Statistical analysis of monotone or non-monotone dose-response data from in vitro toxicological assays

Alternatives to Laboratory Animals

Volumn 31, Issue SUPPL. 1, 2003, Pages 81-96

  Bretz, Frank ^a   Hothorn, Ludwig A ^a  

^a LEIBNIZ UNIVERSITY HANNOVER   (Germany)

Author keywords

Contrast test; Dose response analysis; In vitro toxicological assay; Non monotone; Trend test

Indexed keywords

CONTRAST TEST; DIAGNOSTIC TEST; DOSE RESPONSE; IN VITRO STUDY; MONOTONE DOSE RESPONSE; NON MONOTONE DOSE RESPONSE; PRIORITY JOURNAL; REVIEW; STATISTICAL ANALYSIS; TOXICITY TESTING;

EID: 0042697233     PISSN: 02611929     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1177/026119290303101s06     Document Type: Review

References (71)

1. Wakata, A., Miyamae, Y., Sato, S., Suzuki, T., Morita, T., Asano, N., Awogi, T., Kondo, K. & Hayashi, M. (1998). Evaluation of the rat micronucleus test with bone marrow and peripheral blood: summary of the 9th collaborative study by CSGMT/JEMS MMS. Environmental Molecular Mutagenesis 32, 84-100.
2. 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.
3. Bartholomew, D.J. (1959). A test of homogeneity for ordered alternatives. Biometrika 46, 36-48.
4. Bartholomew, D.J. (1961). Ordered tests in the analysis of variance. Biometrika 48, 325-332.
5. Tang, D.I. & Lin, S.P. (1997). An approximate likelihood ratio test for comparing several treatments to a control. Journal of the American Statistical Association 92, 1155-1162.
6. Agresti, A. & Coull, B.A. (1998). An empirical comparison of inference using order-restricted and linear logit models for a binary response. Communications in Statistics - Computation and Simulation 27, 147-166.
7. Bretz, F. & Seidel, D. (2000). SAS/IML programs for exact calculations of orthant probabilities for arbitrary dimensions. Computational Statistics and Data Analysis 33, 220-221.
8. Williams, D.A. (1971). A test for differences between treatment means when several dose levels are compared with a zero dose control. Biometrics 27, 103-117. Correction: Biometrics 31 (1975), 1019.
9. Williams, D.A. (1972). The comparison of several dose levels with a zero dose control. Biometrics 28, 519-531.
10. Shirley, E.A. (1996). A literature review of statistical methods for the analysis of general toxicology data. In Statistics in Toxicology (ed. B.J.T. Morgan), pp. 20-32. Oxford, UK: Clarendon Press.
11. Bretz, F. & Hothorn, L.A. (2000). A powerful alternative to Williams' test with application to toxicological dose-response relationships of normally distributed data. Environmental and Ecological Statistics 7, 135-154.
12. Hothorn, L.A. (1989). Robustness study on Williams' and Shirley procedure, with application in toxicology. Biometrical Journal 31, 891-903.
13. Mukerjee, H., Robertson, T. & Wright, F.T. (1986). Multiple contrast tests for testing against a simple tree ordering. In Advances in Order Restricted Statistical Inference (ed. R. Dykstra), pp. 203-230. Berlin, Germany: Springer-Verlag.
14. Mukerjee, H., Roberston, T. & Wright, F.T. (1987). Comparison of several treatments with a control using multiple contrasts. Journal of the American Statistical Association 82, 902-910.
15. Marcus, R. (1976). The power of some tests of the equality of normal means against an ordered alternative. Biometrika 63, 177-183.
16. Dunnett, C.W. (1955). A multiple comparison procedure for comparing several treatments with a control. Journal of the American Statistical Association 50, 1096-1121.
17. Dunnett, C.W. (1964). New tables for multiple comparison with a control. Biometrics 20, 482-491.
18. Steel, R.G.D. (1959). A multiple comparison rank sum test: treatments versus control. Biometrics 15, 560-572.
19. Bauer, P. (1997). A note on multiple testing procedures in dose finding. Biometrics 53, 1125-1128.
20. Hothorn, L.A. (1997). New statistical methods for analyzing mutagenicity assays: real data problems in biopharmaceutical drug developments. In Industrial Statistics (ed. C.P. Kitsos & L. Edler), pp. 201-208. Heidelberg, Germany: Physica-Verlag.
