The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Guidelines for accurate EC50/IC50 estimation
Abstract
This article provides minimum requirements for having confidence in the accuracy of EC50/IC50 estimates. Two definitions of EC50/IC50s are considered: relative and absolute. The relative EC50/IC50 is the parameter c in the 4‐parameter logistic model and is the concentration corresponding to a response midway between the estimates of the lower and upper plateaus. The absolute EC50/IC50 is the response corresponding to the 50% control (the mean of the 0% and 100% assay controls). The guidelines first describe how to decide whether to use the relative EC50/IC50 or the absolute EC50/IC50. Assays for which there is no stable 100% control must use the relative EC50/IC50. Assays having a stable 100% control but for which there may be more than 5% error in the estimate of the 50% control mean should use the relative EC50/IC50. Assays that can be demonstrated to produce an accurate and stable 100% control and less than 5% error in the estimate of the 50% control mean may gain efficiency as well as accuracy by using the absolute EC50/IC50. Next, the guidelines provide rules for deciding when the EC50/IC50 estimates are reportable. The relative EC50/IC50 should only be used if there are at least two assay concentrations beyond the lower and upper bend points. The absolute EC50/IC50 should only be used if there are at least two assay concentrations whose predicted response is less than 50% and two whose predicted response is greater than 50%. A wide range of typical assay conditions are considered in the development of the guidelines. Copyright © 2010 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
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.
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
Growth rate inhibition metrics correct for confounders in measuring sensitivity to cancer drugs
Hafner, M., Niepel, M., Chung, M., & Sorger, P. K. (2016) · Nature Methods · doi:10.1038/nmeth.3853 · Cited by 681
Wu, H., Zhu, J., Diao, W., & Wang, C. (2014) · Carbohydrate Polymers · doi:10.1016/j.carbpol.2014.07.025 · Cited by 169
Antibody complementarity determining region design using high-capacity machine learning
Liu, G., Zeng, H., Mueller, J., Carter, B., Wang, Z., Schilz, J., Horny, G., Birnbaum, M. E., Ewert, S., & Gifford, D. K. (2020) · Bioinformatics · doi:10.1093/bioinformatics/btz895 · Cited by 157
A review of chemical gradient systems for cell analysis
Somaweera, H., Ibraguimov, A., & Pappas, D. (2016) · Analytica Chimica Acta · doi:10.1016/j.aca.2015.12.008 · Cited by 98
An unbiased metric of antiproliferative drug effect in vitro
Harris, L. A., Frick, P. L., Garbett, S. P., Hardeman, K. N., Paudel, B. B., Lopez, C. F., Quaranta, V., & Tyson, D. R. (2016) · Nature Methods · doi:10.1038/nmeth.3852 · Cited by 92
Metadata
- Authors
- Sebaugh, J. L.
- Venue
- Pharmaceutical Statistics
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2011-03
- Volume
- 10
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 128-134
- ISSN
- 1539-1604 (ISSN-L)
- 1539-1612
- OpenAlex
- W2022948223
- Cited by
- 946
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 11.04
- 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: Guidelines for accurate EC50/IC50 estimation. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1002/pst.426
- The paper
- Sebaugh, J. L. (2011). Guidelines for accurate EC50/IC50 estimation. Pharmaceutical Statistics. https://doi.org/10.1002/pst.426
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.