Poly-k-trend tests for survival adjusted analysis of tumor rates formulated as approximate multiple contrast test

Journal of Biopharmaceutical Statistics

Volumn 18, Issue 5, 2008, Pages 934-948

  Schaarschmidt, Frank ^a   Sill, Martin ^a   Hothorn, Ludwig A ^a  

^a LEIBNIZ UNIVERSITY HANNOVER   (Germany)

Author keywords

Animal carcinogenicity study; Cochran Armitage trend test; Multiple contrast test; Poly 3 test

Indexed keywords

METHYLEUGENOL;

ANIMAL EXPERIMENT; ANIMAL MODEL; ARTICLE; CANCER INCIDENCE; CARCINOGENICITY; CHEMICAL CARCINOGENESIS; CHRONIC TOXICITY; COCHRAN ARMITAGE TEST; CONFIDENCE INTERVAL; CONTROLLED STUDY; DOSE RESPONSE; FEMALE; FIBROMA; LONG TERM EXPOSURE; MALE; MORTALITY; MULTIPLE CONTRAST TEST; NONHUMAN; POLY K TEST; PRIORITY JOURNAL; SAMPLE SIZE; SKIN TUMOR; STATISTICAL ANALYSIS; STATISTICAL PARAMETERS; SURVIVAL RATE; WILLIAMS TYPE TEST;

ANIMALS; CARCINOGENICITY TESTS; CONFIDENCE INTERVALS; DATA INTERPRETATION, STATISTICAL; DOSE-RESPONSE RELATIONSHIP, DRUG; EUGENOL; MICE; NEOPLASMS, EXPERIMENTAL; PROBABILITY; RATS; SAMPLE SIZE;

EID: 51649084557     PISSN: 10543406     EISSN: 15205711     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/10543400802294285     Document Type: Article

References (28)

1. Armitage, P. (1955). Tests for linear trends in proportions and frequencies. Biometrics 11:375-386.
2. Agresti, A., Caffo, B. (2000). Simple and effective confidence intervals for proportions and differences of proportions result from adding two successes and two failures. Am. Stat. 54:280-288.
3. Bailer, J. A., Portier, C. J. (1988). Effects of treatment-induced mortality and tumor-induced mortality on tests for carcinogenicity in small samples. Biometrics 44:417-431.
4. Bailer, J. A., Portier, C. J. (1989). Testing for increased carcinogenicity using a survival-adjusted quantal response test. Fund. Appl. Toxicol. 12:731-737.
5. Bieler, G. S., Williams, R. L. (1993). Ratio estimates, the delta method, and quantal response tests for increased carcinogenicity. Biometrics 49:793-801.
6. Bretz, F. (2006). An extension of the Williams trend test to general unbalanced linear models. Comput. Stat. Data Anal. 50:1735-1748.
7. Bretz, F., Hothorn, L. A. (2003). Statistical analysis of monotone or non-monotone dose response data from in vitro toxicological assays. ATLA 31:81-96.
8. Bretz, F., Hothorn, L. A. (2002). Detecting dose-response using contrasts: asymptotic power and sample size determination for binomial data. Stat. Med. 21:3325-3335.
9. 2 tests. Biometrics 10:417-451.
10. Dinse, G. E. (1994). A comparison of tumor-incidence analyses applicable in single-sacrifice animal experiments. Stat. Med. 13:689-708.
11. Dunnett, C. W. (1955). A multiple comparison procedure for comparing several treatments with a control. J. Am. Stat. Assoc. 50:1096-1121.
12. Genz, A., Bretz, F., Horthorn, T. with contributions by Miwa, T., Mi, X., Leisch, F., Scheipl, F. (2007). Mvtnorm: Multivariate normal and t distribution. R Package Version 0.8-1. (Software package).
13. Hirotsu, C., Marumo, K. (2002). Changepoint analysis as a method for isotonic inference. Scand. J. Stat. 9:125-138.
14. Hothorn, L.A., Bretz, F. (2000). Evaluation of animal carcinogenicity studies: Cochran armitage trend test vs. maximum tests. Biometrical J. 42:553-567.
15. Hothorn, T., Bretz, F., Genz, A. (2001). On multivariate t and Gau probabilities in R. R News 1(2):27-29.
16. Hothorn, L. A., Hasler, M. (2008). Proof of hazard and proof of safety in toxicological studies using multiple tests or simultaneous confidence intervals for differences and ratios. J. Biopharmaceut. Stat. 18(5):915-932.
17. Johnson, N. L., Kotz, S., Balakrishnan, N. (1994). Wiley Series in Probability and Mathematical Statistics: Continuous Univariate Distributions. New York: Wiley.
18. Lin, K. K. (2000). Progress report on the guidance for industry for statistical aspects of the design, analysis and interpretation of chronic rodent carcinogenicity studies of pharmaceuticals. J. Biopharmaceut. Stat. 10:481-501.
19. Moon, H., Hongshik, A., Kodell, R. L. (2006). A computational tool for testing dose-related trend using an age-adjusted bootstrap-based poly-k test. J. Stat. Software 16(7).
20. 1 mice. Technical report 491. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, National Institutes of Health.
21. Peddada, S. D., Dinse, G. E., Haseman, J. K. (2005). A survival-adjusted quantal response test for comparing tumor incidence rates. Appl. Stat. 54:51-61.
22. Peto, R., Pike, M. C., Day, N. E., Gray, R. G., Lee, P. N., Parish, S., Peto, J., Richards, S., Wahrendorf, J. (1980). Guidelines for simple, sensitive significance tests for carcinogenic effects in long-term animal experiments, in long-term and short-term screening assays for carcinogens: A critical appraisal, World Health Organization.
23. Portier, C., Hedges, J., Hoel, D. (1986). Age-specific models of mortality and tumor onset for historical control animals in the National Toxicology Program's carcinogenicity experiments. Cancer Res. 46:4372-4378.
24. Price, R. M., Bonett, D. G. (2004). An improved confidence interval for a linear function of binomial proportions. Comput. Stat. Data Anal. 45:449-456.
25. R Development Core Team (2007). R: A Language and Environment for Statistical Computing. Vienna, Austria: R Foundation for Statistical Computing.
26. Ryan, T. P., Woodall, W. H. (2005). The most-cited statistical papers. J. Appl. Stat. 32:461-474.
27. Sontag, J. M., Page, N. P., Saffiotti, U. (1976). Guidelines for carcinogen bioassay in small rodents. Technical report 01. Research Triangle Park, NC: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, National Toxicology Program.
28. Williams, D. A. (1971). Test for differences between treatment means when several dose levels are compared with a zero control. Biometrics 27:103-117.