Selected biostatistical aspects of the validation of in vitro toxicological assays

Alternatives to Laboratory Animals

Volumn 30, Issue SUPPL. 2, 2002, Pages 93-98

  Hothorn, Ludwig A ^a  

^a LEIBNIZ UNIVERSITY HANNOVER   (Germany)

Author keywords

In vitro studies; Interlaboratory studies; Statistics; Validation

Indexed keywords

ANIMAL TESTING REPLACEMENT; BIOSTATISTICS; CONFERENCE PAPER; DECISION MAKING; DOSE RESPONSE; IN VITRO STUDY; INTERMETHOD COMPARISON; NONPARAMETRIC TEST; PRIORITY JOURNAL; TOXICITY TESTING; VALIDATION PROCESS;

ANIMALIA;

EID: 0036978503     PISSN: 02611929     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1177/026119290203002s14     Document Type: Conference Paper

References (32)

1. Combes, R.D. (1997). Statistical analysis of dose- response data from in vitro assays: an illustration using Salmonella mutagenicity data. Toxicology in Vitro 11, 683-687.
2. Lovell, D.P., Thomas, G. & Dubow, R. (1999). Issues related to the experimental design and subsequent statistical analysis of in vivo and in vitro comet studies. Teratogenesis Carcinogenesis and Mutagenesis 19, 109-119
3. Kim, B.S., Zhao, B., Kim, H.J. & Cho, M. (2000). The statistical analysis of the in vitro chromosome aberration assay using Chinese hamster ovary cells. Mutation Research 469, 243-252.
4. Kim, B.S. & Margolin, B.H. (1999). Statistical methods for the Ames Salmonella assay. Mutation Research 436, 113-122.
5. Piegorsch, W.W., Simmons, S.J., Margolin, B.H., Zeiger, E., Gidrol, X.M. & Gee, P. (2000). Statistical modeling and analyses of a base-specific Salmonella mutagenicity assay. Mutation Research 467, 11-19.
6. Lovell, D.P. (2000). Dose-response and threshold-mediated mechanisms in mutagenesis: statistical models and study design. Mutation Research 464, 87-95.
7. Lovell, D.P., Yoshimura, I., Hothorn, L.A., Margolin, B.H. & Soper, K. (2000). Report and summary of the major conclusions from statistics in genotoxicity testing working group from the International Workshop on Genotoxicity Test Procedures (IWGTP), March 1999. Environmental and Molecular Mutagenesis 35, 260-263.
8. Hauschke, D., Hayashi, M., Lin, K. K., Lovell, D. P., Robinson, W. D. & Yoshimura, I. (1997). Recommendations for biostatistics of mutagenicity studies. Drug Information Journal 36, 323-326.
9. Feder, P., Carr, G., Holzhütter, H.G., Lovell, D. & Springer, J. (1997). Statistical planning and analysis considerations in the evaluation of in vitro alternatives to whole animal use for eye irritation testing. Food and Chemical Toxicology 35, 167-174.
10. Lovell, D.P. (1999). Principal component analysis of tissue scores from substances used in the COLIPA eye irritation validation study. Toxicology in Vitro 13, 491-503.
11. Archer, G., Balls, M., Bruner, L.H., Curren, R.D., Fentem, J.H., Holzhütter, H-G., Liebsch, M., Lovell, D.P. & Southee, J.A. (1997). The validation of toxicological prediction models. ATLA 25, 505-516.
12. Holzhütter, H-G., Archer, G., Dami, N., Lovell, D.P., Saltelli, A. & Sjöström, M. (1996). Recommendations for the application of biostatistical methods during the development and validation of alternative toxicological methods. ECVAM Biostatistics Task Force Report 1. ATLA 24, 511-530.
13. Simpson, D.G. & Margolin, B.H. (1986). Recursive nonparametric testing for dose-response relationships subject to downturns at high doses. Biometrika 73, 589-596.
