Simulation Study of Ratio Calculation Formulae of Two-Colour cDNA Microarray Data

In cDNA microarray image processing, there are different methods for calculating the channel ratios. Standard microarray image analysis software, such as the Axon GenePix® Pro, calculate the channel ratio from pixels that define a given spot using different methods (i.e. ratio of means, ratio of medians, mean of ratios, median of ratios, and regression ratio). Ratio values calculated using the different methods will then be listed in an output file. Microarray users have to choose one of the available methods at their own discretion, as no guidelines are provided. Therefore, we aim to address one of the most frequently asked questions by the microarray users: which ratio quantity provided by the image analysis software should be used? In this study, we have evaluated the five different ratio calculation approaches using simulation studies. Our results suggest that in most circumstances the ratio of means appears to be the best approach, particularly when the coefficient of variance (CV) of two-channel pixel intensities are small (<0.5) and channel intensities are large. Conversely, the ratio of medians and the median of ratios are more favourable when the CV is large.     

Approximate simultaneous confidence intervals for multiple contrasts of binomial proportions

Simultaneous confidence intervals for contrasts of means in a one-way layout with several independent samples are well established for Gaussian distributed data. Procedures addressing different hypotheses are available, such as all pairwise comparisons or comparisons to control, comparison with average, or different tests for order-restricted alternatives. However, if the distribution of the response is not Gaussian, corresponding methods are usually not available or not implemented in software. For the case of comparisons among several binomial proportions, we extended recently proposed confidence interval methods for the difference of two proportions or single contrasts to multiple contrasts by using quantiles of the multivariate normal distribution, taking the correlation into account. The small sample performance of the proposed methods was investigated in simulation studies. The simple adjustment of adding 2 pseudo-observations to each sample estimate leads to reasonable coverage probabilities. The methods are illustrated by the evaluation of real data examples of a clinical trial and a toxicological study. The proposed methods and examples are available in the R package MCPAN. ((c) 2008 WILEY-VCH Verlag GmbH & Co. KGaA, Weinheim).     

Confidence intervals for the difference in the success rates of two treatments in the analysis of correlated binary responses

In clinical studies, we often compare the success rates of two treatment groups where post‐treatment responses of subjects within clusters are usually correlated. To estimate the difference between the success rates, interval estimation procedures that do not account for this intraclass correlation are likely inappropriate. To address this issue, we propose three interval procedures by direct extensions of recently proposed methods for independent binary data based on the concepts of design effect and effective sample size used in sample surveys. Each of them is then evaluated with four competing variance estimates. We also extend three existing methods recommended for complex survey data using different weighting schemes required for those three existing methods. An extensive simulation study is conducted for the purposes of evaluating and comparing the performance of the proposed methods in terms of coverage and expected width. The interval estimation procedures are illustrated using three examples in clinical and social science studies. Our analytic arguments and numerical studies suggest that the methods proposed in this work may be useful in clustered data analyses.     

Permutation inference methods for multivariate meta-analysis

Multivariate meta-analysis is gaining prominence in evidence synthesis research because it enables simultaneous synthesis of multiple correlated outcome data, and random-effects models have generally been used for addressing between-studies heterogeneities. However, coverage probabilities of confidence regions or intervals for standard inference methods for random-effects models (eg, restricted maximum likelihood estimation) cannot retain their nominal confidence levels in general, especially when the number of synthesized studies is small because their validities depend on large sample approximations. In this article, we provide permutation-based inference methods that enable exact joint inferences for average outcome measures without large sample approximations. We also provide accurate marginal inference methods under general settings of multivariate meta-analyses. We propose effective approaches for permutation inferences using optimal weighting based on the efficient score statistic. The effectiveness of the proposed methods is illustrated via applications to bivariate meta-analyses of diagnostic accuracy studies for airway eosinophilia in asthma and a network meta-analysis for antihypertensive drugs on incident diabetes, as well as through simulation experiments. In numerical evaluations performed via simulations, our methods generally provided accurate confidence regions or intervals under a broad range of settings, whereas the current standard inference methods exhibited serious undercoverage properties.     

