Characterization of recombinant class I MHC alloantigen action upon the survival of disparate heart allografts

Previous studies have led to the development of allochimeric class I MHC proteins as agents that effectively induce donor-specific transplantation tolerance in a rat system with or without additional immunosuppression. Within the α1-helical region of RT1.Au, an epitope that conferred immunologic tolerance was discovered. Studies presented herein were designed to test our central hypothesis that allochimeric proteins onfer tolerance in a mouse model. To test this hypothesis, portal vein (PV) injection of wild-type H2Kd and H2Dd proteins were produced in a bacterial expression system and found to specifically prolong the survival of BALB/c (H2d) heart allografts in C57BL/10 (H2b) recipients. Although a single PV injection of 50 μg α1–α 3 H2Kd alone was ineffective, 50 μg α1 –α3 alone slightly prolonged BALB/c heart allograft survivals. In contrast, the combination of 25 μg α1–α 3 H2Kd and 25 μg α1–α 3 H2Dd proteins prolonged BALB/c graft survivals to 20.2 ± 6.4 days (p < 0.004). The effect was donor-specific, since a combination of 25 μg α1–α3 H2Kd and 25 μg α1–α3 H2Dd proteins failed to affect survivals of third-party C3H (H2k k) heart allografts, namely 9.0 ± 0.0 days in treated versus 7.8 ± 0.5 days in untreated hosts. Thus, the combination of two H2K d and H2Dd proteins is more effective in prolonging allograft survival than a single protein produced in a bacterial expression system. A single PV injection (day 0) of 25 μg α1–α 2 H2Kd and 25 μg α1–α 2 H2Dd proteins to C57BL/10 mice prolonged the survival of BALB/c heart allografts to 22.4 ± 4.5 days. Within a WF to ACI rat heart allograft system, a single PV injection of 20 μg 70–77 u-RT1.Aa induced specific tolerance of allografts. This therapy could be combined with CsA to induce transplantation tolerance. However, combination of 70–77u-RT1.Aa with CTLA4Ig, rapamycin, or AG-490 effectively blocked the induction of transplantation tolerance. Tolerance generated by allochimeric protein could be adoptively transferred to naive recipients. Intragraft cytokine mRNA levels showed a bias towards a Th2-type phenotype. Additionally, studies of cytokine signaling and activation of transcription factors revealed a requirement that these pathways remain available for signaling in order for transplantation tolerance to occur. These studies suggest that the generation of regulatory cells are required for the induction of transplantation tolerance through the use of allochimeric proteins. ^

Outcome-based adaptive randomization for binary data in clinical trials---Compare and contrast

Monte Carlo simulation has been conducted to investigate parameter estimation and hypothesis testing in some well known adaptive randomization procedures. The four urn models studied are Randomized Play-the-Winner (RPW), Randomized Pôlya Urn (RPU), Birth and Death Urn with Immigration (BDUI), and Drop-the-Loses Urn (DL). Two sequential estimation methods, the sequential maximum likelihood estimation (SMLE) and the doubly adaptive biased coin design (DABC), are simulated at three optimal allocation targets that minimize the expected number of failures under the assumption of constant variance of simple difference (RSIHR), relative risk (ORR), and odds ratio (OOR) respectively. Log likelihood ratio test and three Wald-type tests (simple difference, log of relative risk, log of odds ratio) are compared in different adaptive procedures. ^ Simulation results indicates that although RPW is slightly better in assigning more patients to the superior treatment, the DL method is considerably less variable and the test statistics have better normality. When compared with SMLE, DABC has slightly higher overall response rate with lower variance, but has larger bias and variance in parameter estimation. Additionally, the test statistics in SMLE have better normality and lower type I error rate, and the power of hypothesis testing is more comparable with the equal randomization. Usually, RSIHR has the highest power among the 3 optimal allocation ratios. However, the ORR allocation has better power and lower type I error rate when the log of relative risk is the test statistics. The number of expected failures in ORR is smaller than RSIHR. It is also shown that the simple difference of response rates has the worst normality among all 4 test statistics. The power of hypothesis test is always inflated when simple difference is used. On the other hand, the normality of the log likelihood ratio test statistics is robust against the change of adaptive randomization procedures. ^

