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.

A graph theoretic approach to testing associations between disparate sources of functional genomic data

The last few years have seen the advent of high-throughput technologies to analyze various properties of the transcriptome and proteome of several organisms. The congruency of these different data sources, or lack thereof, can shed light on the mechanisms that govern cellular function. A central challenge for bioinformatics research is to develop a unified framework for combining the multiple sources of functional genomics information and testing associations between them, thus obtaining a robust and integrated view of the underlying biology. We present a graph theoretic approach to test the significance of the association between multiple disparate sources of functional genomics data by proposing two statistical tests, namely edge permutation and node label permutation tests. We demonstrate the use of the proposed tests by finding significant association between a Gene Ontology-derived "predictome" and data obtained from mRNA expression and phenotypic experiments for Saccharomyces cerevisiae. Moreover, we employ the graph theoretic framework to recast a surprising discrepancy presented in Giaever et al. (2002) between gene expression and knockout phenotype, using expression data from a different set of experiments.

A NOVEL AND SIMPLE RULE OF THUMB FOR MULTIPLICITY CONTROL IN EQUIVALENCE TESTING USING TWO ONE-SIDED TESTS

Equivalence testing is growing in use in scientific research outside of its traditional role in the drug approval process. Largely due to its ease of use and recommendation from the United States Food and Drug Administration guidance, the most common statistical method for testing (bio)equivalence is the two one-sided tests procedure (TOST). Like classical point-null hypothesis testing, TOST is subject to multiplicity concerns as more comparisons are made. In this manuscript, a condition that bounds the family-wise error rate (FWER) using TOST is given. This condition then leads to a simple solution for controlling the FWER. Specifically, we demonstrate that if all pairwise comparisons of k independent groups are being evaluated for equivalence, then simply scaling the nominal Type I error rate down by (k - 1) is sufficient to maintain the family-wise error rate at the desired value or less. The resulting rule is much less conservative than the equally simple Bonferroni correction. An example of equivalence testing in a non drug-development setting is given.