Meta-analysis of studies with missing data

Summary .  Consider a meta-analysis of studies with varying proportions of patient-level missing data, and assume that each primary study has made certain missing data adjustments so that the reported estimates of treatment effect size and variance are valid. These estimates of treatment effects can be combined across studies by standard meta-analytic methods, employing a random-effects model to account for heterogeneity across studies. However, we note that a meta-analysis based on the standard random-effects model will lead to biased estimates when the attrition rates of primary studies depend on the size of the underlying study-level treatment effect. Perhaps ignorable within each study, these types of missing data are in fact not ignorable in a meta-analysis. We propose three methods to correct the bias resulting from such missing data in a meta-analysis: reweighting the DerSimonian–Laird estimate by the completion rate; incorporating the completion rate into a Bayesian random-effects model; and inference based on a Bayesian shared-parameter model that includes the completion rate. We illustrate these methods through a meta-analysis of 16 published randomized trials that examined combined pharmacotherapy and psychological treatment for depression.     

Estimating sexual dimorphism and size differences in the fossil record: A test of methods

Investigations of size variation in fossil and archaeological skeletal assemblages may be complicated by incomplete skeletons, biased representation of sexes, and the lack of morphological features that identify sex. In order to refine our ability to evaluate size variation, we test the accuracy of three methods that are currently used to estimate size differences in unsexed (pooled) samples: the means method, the median method, and a newly applied technique, the method of moments. Using body mass data from 42 primate species, we calculated actual levels of sexual dimorphism for each species and compared these values to estimates produced by each method. Multivariate regression was used to examine the effects of sample distribution characteristics, including sample size, kurtosis, skewness, sample variance, sex ratio, and intrasexual variance on the performance of the methods. None of the methods appears to be especially accurate. However, one of the simplest methods, the means method, performs relatively well. Factors that lead to inaccuracies in estimation are not readily evident based on multiple regression analysis. We urge caution in the utilization of these techniques, and advocate further analysis of simulated data. Am J Phys Anthropol 110: 95–104, 1999. © 1999 Wiley-Liss, Inc.     

A pseudo-likelihood method for estimating misclassification probabilities in competing-risks settings when true-event data are partially observed

Outcome misclassification occurs frequently in binary-outcome studies and can result in biased estimation of quantities such as the incidence, prevalence, cause-specific hazards, cumulative incidence functions, and so forth. A number of remedies have been proposed to address the potential misclassification of the outcomes in such data. The majority of these remedies lie in the estimation of misclassification probabilities, which are in turn used to adjust analyses for outcome misclassification. A number of authors advocate using a gold-standard procedure on a sample internal to the study to learn about the extent of the misclassification. With this type of internal validation, the problem of quantifying the misclassification also becomes a missing data problem as, by design, the true outcomes are only ascertained on a subset of the entire study sample. Although, the process of estimating misclassification probabilities appears simple conceptually, the estimation methods proposed so far have several methodological and practical shortcomings. Most methods rely on missing outcome data to be missing completely at random (MCAR), a rather stringent assumption which is unlikely to hold in practice. Some of the existing methods also tend to be computationally-intensive. To address these issues, we propose a computationally-efficient, easy-to-implement, pseudo-likelihood estimator of the misclassification probabilities under a missing at random (MAR) assumption, in studies with an available internal-validation sample. We present the estimator through the lens of studies with competing-risks outcomes, though the estimator extends beyond this setting. We describe the consistency and asymptotic distributional properties of the resulting estimator, and derive a closed-form estimator of its variance. The finite-sample performance of this estimator is evaluated via simulations. Using data from a real-world study with competing-risks outcomes, we illustrate how the proposed method can be used to estimate misclassification probabilities. We also show how the estimated misclassification probabilities can be used in an external study to adjust for possible misclassification bias when modeling cumulative incidence functions.     

An improved double sampling procedure based on the variance

Sample size calculations for a continuous outcome require specification of the anticipated variance; inaccurate specification can result in an underpowered or overpowered study. For this reason, adaptive methods whereby sample size is recalculated using the variance of a subsample have become increasingly popular. The first proposal of this type (Stein, 1945, Annals of Mathematical Statistics 16, 243-258) used all of the data to estimate the mean difference but only the first stage data to estimate the variance. Stein's procedure is not commonly used because many people perceive it as ignoring relevant data. This is especially problematic when the first stage sample size is small, as would be the case if the anticipated total sample size were small. A more naive approach uses in the denominator of the final test statistic the variance estimate based on all of the data. Applying the Helmert transformation, we show why this naive approach underestimates the true variance and how to construct an unbiased estimate that uses all of the data. We prove that the type I error rate of our procedure cannot exceed alpha.     