Impact of hormonal therapy on survival and racial disparities in a large community-based cohort of older men with local/regional prostate cancer

Prostate cancer (CaP) is the most diagnosed non-cutaneous malignancy and the second leading cause of cancer mortality among United States males. Major racial disparities in incidence, survival, as well as treatment persist. The mortality is three times higher among African Americans (AAs) compared with Caucasians. Androgen carcinogenesis has been persistently implicated but results are inconsistent; and hormone manipulation has been the main stay of treatment for metastatic disease, supportive of the androgen carcinogenesis. The survival disadvantage of AAs has been attributed to the differences in socioeconomic factors (SES), tumor stage, and treatment. We hypostasized that HT prolongs survival in CaP and that the racial disparities in survival is influenced by variation in HT and primary therapies as well as SES. To address these overall hypothesis, we first utilized a random-effect meta-analytic design to examine evidence from randomized trials on the efficacy of androgen deprivation therapy in localized and metastatic disease, and assessed, using Cox proportional hazards models, the effectiveness of HT in prolonging survival in a large community-based cohort of older males diagnosed with local/regional CaP. Further we examined the role of HT and primary therapies on the racial disparities in CaP survival. The results indicated that adjuvant HT compared with standard care alone is efficacious in improving overall survival, whereas HT has no significant benefit in the real world experience in increasing the overall survival of older males in the community treated for local/regional disease. Further, racial differences in survival persist and were explained to some extent by the differences in the primary therapies (radical prostatectomy, radiation and watchful waiting) and largely by SES. Therefore, given the increased used of hormonal therapy and the cost-effectiveness today, more RCTs are needed to assess whether or not survival prolongation translates to improved quality of life, and to answer the research question on whether or not the decreased use of radical prostatectomy by AAs is driven by the Clinicians bias or AAs's preference of conservative therapy and to encourage AAs to seek curative therapies, thus narrowing to some degree the persistent mortality disparities between AAs and Caucasians. ^

Ascertainment, meta-analysis and reporting of adverse reactions in clinical trials of antibiotics

The ascertainment and analysis of adverse reactions to investigational agents presents a significant challenge because of the infrequency of these events, their subjective nature and the low priority of safety evaluations in many clinical trials. A one year review of antibiotic trials published in medical journals demonstrates the lack of standards in identifying and reporting these potentially fatal conditions. This review also illustrates the low probability of observing and detecting rare events in typical clinical trials which include fewer than 300 subjects. Uniform standards for ascertainment and reporting are suggested which include operational definitions of study subjects. Meta-analysis of selected antibiotic trials using multivariate regression analysis indicates that meaningful conclusions may be drawn from data from multiple studies which are pooled in a scientifically rigorous manner. ^

