The role of control groups in mutagenicity studies: Matching biological and statistical relevance

Alternatives to Laboratory Animals

Volumn 31, Issue SUPPL. 1, 2003, Pages 65-75

  Hauschke, Dieter ^a   Hothorn, Torsten ^b   Schäfer, Juliane ^c  

^a ALTANA PHARMA AG   (Germany)

^b UNIVERSITY OF ERLANGEN NUREMBERG   (Germany)

^c UNIVERSITY OF MUNICH   (Germany)

Author keywords

Biological relevance; Fieller confidence intervals; Mutagenicity studies; Test on equivalence

Indexed keywords

CONSUMER; CONTROLLED STUDY; HAZARD; MAXIMUM ALLOWABLE CONCENTRATION; MUTAGENICITY; POPULATION RESEARCH; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROBABILITY; REVIEW; RISK ASSESSMENT; SAFETY; STATISTICAL ANALYSIS; STATISTICS;

EID: 0042196046     PISSN: 02611929     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1177/026119290303101s04     Document Type: Review

References (15)

1. Hothorn, L.A. (1995). Biostatistical analysis of the control vs k treatments design including a positive control group. In Biometrie in der chemisch-pharmazeutischen Industrie (ed J. Vollmar), pp. 19-26. Stuttgart, Germany: Gustav Fischer Verlag.
2. Bartholomew, D.J. (1961). Ordered tests in the analysis of variance. Biometrika 2, 325-332.
3. Hothorn, L. A., Hayashi, M. & Seidel, D. (2000). Dose-response relationship in mutagenicity assays including an appropriate positive control group: a multiple testing approach. Environmental and Ecological Statistics 7, 27-42.
4. Maurer, W., Hothorn, L. A. & Lehmacher, W. (1995). Multiple comparisons in drug clinical and preclinical assays: a priori ordered hypotheses. In Biometrie in der chemisch-pharmazeutischen Industrie (ed. J. Vollmar), pp. 3-18. Stuttgart, Germany: Gustav Fischer Verlag.
5. 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 31, 323-326.
6. Hauschke, D. & Hothorn, L. A. (1998). Safety assessment in toxicological 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. 197-225. New York, NY, USA: Marcel Dekker.
7. De Boeck, M., Touil, N., De Visscher, G., Vande, P. A. & Kirsch-Volders, M. (2000). Validation and implementation of an internal standard in comet assay analysis. Mutation Research 469, 181-197.
8. Hothorn, L. A. & Hauschke, D. (2000). Identifying the maximum safe dose: a multiple testing approach. Journal of Biopharmaceutical Statistics 10, 15-30.
9. Sasabuchi, S. (1988). A multivariate one-sided test with composite hypotheses determined by linear inequalities when the covariance matrix has an unknown scale factor. Memoirs of the Faculty of Science, Kyushu University, Series A, Mathematics 42, 9-19.
10. Hauschke, D., Kieser, M. & Hothorn, L. A. (1999). Proof of safety in toxicology based on the ratio of two means for normally distributed data. Biometrical Journal 41, 295-304.
11. Fieller, E. (1954). Some problems in interval estimation. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society B 16, 175-185.
12. Schäfer, J. (2001). Kriterien zur Entscheidung über therapeutische Äquivalenz (Criteria for the Decision on Therapeutic Equivalence; in German). Masters Thesis, University of Munich.
13. Anon. (1991). Guidance Note: The Practical Interpretation of Annex V: Test Method B10, the In Vitro Mammalian Cell Cytogenetics Test. XI/574/91 Rev. 2. Brussels, Belgium: Commission of the EC, Directorate General Environment.
14. Adler, I.D. & Kliesch, U. (1990). Comparison of single and multiple treatment regimens in the mouse bone marrow micronucleus assay for hydroquinone and cyclophosphamide. Mutation Research 234, 115-123.
15. Fisher, R.A. (1935). The Design of Experiments. London, UK: Oliver & Boyd.