Estimating the Number of Essential Genes in a Genome by Random Transposon Mutagenesis

We describe a Bayesian method for estimating the number of essential genes in a genome, on the basis of data on viable mutants for which a single transposon was inserted after a random TA site in a genome,potentially disrupting a gene. The prior distribution for the number of essential genes was taken to be uniform. A Gibbs sampler was used to estimate the posterior distribution. The method is illustrated with simulated data. Further simulations were used to study the performance of the procedure.

Posterior Simulation in the Generalized Linear Model with Semiparmetric Random Effects

Generalized linear mixed models with semiparametric random effects are useful in a wide variety of Bayesian applications. When the random effects arise from a mixture of Dirichlet process (MDP) model, normal base measures and Gibbs sampling procedures based on the Pólya urn scheme are often used to simulate posterior draws. These algorithms are applicable in the conjugate case when (for a normal base measure) the likelihood is normal. In the non-conjugate case, the algorithms proposed by MacEachern and Müller (1998) and Neal (2000) are often applied to generate posterior samples. Some common problems associated with simulation algorithms for non-conjugate MDP models include convergence and mixing difficulties. This paper proposes an algorithm based on the Pólya urn scheme that extends the Gibbs sampling algorithms to non-conjugate models with normal base measures and exponential family likelihoods. The algorithm proceeds by making Laplace approximations to the likelihood function, thereby reducing the procedure to that of conjugate normal MDP models. To ensure the validity of the stationary distribution in the non-conjugate case, the proposals are accepted or rejected by a Metropolis-Hastings step. In the special case where the data are normally distributed, the algorithm is identical to the Gibbs sampler.

The Optimal Confidence Region for a Random Parameter

Under a two-level hierarchical model, suppose that the distribution of the random parameter is known or can be estimated well. Data are generated via a fixed, but unobservable realization of this parameter. In this paper, we derive the smallest confidence region of the random parameter under a joint Bayesian/frequentist paradigm. On average this optimal region can be much smaller than the corresponding Bayesian highest posterior density region. The new estimation procedure is appealing when one deals with data generated under a highly parallel structure, for example, data from a trial with a large number of clinical centers involved or genome-wide gene-expession data for estimating individual gene- or center-specific parameters simultaneously. The new proposal is illustrated with a typical microarray data set and its performance is examined via a small simulation study.

RANDOM EFFECTS MODELS IN A META-ANALYSIS OF THE ACCURACY OF DIAGNOSTIC TESTS WITHIN A GOLD STANDARD IN THE PRESENCE OF MISSING DATA

In evaluating the accuracy of diagnosis tests, it is common to apply two imperfect tests jointly or sequentially to a study population. In a recent meta-analysis of the accuracy of microsatellite instability testing (MSI) and traditional mutation analysis (MUT) in predicting germline mutations of the mismatch repair (MMR) genes, a Bayesian approach (Chen, Watson, and Parmigiani 2005) was proposed to handle missing data resulting from partial testing and the lack of a gold standard. In this paper, we demonstrate an improved estimation of the sensitivities and specificities of MSI and MUT by using a nonlinear mixed model and a Bayesian hierarchical model, both of which account for the heterogeneity across studies through study-specific random effects. The methods can be used to estimate the accuracy of two imperfect diagnostic tests in other meta-analyses when the prevalence of disease, the sensitivities and/or the specificities of diagnostic tests are heterogeneous among studies. Furthermore, simulation studies have demonstrated the importance of carefully selecting appropriate random effects on the estimation of diagnostic accuracy measurements in this scenario.