Guided tree topology proposals for Bayesian phylogenetic inference

Increasingly, large data sets pose a challenge for computationally intensive phylogenetic methods such as Bayesian Markov chain Monte Carlo (MCMC). Here, we investigate the performance of common MCMC proposal distributions in terms of median and variance of run time to convergence on 11 data sets. We introduce two new Metropolized Gibbs Samplers for moving through "tree space." MCMC simulation using these new proposals shows faster average run time and dramatically improved predictability in performance, with a 20-fold reduction in the variance of the time to estimate the posterior distribution to a given accuracy. We also introduce conditional clade probabilities and demonstrate that they provide a superior means of approximating tree topology posterior probabilities from samples recorded during MCMC.     

Additional Circular Systematic Sampling Methods

Several systematic sampling methods have been used to estimate the population mean when size of the population is a multiple of sample size. Among these, only few methods have been extended and used to estimate mean of the population when its size is not a multiple of sample size. In this paper, new methods called balanced circular systematic sampling and centered circular systematic sampling are introduced by extending balanced systematic sampling method and centered systematic sampling method respectively. These methods are compared with circular systematic sampling using average variance of corrected sample means for populations exhibiting approximate linear and parabolic trends. The suggested methods are found suitable to estimate the population mean.     

The Missing Medians: Exclusion of Ordinal Data from Meta-Analyses

Background

Meta-analyses are considered the gold standard of evidence-based health care, and are used to guide clinical decisions and health policy. A major limitation of current meta-analysis techniques is their inability to pool ordinal data. Our objectives were to determine the extent of this problem in the context of neurological rating scales and to provide a solution.

Methods

Using an existing database of clinical trials of oral neuroprotective therapies, we identified the 6 most commonly used clinical rating scales and recorded how data from these scales were reported and analysed. We then identified systematic reviews of studies that used these scales (via the Cochrane database) and recorded the meta-analytic techniques used. Finally, we identified a statistical technique for calculating a common language effect size measure for ordinal data.

Results

We identified 103 studies, with 128 instances of the 6 clinical scales being reported. The majority– 80%–reported means alone for central tendency, with only 13% reporting medians. In analysis, 40% of studies used parametric statistics alone, 34% of studies employed non-parametric analysis, and 26% did not include or specify analysis. Of the 60 systematic reviews identified that included meta-analysis, 88% used mean difference and 22% employed difference in proportions; none included rank-based analysis. We propose the use of a rank-based generalised odds ratio (WMW GenOR) as an assumption-free effect size measure that is easy to compute and can be readily combined in meta-analysis.

Conclusion

There is wide scope for improvement in the reporting and analysis of ordinal data in the literature. We hope that adoption of the WMW GenOR will have the dual effect of improving the reporting of data in individual studies while also increasing the inclusivity (and therefore validity) of meta-analyses.     

Blinded Sample Size Recalculation for Normally Distributed Outcomes Using Long‐ and Short‐term Data

Clinical trials are often planned with high uncertainty about the variance of the primary outcome variable. A poor estimate of the variance, however, may lead to an over‐ or underpowered study. In the internal pilot study design, the sample variance is calculated at an interim step and the sample size can be adjusted if necessary. The available recalculation procedures use the data of those patients for sample size recalculation that have already completed the study. In this article, we consider a variance estimator that takes into account both the data at the endpoint and at an intermediate point of the treatment phase. We derive asymptotic properties of this estimator and the relating sample size recalculation procedure. In a simulation study, the performance of the proposed approach is evaluated and compared with the procedure that uses only long‐term data. Simulation results demonstrate that the sample size resulting from the proposed procedure shows in general a smaller variability. At the same time, the Type I error rate is not inflated and the achieved power is close to the desired value.     