14. Schmoor, C. & Schumacher, M. (1992). Adaptive statistical procedures for the analysis of nonmonotone dose-response relationships. Biometrie und Informatik in Medizin und Biologie 23, 113-126.
15. Dunnett, C.W. (1955). A multiple comparison procedure for comparing several treatments with a control. Journal of the American Statistical Association 50, 1096-1121.
16. Munzel, U. & Hothorn, L.A. (2001). A unified approach to simultaneous rank test procedures in the unbalanced one-way layout. Biometrical Journal 43, 553-559
17. Koch, H-F. & Hothorn, L.A. (1999). Exact unconditional distributions for dichotomous data in many-to-one comparisons. Journal of Statistics and Planning Inference 82, 83-99.
18. Bretz, F. & Hothorn, L.A. (2003). Statistical analysis of monotone or non-monotone dose - response data from in vitro toxicological assays. ATLA, in press.
19. Hothorn, L.A. & Bretz, F. (2003). Dose-response and thresholds in mutagenicity studies: a statistical testing approach. ATLA, in press.
20. Kim, B.S., Zhao, B., Kim, H.J. & Cho, M. (2000). The statistical analysis of the in vitro chromosome aberration assay using Chinese hamster ovary cells. Mutation Research 469, 243-252.
21. Hothorn, L.A. & Bretz, F.(2000). Evaluation of animal carcinogenicity studies. Cochran-Armitage trend test vs. multiple contrast tests. Biometrical Journal 42, 553-567
22. Takanashi, H. & Urano, K. (1998). Statistical procedures for estimating the detection limit and determination limit of the Ames Salmonella mutagenicity assay. Science of the Total Environment 221, 31-42.
23. Altman, D. & Bland, M. (1994). Regression towards the mean. British Medical Journal 308, 1499.
24. Kirkland, D.J., Hayashi, M., MacGregor, J.T., Müller, L., Schechtmann, L. & Sofuni, T. (2000). Summary of major conclusions form the international workshop on genotoxicity test procedure. Environmental and Molecular Mutagenesis 35, 162-166.
25. Hauschke, D. & Hothorn, L.A. (1998). Safety assessment in toxicology studies: proof of safety versus proof of hazard. In Design and Analysis of Animal Studies in Pharmaceutical Development (ed. S.C. Chow & J.P. Liu), pp. 197-226. New York, NY, USA: Marcel Dekker.
26. Hauschke, D. & Hothorn, L.A. (2003). The role of control groups in mutagenicity studies: matching biological and statistical relevance. ATLA, in press.
27. Balls, M. & Fentem, J.H. (1999). The validation and acceptance of alternatives to animal testing. Toxicology in Vitro 13, 837-846.
28. Hothorn, L.A. (2003). Statistics of interlaboratory in vitro toxicological studies. ATLA, in press.
29. Gee, P., Sommers, C.H., Melick, A.S., Gidrol, X.M., Todd, M.D., Burris, R.B., Nelson, M.E., Klemm, R.C. & Zeiger, E. (1998). Comparison of responses of base-specific Salmonella tester strains with the traditional strains for identifying mutagens: the results of a validation study. Mutation Research 412, 115-30.
30. Edler, L. & Ittrich, C. (2003). Biostatistical methods for the validation of alternative methods for the in vitro toxicity testing. ATLA, in press.
31. Matsukawa, K., Masuda, K., Kakishima, H., Suzuki, K., Nakagawa, Y., Matsushiga, C., Imanishi, Y., Nakamura, T., Mizutani, A., Watanabe, R., Shingai, T., Kaneko, T., Hirose, A. & Ohno, Y. (1999). Interlaboratory validation of the in vitro eye irritation tests for cosmetic ingredentients. (11) EYTEX™. Toxicology in Vitro 13, 209-217.
32. De Bock, G.H. & Houweling, J.C. (2000). Diagnostic test evaluation without a gold standard. In Encyclopedia of Epidemiologic Methods (ed. M.H. Gail & J. Benichou), pp. 301-303. New York, NY, USA: John Wiley.