Statistical analysis of in vivo anticancer experiments: Tumor growth inhibition

Drug Information Journal

Volumn 40, Issue 2, 2006, Pages 229-238

  Hothorn, Ludwig A ^a  

^a LEIBNIZ UNIVERSITY HANNOVER   (Germany)

Author keywords

Confidence intervals; Treatment to control ratio; Tumor inhibition

Indexed keywords

ANTINEOPLASTIC AGENT; FUMAGILLIN; FUMAGILLOL CHLOROACETYLCARBAMATE; PLACEBO;

ANALYTIC METHOD; ANIMAL EXPERIMENT; ANIMAL MODEL; AREA UNDER THE CURVE; CANCER INHIBITION; CANCER RECURRENCE; CLINICAL TRIAL; CONFIDENCE INTERVAL; CONTROLLED CLINICAL TRIAL; CONTROLLED STUDY; DECISION MAKING; GROWTH INHIBITION; HUMAN; IN VIVO STUDY; MOUSE; NONHUMAN; PARAMETRIC TEST; PRIORITY JOURNAL; QUANTITATIVE ANALYSIS; REVIEW; STATISTICAL ANALYSIS; SURVIVAL; TREATMENT TO CONTROL RATIO; TUMOR REGRESSION;

EID: 33646552698     PISSN: 00928615     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1177/009286150604000212     Document Type: Review

References (28)

1. Shusterman S, Grupp SA, Barr R, Carpentieri D, Zhao H, Maris JM. The angiogenesis inhibitor TNP-470 effectively inhibits human neuroblastoma xenograft growth, especially in the setting of subclinical disease. Clin Cancer Res. 2001; 7:977-984.
2. Freedman LS, Midthune DN, Brown CC, Steele V, Kelloff GJ. Statistical analysis of animal cancer chemoprevention experiments. Biometrics. 1993; 49:259-268.
3. Kokoska SM, Hardin JM, Grubbs CJ, Hsu C. The statistical analysis of cancer inhibition/promotion experiments. Anticancer Res. 1993;13: 1357-1363.
4. Dunson DB, Haseman JK. Modeling tumor onset and multiplicity using transition models with latent variables. Biometrics. 1999;55:965-970.
5. Koziol JA, Maxwell DA. A distribution-free test for paired growth curve analyses with application to an animal tumour immunotherapy experiment. Stat. Med. 1992;1:83-89.
6. Hanfelt JJ. Statistical approaches to experimental design and data analysis of in vivo studies. Breast Cancer Res Treat. 1997;46:279-302.
7. Liang H, Sha NJ. Modeling antitumor activity by using a non-linear mixed-effects model. Math Biosci. 2004;89:61-73.
8. Tan M, Fang HB, Tian GL, Houghton PJ. Small-sample inference for incomplete longitudinal data with truncation and censoring in tumor xenograft models. Biometrics. 2002;58:612-620.
9. Tan T, Fang HB, Tian GL. Repeated-measures models with constrained parameters for incomplete data in tumour xenograft experiments. Stat. Med. 2005;24:109-119.
10. Pham B, Cranney A, Boers M, Verhoeven AC, Wells G, Tugwell P. Validity of area-under-the-curve analysis to summarize effect in rheumatoid arthritis clinical trials. J Rheumatol. 1999; 26:712-716.
11. Frison L, Pocock SJ. Repeated measures in clinical trials: analysis using mean summary statistics and its implications for design. Stat Med. 1992; 11:1685-1704.
12. Qian W, Parmar MKB. Analysis of messy longitudinal data from a randomized clinical trial. Stat Med. 2000;19:2657-2674.
13. Matthews JN, Campbell MJ. Adjusting for baseline: change or percentage change. Stat Med. 1992;11:1624-1626.
14. Vardi Y, Ying Z, Zhang C. Two-sample tests for growth curves under dependent right censoring. Biometrika. 2001;80:949-960.
15. Heitjan DF, Kunselman S. Time until first significant difference in in vivo tumor growth experiments. In Vivo. 1995;9:7-9.
16. Re RN, Cook JL, Giardina JF. The inhibition of tumor growth by triplex-forming oligonuceotides. Cancer Lett. 2004;209:51-53.
17. Harrison G, Richards S, Lawson S, et al. Comparison of allogeneic transplant versus chemotherapy for relapsed childhood acute lymphoblastic leukaemia in the MRC UKALL R1 trial. Ann Oncol. 2000;11:999-1006.
18. Roehmel J. Therapeutic equivalence investigations: statistical considerations. Stat Med. 1998; 17:1703-1714.
19. Feuerstein TJ, Rossner R, Schumacher M. How to express an effect mean as percentage of a control mean? J Pharmacol Toxicol Methods. 1997;37: 187-190.
20. Liu JP, Weng CS. Evaluation of log-transformation in assessing bioequivalence. Commun Stat. 1994; A23:421-434.
21. Fieller E. Some problems in interval estimation. J R Stat Soc. 1954;B16:175-185.
22. Corbett Th, Valeriote F. Tumor models and the discovery and secondary evaluation of solid tumor active agents. Int J Pharmacognosy. 1995;33: 102-122.
23. Hauschke D, Kieser M, Hothorn LA Proof of safety in toxicology based on the ratio of two means for normally distributed data. Biometr J. 1999; 41:295-304.
24. Iversen PW. Comparison of in vivo tumor growth models. Proc Annu Meeting Am Stat Assoc. 2001:5-9.
25. Hothorn T, Munzel U. Non-parametric confidence interval for the ratio. Report University of Erlangen, Department Medical Statistics. 2002. Available at: www.uni-erlangen.de.
26. Hodges JL, Lehmann EL. Estimates of location based on rank tests. Ann Math Stat. 1963; 34:598-611.
27. Dilba G, Bretz F, Guiard V, Hothorn LA. Simultaneous confidence intervals for ratios for the comparison of several treatments with a control. Meth Inf Med. 2004;43:465-469.
28. Bretz F, Hothorn LA, Hsu J. Identifying effective and/or safe doses by stepwise confidence intervals for ratios. Stat Med. 2003;22:847-858.