Methods of adjusted comparison of medians

Consider the problem of making an adjusted comparison of the medians of two populations on an interval type outcome variable. A common method of doing this is through the use of a linear model requiring the residuals to be normally distributed. We describe here two methods based on a linear model after Box–Cox transformation of the outcome variable. The methods require a reference population, which could be either of the populations under study or their aggregate. We compare the new procedures with the comparison of normal means procedure and other procedures proposed for this problem by simulation. It is found that the procedure based on comparison of the predicted values obtained from the observed covariates of the reference population has higher power for testing and smaller mean square error of estimation than the other methods, while maintaining reasonable control of the type I error rate. We illustrate the methods by analyzing the duration of the second stage of labor for women in two large observation studies (Collaborative Perinatal Project and Consortium on Safe Labor) separated by 50 years. We recommend the method based on comparison of the predicted values of the transformed outcomes, with careful attention to how close the resulting residual distribution is to normal.     

General Framework for Meta-analysis of Rare Variants in Sequencing Association Studies

We propose a general statistical framework for meta-analysis of gene- or region-based multimarker rare variant association tests in sequencing association studies. In genome-wide association studies, single-marker meta-analysis has been widely used to increase statistical power by combining results via regression coefficients and standard errors from different studies. In analysis of rare variants in sequencing studies, region-based multimarker tests are often used to increase power. We propose meta-analysis methods for commonly used gene- or region-based rare variants tests, such as burden tests and variance component tests. Because estimation of regression coefficients of individual rare variants is often unstable or not feasible, the proposed method avoids this difficulty by calculating score statistics instead that only require fitting the null model for each study and then aggregating these score statistics across studies. Our proposed meta-analysis rare variant association tests are conducted based on study-specific summary statistics, specifically score statistics for each variant and between-variant covariance-type (linkage disequilibrium) relationship statistics for each gene or region. The proposed methods are able to incorporate different levels of heterogeneity of genetic effects across studies and are applicable to meta-analysis of multiple ancestry groups. We show that the proposed methods are essentially as powerful as joint analysis by directly pooling individual level genotype data. We conduct extensive simulations to evaluate the performance of our methods by varying levels of heterogeneity across studies, and we apply the proposed methods to meta-analysis of rare variant effects in a multicohort study of the genetics of blood lipid levels.     

Meta-analysis of genetic-linkage analysis of quantitative-trait loci

Meta-analysis is an important tool in linkage analysis. The pooling of results across primary linkage studies allows greater statistical power to detect quantitative-trait loci (QTLs) and more-precise estimation of their genetic effects and, hence, yields conclusions that are stronger relative to those of individual studies. Previous methods for the meta-analysis of linkage studies have been proposed, and, although some methods address the problem of between-study heterogeneity, most methods still require linkage analysis at the same marker or set of markers across studies, whereas others do not result in an estimate of genetic variance. In this study, we present a meta-analytic procedure to evaluate evidence from several studies that report Haseman-Elston statistics for linkage to a QTL at multiple, possibly distinct, markers on a chromosome. This technique accounts for between-study heterogeneity and estimates both the location of the QTL and the magnitude of the genetic effect more precisely than does an individual study. We also provide standard errors for the genetic effect and for the location (in cM) of the QTL, using a resampling method. The approach can be applied under other conditions, provided that the various studies use the same linkage statistic.     

A test for genetic association that incorporates information about deviation from Hardy-Weinberg proportions in cases

For assessment of genetic association between single-nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) and disease status, the logistic-regression model or generalized linear model is typically employed. However, testing for deviation from Hardy-Weinberg proportion in a patient group could be another approach for genetic-association studies. The Hardy-Weinberg proportion is one of the most important principles in population genetics. Deviation from Hardy-Weinberg proportion among cases (patients) could provide additional evidence for the association between SNPs and diseases. To develop a more powerful statistical test for genetic-association studies, we combined evidence about deviation from Hardy-Weinberg proportion in case subjects and standard regression approaches that use case and control subjects. In this paper, we propose two approaches for combining such information: the mean-based tail-strength measure and the median-based tail-strength measure. These measures integrate logistic regression and Hardy-Weinberg-proportion tests for the study of the association between a binary disease outcome and an SNP on the basis of case- and control-subject data. For both mean-based and median-based tail-strength measures, we derived exact formulas to compute p values. We also developed an approach for obtaining empirical p values with the use of a resampling procedure. Results from simulation studies and real-disease studies demonstrate that the proposed approach is more powerful than the traditional logistic-regression model. The type I error probabilities of our approach were also well controlled.     

