Multiple Testing With an Empirical Alternative Hypothesis

An optimal multiple testing procedure is identified for linear hypotheses under the general linear model, maximizing the expected number of false null hypotheses rejected at any significance level. The optimal procedure depends on the unknown data-generating distribution, but can be consistently estimated. Drawing information together across many hypotheses, the estimated optimal procedure provides an empirical alternative hypothesis by adapting to underlying patterns of departure from the null. Proposed multiple testing procedures based on the empirical alternative are evaluated through simulations and an application to gene expression microarray data. Compared to a standard multiple testing procedure, it is not unusual for use of an empirical alternative hypothesis to increase by 50% or more the number of true positives identified at a given significance level.

Smooth Estimation of a Monotone Density

We investigate the interplay of smoothness and monotonicity assumptions when estimating a density from a sample of observations. The nonparametric maximum likelihood estimator of a decreasing density on the positive half line attains a rate of convergence at a fixed point if the density has a negative derivative. The same rate is obtained by a kernel estimator, but the limit distributions are different. If the density is both differentiable and known to be monotone, then a third estimator is obtained by isotonization of a kernel estimator. We show that this again attains the rate of convergence and compare the limit distributors of the three types of estimators. It is shown that both isotonization and smoothing lead to a more concentrated limit distribution and we study the dependence on the proportionality constant in the bandwidth. We also show that isotonization does not change the limit behavior of a kernel estimator with a larger bandwidth, in the case that the density is known to have more than one derivative.

MULTIPLE DISEASES IN CARRIER PROBABILITY ESTIMATION: ACCOUNTING FOR SURVIVING ALL CANCERS OTHER THAN BREAST AND OVARY IN BRCAPRO

Mendelian models can predict who carries an inherited deleterious mutation of known disease genes based on family history. For example, the BRCAPRO model is commonly used to identify families who carry mutations of BRCA1 and BRCA2, based on familial breast and ovarian cancers. These models incorporate the age of diagnosis of diseases in relatives and current age or age of death. We develop a rigorous foundation for handling multiple diseases with censoring. We prove that any disease unrelated to mutations can be excluded from the model, unless it is sufficiently common and dependent on a mutation-related disease time. Furthermore, if a family member has a disease with higher probability density among mutation carriers, but the model does not account for it, then the carrier probability is deflated. However, even if a family only has diseases the model accounts for, if the model excludes a mutation-related disease, then the carrier probability will be inflated. In light of these results, we extend BRCAPRO to account for surviving all non-breast/ovary cancers as a single outcome. The extension also enables BRCAPRO to extract more useful information from male relatives. Using 1500 familes from the Cancer Genetics Network, accounting for surviving other cancers improves BRCAPRO’s concordance index from 0.758 to 0.762 (p = 0.046), improves its positive predictive value from 35% to 39% (p < 10−6) without impacting its negative predictive value, and improves its overall calibration, although calibration slightly worsens for those with carrier probability < 10%. Copyright c 2000 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.