Selection bias and the cross-validation of regression models for prediction

Strategies are compared for the development of a linear regression model with stochastic (multivariate normal) regressor variables and the subsequent assessment of its predictive ability. Bias and mean squared error of four estimators of predictive performance are evaluated in simulated samples of 32 population correlation matrices. Models including all of the available predictors are compared with those obtained using selected subsets. The subset selection procedures investigated include two stopping rules, C$\sb{\rm p}$ and S$\sb{\rm p}$, each combined with an 'all possible subsets' or 'forward selection' of variables. The estimators of performance utilized include parametric (MSEP$\sb{\rm m}$) and non-parametric (PRESS) assessments in the entire sample, and two data splitting estimates restricted to a random or balanced (Snee's DUPLEX) 'validation' half sample. The simulations were performed as a designed experiment, with population correlation matrices representing a broad range of data structures.^ The techniques examined for subset selection do not generally result in improved predictions relative to the full model. Approaches using 'forward selection' result in slightly smaller prediction errors and less biased estimators of predictive accuracy than 'all possible subsets' approaches but no differences are detected between the performances of C$\sb{\rm p}$ and S$\sb{\rm p}$. In every case, prediction errors of models obtained by subset selection in either of the half splits exceed those obtained using all predictors and the entire sample.^ Only the random split estimator is conditionally (on $\\beta$) unbiased, however MSEP$\sb{\rm m}$ is unbiased on average and PRESS is nearly so in unselected (fixed form) models. When subset selection techniques are used, MSEP$\sb{\rm m}$ and PRESS always underestimate prediction errors, by as much as 27 percent (on average) in small samples. Despite their bias, the mean squared errors (MSE) of these estimators are at least 30 percent less than that of the unbiased random split estimator. The DUPLEX split estimator suffers from large MSE as well as bias, and seems of little value within the context of stochastic regressor variables.^ To maximize predictive accuracy while retaining a reliable estimate of that accuracy, it is recommended that the entire sample be used for model development, and a leave-one-out statistic (e.g. PRESS) be used for assessment. ^

Information bias and lifetime mortality risks of radiation-induced cancer

Additive and multiplicative models of relative risk were used to measure the effect of cancer misclassification and DS86 random errors on lifetime risk projections in the Life Span Study (LSS) of Hiroshima and Nagasaki atomic bomb survivors. The true number of cancer deaths in each stratum of the cancer mortality cross-classification was estimated using sufficient statistics from the EM algorithm. Average survivor doses in the strata were corrected for DS86 random error ($\sigma$ = 0.45) by use of reduction factors. Poisson regression was used to model the corrected and uncorrected mortality rates with covariates for age at-time-of-bombing, age at-time-of-death and gender. Excess risks were in good agreement with risks in RERF Report 11 (Part 2) and the BEIR-V report. Bias due to DS86 random error typically ranged from $-$15% to $-$30% for both sexes, and all sites and models. The total bias, including diagnostic misclassification, of excess risk of nonleukemia for exposure to 1 Sv from age 18 to 65 under the non-constant relative projection model was $-$37.1% for males and $-$23.3% for females. Total excess risks of leukemia under the relative projection model were biased $-$27.1% for males and $-$43.4% for females. Thus, nonleukemia risks for 1 Sv from ages 18 to 85 (DRREF = 2) increased from 1.91%/Sv to 2.68%/Sv among males and from 3.23%/Sv to 4.02%/Sv among females. Leukemia excess risks increased from 0.87%/Sv to 1.10%/Sv among males and from 0.73%/Sv to 1.04%/Sv among females. Bias was dependent on the gender, site, correction method, exposure profile and projection model considered. Future studies that use LSS data for U.S. nuclear workers may be downwardly biased if lifetime risk projections are not adjusted for random and systematic errors. (Supported by U.S. NRC Grant NRC-04-091-02.) ^

POPULATION ASSESSMENTS OF INFECTION WITH SCHISTOSOMA MANSONI: EFFECTS OF BIAS CAUSED BY THE RELATIVE SENSITIVITY OF DIAGNOSTIC TECHNIQUES (PUERTO RICO)