21. Simpson, D.G. & Margolin, B.H. (1986). Recursive nonparametric testing for dose-response relationships subject to downturns at high doses. Biometrika 73, 589-596.
22. Barlow, R.E., Bartholomew, D.J., Bremner, J.M. & Brunk, H.D. (1972). Statistical Inference Under Order Restrictions. London, UK: Wiley.
23. Robertson, T., Wright, F.T. & Dykstra, R.L. (1988). Order Restricted Statistical Inference. New York, NY, USA: Wiley.
24. SAS Institute (1997). SAS/STAT Software: Changes and Enhancements through Release 6.12. Cary, NC, USA: SAS Institute.
25. Hayter, A.J., Kuriki, S. & Shimodaira, H. (2002). The isotonic range statistic for testing against an ordered alternative. Journal of Statistical Planning on Inference 105, 347-362.
26. Hayter, A.J. & Liu, W. (1999). A new test against an umbrella alternative and the associated simultaneous confidence intervals, Computational Statistics and Data Analysis 30, 393-401.
27. Chuang-Stein, C. & Agresti, A. (1997). A review of tests for detecting a monotone dose-response relationship with ordinal response data. Statistics in Medicine 16, 2599-2618.
28. Hirotsu, C. (1979). The cumulative chi-squares method and a Studentised maximal contrast method for testing an ordered alternative in a one-way analysis of variance model. Reports of Statistics: Application Research 26, 12-21.
29. Hirotsu, C. (1997). Isotonic inference with particular interest in application to clinical trials. In Industrial Statistics (ed. C.P. Kitsos & L. Edler), pp. 233-241. Heidelberg, Germany: Physica-Verlag.
30. Tukey, J.W., Ciminera, J.L. & Heyse, J.F. (1985). Testing the statistical certainty of a response to increasing doses of a drug. Biometrics 41, 295-301.
31. Capizzi, T., Survill, T.T., Heyse, J.F. & Malani, H. (1992). An empirical and simulated comparison of some tests for detecting progressiveness of response with increasing doses of a compound. Biometrical Journal 34, 275-289.
32. Antonello, J.M., Clark, R.L. & Heyse, J.F. (1993). Application of the Tukey trend test procedure to assess developmental and reproductive toxicity. I. Measurement data. Fundamentals in Applied Toxicology 21, 52-58.
33. Mudholkar, G. & McDermott, M. (1989). A class of tests for equality of ordered means. Biometrika 76, 161-168.
34. McDermott, M.P. & Mudholkar, G.S. (1993). A simple approach to testing homogeneity of order-constrained means. Journal of the American Statistical Association 88, 1371-1379.
35. McDermott, M.P. (1999). Generalised orthogonal contrast tests for homogeneity of ordered means. The Canadian Journal of Statistics 27, 457-470.
36. Hayter, A.J. (1990). A one-sided Studentised range test for testing against a simple ordered alternative. Journal of the American Statistical Association 85, 778-785.
37. Tukey, J.W. (1953). The problem of multiple comparisons. Unpublished manuscript reprinted in: The Collected Works of John W. Tukey, Volume 8 (ed. H.I. Braun), (1994). New York, NY, USA: Chapman and Hall.
38. Cohen, A. & Sackrowitz, H.B. (1992). Improved tests for comparing treatments against a control and other one-sided problems. Journal of the American Statistical Association 87, 1137-1144.
39. Genz, A. & Bretz, F. (1999). Numerical computation of multivariate t-probabilities with application to power calculation of multiple contrasts. Journal of Statistical Computation and Simulation 63, 361-378.
40. Genz, A. & Bretz, F. (2002). Methods for the computation of multivariate t-probabilities. Journal of Computational and Graphical Statistics 11, 950-971.
41. Tamhane, A.C., Dunnett, C.W. & Hochberg, Y. (1996). Multiple test procedures for dose finding. Biometrics 52, 21-37.
42. Hothorn, L.A. & Hauschke, D. (1998). Principles in statistical testing in randomised toxicological studies. In Design and Analysis of Animal Studies in Pharmaceutical Development (ed. S.C. Chow & J.P. Liu), pp. 79-134. New York, NY, USA: Marcel Dekker.
43. Bailey, S. (1998). Subchronic toxicity studies. In Design and Analysis of Animal Studies in Pharmaceutical Development (ed. S.C. Chow & J.P. Liu), pp. 135-196. New York, NY, USA: Marcel Dekker.
