Prediction Intervals for Overdispersed Binomial Endpoints and Their Application to Toxicological Historical Control Data.

IF 1.4 4区 医学 Q4 PHARMACOLOGY & PHARMACY
Max Menssen, Jonathan Rathjens
{"title":"Prediction Intervals for Overdispersed Binomial Endpoints and Their Application to Toxicological Historical Control Data.","authors":"Max Menssen, Jonathan Rathjens","doi":"10.1002/pst.70033","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>For toxicology studies, the validation of the concurrent control group by historical control data (HCD) has become requirements. This validation is usually done by historical control limits (HCL), which should cover the observations of the concurrent control with a predefined level of confidence. In many applications, HCL are applied to dichotomous data, for example, the number of rats with a tumor versus the number of rats without a tumor (carcinogenicity studies) or the number of cells with a micronucleus out of a total number of cells. Dichotomous HCD may be overdispersed and can be heavily right- (or left-) skewed, which is usually not taken into account in the practical applications of HCL. To overcome this problem, four different prediction intervals (two frequentist, two Bayesian), that can be applied to such data, are proposed. Based on comprehensive Monte-Carlo simulations, the coverage probabilities of the proposed prediction intervals were compared to heuristical HCL typically used in daily toxicological routine (historical range, limits of the np-chart, mean <math> <semantics><mrow><mo>±</mo></mrow> <annotation>$$ \\pm $$</annotation></semantics> </math> 2 SD). Our simulations reveal, that frequentist bootstrap calibrated prediction intervals control the type-1-error best, but, also prediction intervals calculated based on Bayesian generalized linear mixed models appear to be practically applicable. Contrary, all heuristics fail to control the type-1-error. The application of HCL is demonstrated based on a real life data set containing historical controls from long-term carcinogenicity studies run on behalf of the U.S. National Toxicology Program. The proposed frequentist prediction intervals are publicly available from the R package predint, whereas R code for the computation of the two Bayesian prediction intervals is provided via GitHub.</p>","PeriodicalId":19934,"journal":{"name":"Pharmaceutical Statistics","volume":"24 5","pages":"e70033"},"PeriodicalIF":1.4000,"publicationDate":"2025-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12433933/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Pharmaceutical Statistics","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1002/pst.70033","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"PHARMACOLOGY & PHARMACY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

For toxicology studies, the validation of the concurrent control group by historical control data (HCD) has become requirements. This validation is usually done by historical control limits (HCL), which should cover the observations of the concurrent control with a predefined level of confidence. In many applications, HCL are applied to dichotomous data, for example, the number of rats with a tumor versus the number of rats without a tumor (carcinogenicity studies) or the number of cells with a micronucleus out of a total number of cells. Dichotomous HCD may be overdispersed and can be heavily right- (or left-) skewed, which is usually not taken into account in the practical applications of HCL. To overcome this problem, four different prediction intervals (two frequentist, two Bayesian), that can be applied to such data, are proposed. Based on comprehensive Monte-Carlo simulations, the coverage probabilities of the proposed prediction intervals were compared to heuristical HCL typically used in daily toxicological routine (historical range, limits of the np-chart, mean ± $$ \pm $$ 2 SD). Our simulations reveal, that frequentist bootstrap calibrated prediction intervals control the type-1-error best, but, also prediction intervals calculated based on Bayesian generalized linear mixed models appear to be practically applicable. Contrary, all heuristics fail to control the type-1-error. The application of HCL is demonstrated based on a real life data set containing historical controls from long-term carcinogenicity studies run on behalf of the U.S. National Toxicology Program. The proposed frequentist prediction intervals are publicly available from the R package predint, whereas R code for the computation of the two Bayesian prediction intervals is provided via GitHub.

过分散二项终点的预测区间及其在毒理学历史控制数据中的应用。
在毒理学研究中,利用历史对照数据(HCD)对并发对照组进行验证已成为一种要求。这种验证通常由历史控制限制(HCL)完成,它应该以预定义的置信度覆盖并发控制的观察结果。在许多应用中,HCL应用于二分类数据,例如,有肿瘤的大鼠数量与没有肿瘤的大鼠数量(致癌性研究)或细胞总数中带有微核的细胞数量。二分型HCD可能会过度分散,并可能出现严重的右(或左)偏斜,这在HCL的实际应用中通常没有被考虑到。为了克服这个问题,提出了四种不同的预测区间(两个频域,两个贝叶斯),可以应用于这些数据。基于全面的蒙特卡罗模拟,将提出的预测区间的覆盖概率与日常毒理学常规中通常使用的启发式HCL(历史范围,np图的极限,平均值±$$ \pm $$ 2 SD)进行比较。仿真结果表明,频率自提校正的预测区间对1型误差控制效果最好,而基于贝叶斯广义线性混合模型计算的预测区间也具有实际应用价值。相反,所有的启发式方法都不能控制类型1错误。HCL的应用基于一个真实的数据集,其中包含代表美国国家毒理学计划进行的长期致癌性研究的历史对照。建议的频率预测区间可以从R包predint中公开获得,而计算两个贝叶斯预测区间的R代码可以通过GitHub提供。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Pharmaceutical Statistics
Pharmaceutical Statistics 医学-统计学与概率论
CiteScore
2.70
自引率
6.70%
发文量
90
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: Pharmaceutical Statistics is an industry-led initiative, tackling real problems in statistical applications. The Journal publishes papers that share experiences in the practical application of statistics within the pharmaceutical industry. It covers all aspects of pharmaceutical statistical applications from discovery, through pre-clinical development, clinical development, post-marketing surveillance, consumer health, production, epidemiology, and health economics. The Journal is both international and multidisciplinary. It includes high quality practical papers, case studies and review papers.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信