions underlying REP estimation.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1002/etc.5620191131

Cites

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cited by

See all 277

Metadata

Authors
Villeneuve, D. L., Blankenship, A. L., & Giesy, J. P.
Venue
Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry
Published
2000-11-01
Volume
19
Issue
11
Pages
2835-2843
ISSN
  • 0730-7268 (ISSN-L)
  • 1552-8618
OpenAlex
W1973402545
Cited by
277
References
0
FWCI
7.53
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Derivation and application of relative potency estimates based on in vitro bioassay results. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1002/etc.5620191131
The paper
Villeneuve, D. L., Blankenship, A. L., & Giesy, J. P. (2000). Derivation and application of relative potency estimates based on in vitro bioassay results. Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry. https://doi.org/10.1002/etc.5620191131

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.