Statistical hypothesis testing and common misinterpretations: should we abandon p-value in forensic science applications?

Many people regard the concept of hypothesis testing as fundamental to inferential statistics. Various schools of thought, in particular frequentist and Bayesian, have promoted radically different solutions for taking a decision about the plausibility of competing hypotheses. Comprehensive philosophical comparisons about their advantages and drawbacks are widely available and continue to span over large debates in the literature. More recently, controversial discussion was initiated by an editorial decision of a scientific journal [1] to refuse any paper submitted for publication containing null hypothesis testing procedures. Since the large majority of papers published in forensic journals propose the evaluation of statistical evidence based on the so called p-values, it is of interest to expose the discussion of this journal's decision within the forensic science community. This paper aims to provide forensic science researchers with a primer on the main concepts and their implications for making informed methodological choices.

Comparing Etest and Broth Microdilution for Antifungal Susceptibility Testing of the Most-Relevant Pathogenic Molds.

Invasive mold infections are life-threatening diseases for which appropriate antifungal therapy is crucial. Their epidemiology is evolving, with the emergence of triazole-resistant Aspergillus spp. and multidrug-resistant non-Aspergillus molds. Despite the lack of interpretive criteria, antifungal susceptibility testing of molds may be useful in guiding antifungal therapy. The standard broth microdilution method (BMD) is demanding and requires expertise. We assessed the performance of a commercialized gradient diffusion method (Etest method) as an alternative to BMD. The MICs or minimal effective concentrations (MECs) of amphotericin B, voriconazole, posaconazole, caspofungin, and micafungin were assessed for 290 clinical isolates of the most representative pathogenic molds (154 Aspergillus and 136 non-Aspergillus isolates) with the BMD and Etest methods. Essential agreements (EAs) within ±2 dilutions of ≥90% between the two methods were considered acceptable. EAs for amphotericin B and voriconazole were >90% for most potentially susceptible species. For posaconazole, the correlation was acceptable for Mucoromycotina but Etest MIC values were consistently lower for Aspergillus spp. (EAs of <90%). Excellent EAs were found for echinocandins with highly susceptible (MECs of <0.015 μg/ml) or intrinsically resistant (MECs of >16 μg/ml) strains. However, MEC determinations lacked consistency between methods for strains exhibiting mid-range MECs for echinocandins. We concluded that the Etest method is an appropriate alternative to BMD for antifungal susceptibility testing of molds under specific circumstances, including testing with amphotericin B or triazoles for non-Aspergillus molds (Mucoromycotina and Fusarium spp.). Additional study of molecularly characterized triazole-resistant Aspergillus isolates is required to confirm the ability of the Etest method to detect voriconazole and posaconazole resistance among Aspergillus spp.

Further molecular profiling of tumors harboring therapeutic targets within non-small cell lung cancer

Background: Treatment of NSCLC has been revolutionized in recent years with the introduction of several targeted therapies for selected genetically altered subtypes of NSCLC. A better understanding of molecular characteristics of NSCLC, which features common drug targets, may identify new therapeutic options. Methods: Over 6,700 non-small cell lung cancer cases referred to Caris Life Sciences between 2009 and 2014. Diagnoses and history were collected from referring physicians. Specific testing was performed per physician request and included a combination of sequencing (Sanger, NGS or pyrosequencing), protein expression (IHC), gene amplification/rearrangement (CISH or FISH), and/or RNA fragment analysis. Results: Tumors profiles from patients with hormone receptor positive disease (HER2, ER, PR, or AR positive by IHC) (n=629), HER2 mutations (n=8) ALK rearrangements (n=55), ROS1 rearrangement (n=17), cMET amplification or mutation (n=126), and cKIT mutation (n=11) were included in this analysis and compared to the whole cohort. Tumors with ALK rearrangement overexpressed AR in 18% of cases, and 7% presented with concomitant KRAS mutation. Lower rates of PTEN loss, as assessed by IHC, were observed in ALK positive (20%), ROS1 positive (9%) and cKIT mutated tumors (25%) compared to the overall NSCLC population (58%). cMET was overexpressed in 66% of ROS1 translocated and 57% of HER2 mutated tumors. cKIT mutations were found co-existing with APC (20%) and EGFR (20%) mutations. Pathway analysis revealed that hormone receptor positive disease carried more mutations in the ERK pathway (32%) compared to 9% in the mTOR pathway. 25% of patients with HER2 mutations harbored a co-existing mutation in the mTOR pathway. Conclusions: Pathway profiling reveals that NSCLC tumors present more often than reported with several concomitant alterations affecting the ERK or AKT pathway. Additionally, they are also characterized by the expression of potential biological modifiers of the cell cycle like hormonal receptors, representing a rationale for dual inhibition strategies in selected patients. Further refining of the understanding of NSCLC biomarker profile will optimize research for new treatment strategies.

A new alternative method for testing skin irritation using a fresh human skin model

La dermatite irritative est décrite comme une réaction réversible, non immunologique caractérisée par des lésions d'aspect très variable, allant de la simple rougeur jusqu'à la formation de bulles voire d'une nécrose, accompagnée de prurit ou d'une sensation de brûlure suite à I' application d'une substance chimique. Le teste de prédiction d'irritation cutanée est traditionnellement depuis les années 1940 le Test de Draize. Ce test consiste en l'application d'une substance chimique sur une peau rasée de lapin pendant 4h et de regarder à 24h si des signes cliniques d'irritations sont présents. Cette méthode critiquable autant d'un point de vue éthique que qualitative reste actuellement le teste le plus utilisé. Depuis le début des années 2000 de nouvelles méthodes in vitro se sont développées tel que le model d'épiderme humain recombiné (RHE). Il s agit d'une multicouche de kératinocyte bien différencié obtenu depuis une culture de don d'ovocyte. Cependant cette méthode en plus d'être très couteuse n'obtient au mieux que 76% de résultat similaire comparé au test in vivo humain. Il existe donc la nécessité de développer une nouvelle méthode in vitro qui simulerait encore mieux la réalité anatomique et physiologique retrouvée in vivo. Notre objectif a été de développer cette nouvelle méthode in vitro. Pour cela nous avons travaillé avec de la peau humaine directement prélevée après une abdominoplastie. Celle ci après préparation avec un dermatome, un couteau dont la lame est réglable pour découper l'épaisseur souhaitée de peau, est montée dans un système de diffusion cellulaire. La couche cornée est alors exposée de manière optimale à 1 ml de la substance chimique testée pendant 4h. L'échantillon de peau est alors fixé dans du formaldéhyde pour permettre la préparation de lames standards d'hématoxyline et éosine. L'irritation est alors investiguée selon des critères histopathologiques de spongioses, de nécroses et de vacuolisations cellulaires. Les résultats de ce.tte première batterie de testes sont plus que prometteurs. En effet, comparé au résultat in vivo, nous obtenons 100% de concordance pour les 4 même substances testes irritantes ou non irritantes, ce qui est supérieur au model d épiderme humain recombiné (76%). De plus le coefficient de variation entre les 3 différentes séries est inférieur à 0.1 ce qui montre une bonne reproductibilité dans un même laboratoire. Dans le futur cette méthode va devoir être testée avec un plus grand nombre de substances chimiques et sa reproductibilité évaluée dans différents laboratoires. Mais cette première evaluation, très encourageante, ouvre des pistes précieuses pour l'avenir des tests irritatifs.