Multiplicity-adjusted inferences in risk assessment: Benchmark analysis with quantal response data

Biometrics

Volumn 61, Issue 1, 2005, Pages 277-286

  Nitcheva, Daniela K ^a,b   Piegorsch, Walter W ^a,b   West, R Webster ^a   Kodell, Ralph L ^c  

^a UNIVERSITY OF SOUTH CAROLINA   (United States)

^b South Carolina Cancer Center   (United States)

^c NATIONAL CENTER FOR TOXICOLOGICAL RESEARCH   (United States)

Author keywords

Benchmark dose; Low dose extrapolation; Multistage model; Quantal data; Quantitative risk assessment; Safety assessment; Simultaneous inferences

Indexed keywords

SAFETY ENGINEERING;

BENCHMARK ANALYSIS; BENCHMARK DOSE; LOW-DOSE EXTRAPOLATION; MULTI STAGE MODELING; QUANTAL DATA; QUANTAL RESPONSE; QUANTITATIVE RISK ASSESSMENT; RESPONSE DATA; SAFETY ASSESSMENTS; SIMULTANEOUS INFERENCE;

RISK ASSESSMENT;

TILUDRONIC ACID; TOXIN;

RISK ASSESSMENT;

COMPUTER SIMULATION; CONFIDENCE INTERVAL; CONTROLLED STUDY; DOSE RESPONSE; DRUG MEGADOSE; DRUG SURVEILLANCE PROGRAM; HUMAN; LOW DRUG DOSE; MATHEMATICAL ANALYSIS; MAXIMUM ALLOWABLE CONCENTRATION; MONTE CARLO METHOD; QUALITY CONTROL; QUANTITATIVE ANALYSIS; REVIEW; RISK ASSESSMENT; STATISTICAL MODEL; TOXICITY;

EID: 15044350900     PISSN: 0006341X     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.0006-341X.2005.031211.x     Document Type: Review

References (20)

1. Al-Saidy, O. M., Piegorsch, W. W., West, R. W., and Nitcheva, D. K. (2003). Confidence bands for low-dose risk estimation with quantal response data. Biometrics 59, 1056-1062.
2. Armitage, P. and Doll, R. (1954). The age distribution of cancer and a multi-stage theory of carcinogenesis. British Journal of Cancer 8, 1-12.
3. Bailer, A. J. and Smith, R. J. (1994). Estimating upper confidence limits for extra risk in quantal multistage models. Risk Analysis 14, 1001-1010.
4. Casella, G. and Berger, R. L. (2002). Statistical Inference, 2nd edition. Pacific Grove, California: Duxbury.
5. Crump, K. S. (1984). A new method for determining allowable daily intake. Fundamental and Applied Toxicology 4, 854-871.
6. Crump, K. S. (1995). Calculation of benchmark doses from continuous data. Risk Analysis 15, 79-89.
7. Crump, K. S. and Howe, R. (1985). A review of methods for calculating confidence limits in low dose extrapolation. In Toxicological Risk Assessment, Vol. I: Biological and Statistical Criteria, D. B. Clayson, D. Krewski, and I. Munro (eds), 187-203. Boca Raton, Florida: CRC Press.
8. Faustman, E. M. and Bartell, S. M. (1997). Review of non-cancer risk assessment: Applications of benchmark dose methods. Human and Ecological Risk Assessment 3, 893-920.
9. Gaylor, D. W. and Kodell, R. L. (2002). A procedure for developing risk-based reference doses. Regulatory Toxicology and Pharmacology 35, 137-141.
10. Guess, H. A. and Crump, K. S. (1976). Low-dose extrapolation of data from animal carcinogenicity experiments - Analysis of a new statistical technique. Mathematical Biosciences 32, 15-36.
11. Hothorn, L. A. and Hauschke, D. (2000). Identifying the maximum safe dose: A multiple testing approach. Journal of Biopharmaceutical Statistics 10, 15-30.
12. Kodell, R. L. and Park, C. N. (1995). Linear extrapolation in cancer risk assessment. In Low-Dose Extrapolation of Cancer Risks: Issues and Perspectives, S. Olin, W. Farland, C. Park, L. Rhomberg, R. Scheuplein, T. Starr, and J. Wilson (eds), 87-104. Washington, D.C.: ILSI Press.
13. Krewski, D. and van Ryzin, J. (1981). Dose response models for quantal response toxicity data. In Statistics and Related Topics, M. Csörgö, D. A. Dawson, J. N. K. Rao, and A. K. M. E. Saleh (eds), 201-231. Amsterdam: North-Holland.
14. Moerbeek, M., Piersma, A. H., and Slob, W. (2004). A comparison of three methods for calculating confidence intervals for the benchmark dose. Risk Analysis 24, 31-40.
15. Neter, J., Kutner, M. H., Nachtsheim, C. J., and Wasserman, W. (1996). Applied Linear Statistical Models, 4th edition. Chicago: R. D. Irwin.
16. Pan, W., Piegorsch, W. W., and West, R. W. (2003). Exact one-sided simultaneous confidence bands via Uusipaikka's method. Annals of the Institute of Statistical Mathematics 55, 243-250.
17. Portier, C. J. (1994). Biostatistical issues in the design and analysis of animal carcinogenicity experiments. Environmental Health Perspectives 102 (suppl. 1), 5-8.
18. Schlosser, P. M., Lilly, P. D., Conolly, R. B., Janszen, D. B., and Kimbell, J. S. (2003). Benchmark dose risk assessment for formaldehyde using airflow modeling and a single-compartment, DNA-protein cross-link dosimetry model to estimate human equivalent doses. Risk Analysis 23, 473-487.
19. Schwertman, N. C. and Carter, N. J. (1995). A more practical Scheffé-type multiple comparison procedure for commonly encountered numbers of comparisons. Journal of Statistical Computation and Simulation 53, 181-196.
20. U.S. EPA. (2000). Benchmark dose technical guidance document. Technical Report EPA/630/R-00/001, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, D.C.