Median Regression Model with Interval Censored Data

Quantile regression methods have been used to estimate upper and lower quantile reference curves as the function of several covariates. Especially, in survival analysis, median regression models to the right‐censored data are suggested with several assumptions. In this article, we consider a median regression model for interval‐censored data and construct an estimating equation based on weights derived from interval‐censored data. In a simulation study, the performances of the proposed method are evaluated for both symmetric and right‐skewed distributed failure times. A well‐known breast cancer data are analyzed to illustrate the proposed method.     

Skew-normal random-effects model for meta-analysis of diagnostic test accuracy (DTA) studies

Hierarchical models are recommended for meta-analyzing diagnostic test accuracy (DTA) studies. The bivariate random-effects model is currently widely used to synthesize a pair of test sensitivity and specificity using logit transformation across studies. This model assumes a bivariate normal distribution for the random-effects. However, this assumption is restrictive and can be violated. When the assumption fails, inferences could be misleading. In this paper, we extended the current bivariate random-effects model by assuming a flexible bivariate skew-normal distribution for the random-effects in order to robustly model logit sensitivities and logit specificities. The marginal distribution of the proposed model is analytically derived so that parameter estimation can be performed using standard likelihood methods. The method of weighted-average is adopted to estimate the overall logit-transformed sensitivity and specificity. An extensive simulation study is carried out to investigate the performance of the proposed model compared to other standard models. Overall, the proposed model performs better in terms of confidence interval width of the average logit-transformed sensitivity and specificity compared to the standard bivariate linear mixed model and bivariate generalized linear mixed model. Simulations have also shown that the proposed model performed better than the well-established bivariate linear mixed model in terms of bias and comparable with regards to the root mean squared error (RMSE) of the between-study (co)variances. The proposed method is also illustrated using a published meta-analysis data.     

Exploiting collider bias to apply two-sample summary data Mendelian randomization methods to one-sample individual level data

Over the last decade the availability of SNP-trait associations from genome-wide association studies has led to an array of methods for performing Mendelian randomization studies using only summary statistics. A common feature of these methods, besides their intuitive simplicity, is the ability to combine data from several sources, incorporate multiple variants and account for biases due to weak instruments and pleiotropy. With the advent of large and accessible fully-genotyped cohorts such as UK Biobank, there is now increasing interest in understanding how best to apply these well developed summary data methods to individual level data, and to explore the use of more sophisticated causal methods allowing for non-linearity and effect modification.In this paper we describe a general procedure for optimally applying any two sample summary data method using one sample data. Our procedure first performs a meta-analysis of summary data estimates that are intentionally contaminated by collider bias between the genetic instruments and unmeasured confounders, due to conditioning on the observed exposure. These estimates are then used to correct the standard observational association between an exposure and outcome. Simulations are conducted to demonstrate the method’s performance against naive applications of two sample summary data MR. We apply the approach to the UK Biobank cohort to investigate the causal role of sleep disturbance on HbA1c levels, an important determinant of diabetes.Our approach can be viewed as a generalization of Dudbridge et al. (Nat. Comm. 10: 1561), who developed a technique to adjust for index event bias when uncovering genetic predictors of disease progression based on case-only data. Our work serves to clarify that in any one sample MR analysis, it can be advantageous to estimate causal relationships by artificially inducing and then correcting for collider bias.     

Test-based exact confidence intervals for the difference of two binomial proportions

Confidence intervals are often provided to estimate a treatment difference. When the sample size is small, as is typical in early phases of clinical trials, confidence intervals based on large sample approximations may not be reliable. In this report, we propose test-based methods of constructing exact confidence intervals for the difference in two binomial proportions. These exact confidence intervals are obtained from the unconditional distribution of two binomial responses, and they guarantee the level of coverage. We compare the performance of these confidence intervals to ones based on the observed difference alone. We show that a large improvement can be achieved by using the standardized Z test with a constrained maximum likelihood estimate of the variance.