44. Lee, R.E. & Spurrier, J.D. (1995). Successive comparisons between ordered treatments. Journal of Statistical Planning and Inference 43, 323-330.
45. Saville, D.J. & Wood, G.R. (1991). Statistical Methods: The Geometric Approach. New York, NY, USA: Springer-Verlag.
46. Abelson, R.P. & Tukey, J.W. (1963). Efficient utilisation of non-numerical information in quantitative analysis: general theory and the case of simple order. The Annals of Mathematical Statistics 34, 1347-1369.
47. Schaafsma, W. & Smid, L.J. (1966). Most stringent somewhere most powerful tests against alternatives restricted by a number of linear inequalities. The Annals of Mathematical Statistics 37, 1161-1172.
48. Bretz, F. (1999). Powerful Modification of Williams's Test on Trend. PhD thesis, University of Hannover. Web site http://www.bioinf.uni-hannover.de/~bretz/ thesis/index.html (Accessed 25/5/03).
49. Neuhäuser, M. & Hothorn, L.A. (2000). Parametric location-scale and scale trend tests based on Levene's transformation. Computational Statistics and Data Analysis 33, 189-200.
50. Dunnett, C.W. (1980). Pairwise multiple comparisons in the unequal variance case. Journal of the American Statistical Association 75, 796-800.
51. Hochberg, Y. & Tamhane, A.C. (1987). Multiple Comparison Procedures. New York, NY, USA: Wiley.
52. Meng, C.Y.K., Davis, S.B. & Roth, A.J. (1993). Robust contrast based trend tests. ASA Proceedings of the Biopharmaceutical Section, 127-132.
53. Hettmansperger, T.P. & Norton, R.M. (1987). Tests for patterned alternatives in k-sample problems. Journal of the American Statistical Association 82, 292-299.
54. Seidel, D. (2001). Gerichtete Tests für geordnet kategoriale Daten bei sehr kleinen Fallzahlen. PhD Thesis, University of Hannover.
55. 2-test. Biometrics 10, 417-451.
56. Armitage, P. (1955). Tests for linear trends in proportions and frequencies. Biometrics 11, 375-386.
57. National Archives and Record Service (1985). Federal Register No. 50.
58. Tarone, R.E. & Gart, J.J. (1980). On the robustness of combined tests for trends in proportions. Journal of the American Statistical Association 75, 110-116.
59. Bretz, F. & Hothorn, L.A. (2002). Asymptotic power and sample size determination for contrast tests with binomial data. Statistics in Medicine 21, 3325-3335.
60. Liu, Q. (1998). An order-directed score test for trend in ordered 2 x K tables. Biometrics 54, 1147-1154.
61. 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.
62. Rom, D.M., Costello, R.J. & Connell, L.T. (1994). On closed test procedures for dose-response analysis. Statistics in Medicine 13, 1583-1596.
63. Shi, N.Z. (1988). A test of homogeneity for umbrella alternatives and tables of the level probabilities. Communications in Statistics: Theory and Methods 17, 657-670.
64. Marcus, R. & Genizi, A. (1994). Simultaneous confidence intervals for umbrella contrasts of normal means. Computational Statistics and Data Analysis 17, 393-407.
65. Lim, D.H. & Wolfe, D.A. (1997). Nonparametric tests for comparing umbrella pattern treatment effects with a control in a randomized block design. Biometrics 53, 410-418.
66. Mack, G.A. & Wolfe, D.A. (1981). K-sample rank tests for umbrella alternatives. Journal of the American Statistical Association 76, 175-181. Correction: ibid. 77, 954 (1982).
67. Bretz, F. & Hothorn, L.A. (2001). Testing dose-response relationships with a priori unknown, possibly non-monotone shapes. Journal of Biopharmaceutical Statistics 11, 193-207.
68. Ruberg, S.J. (1989). Contrasts for identifying the minimum effective dose. Journal of the American Statistical Association 84, 816-822.
69. Fligner, M.A. & Wolfe, D.A. (1982). Distribution-free tests for comparing several treatments with a control. Statistica Neelandica 36, 119-127.
70. Neuhäuser, M. (1996). Trendtests bei a-priori unbekanntem Erwartungswertprofil. PhD Thesis, University of Dortmund.
71. Hothorn, L.A. & Bretz, F. (2003). Dose-response and thresholds in mutagenicity studies: a statistical testing approach. ATLA 31, Suppl. 1, 97-103.