This study establishes the extent and relevance of bias of population estimates of prevalence, incidence, and intensity of infection with Schistosoma mansoni caused by the relative sensitivity of stool examination techniques. The population studied was Parcelas de Boqueron in Las Piedras, Puerto Rico, where the Centers for Disease Control, had undertaken a prospective community-based study of infection with S. mansoni in 1972. During each January of the succeeding years stool specimens from this population were processed according to the modified Ritchie concentration (MRC) technique. During January 1979 additional stool specimens were collected from 30 individuals selected on the basis of their mean S. mansoni egg output during previous years. Each specimen was divided into ten 1-gm aliquots and three 42-mg aliquots. The relationship of egg counts obtained with the Kato-Katz (KK) thick smear technique as a function of the mean of ten counts obtained with the MRC technique was established by means of regression analysis. Additionally, the effect of fecal sample size and egg excretion level on technique sensitivity was evaluated during a blind assessment of single stool specimen samples, using both examination methods, from 125 residents with documented S. mansoni infections. The regression equation was: Ln KK = 2.3324 + 0.6319 Ln MRC, and the coefficient of determination (r('2)) was 0.73. The regression equation was then utilized to correct the term "m" for sample size in the expression P ((GREATERTHEQ) 1 egg) = 1 - e('-ms), which estimates the probability P of finding at least one egg as a function of the mean S. mansoni egg output "m" of the population and the effective stool sample size "s" utilized by the coprological technique. This algorithm closely approximated the observed sensitivity of the KK and MRC tests when these were utilized to blindly screen a population of known parasitologic status for infection with S. mansoni. In addition, the algorithm was utilized to adjust the apparent prevalence of infection for the degree of functional sensitivity exhibited by the diagnostic test. This permitted the estimation of true prevalence of infection and, hence, a means for correcting estimates of incidence of infection. ^

Robust effect sizes and their confidence intervals for group difference between trajectories in hierarchical linear growth model

Hierarchical linear growth model (HLGM), as a flexible and powerful analytic method, has played an increased important role in psychology, public health and medical sciences in recent decades. Mostly, researchers who conduct HLGM are interested in the treatment effect on individual trajectories, which can be indicated by the cross-level interaction effects. However, the statistical hypothesis test for the effect of cross-level interaction in HLGM only show us whether there is a significant group difference in the average rate of change, rate of acceleration or higher polynomial effect; it fails to convey information about the magnitude of the difference between the group trajectories at specific time point. Thus, reporting and interpreting effect sizes have been increased emphases in HLGM in recent years, due to the limitations and increased criticisms for statistical hypothesis testing. However, most researchers fail to report these model-implied effect sizes for group trajectories comparison and their corresponding confidence intervals in HLGM analysis, since lack of appropriate and standard functions to estimate effect sizes associated with the model-implied difference between grouping trajectories in HLGM, and also lack of computing packages in the popular statistical software to automatically calculate them. ^ The present project is the first to establish the appropriate computing functions to assess the standard difference between grouping trajectories in HLGM. We proposed the two functions to estimate effect sizes on model-based grouping trajectories difference at specific time, we also suggested the robust effect sizes to reduce the bias of estimated effect sizes. Then, we applied the proposed functions to estimate the population effect sizes (d ) and robust effect sizes (du) on the cross-level interaction in HLGM by using the three simulated datasets, and also we compared the three methods of constructing confidence intervals around d and du recommended the best one for application. At the end, we constructed 95% confidence intervals with the suitable method for the effect sizes what we obtained with the three simulated datasets. ^ The effect sizes between grouping trajectories for the three simulated longitudinal datasets indicated that even though the statistical hypothesis test shows no significant difference between grouping trajectories, effect sizes between these grouping trajectories can still be large at some time points. Therefore, effect sizes between grouping trajectories in HLGM analysis provide us additional and meaningful information to assess group effect on individual trajectories. In addition, we also compared the three methods to construct 95% confident intervals around corresponding effect sizes in this project, which handled with the uncertainty of effect sizes to population parameter. We suggested the noncentral t-distribution based method when the assumptions held, and the bootstrap bias-corrected and accelerated method when the assumptions are not met.^

Left, right and interval bivariate censored data: Evaluating screening mammography in the presence of lead -time bias, length bias and over-detection

Of the large clinical trials evaluating screening mammography efficacy, none included women ages 75 and older. Recommendations on an upper age limit at which to discontinue screening are based on indirect evidence and are not consistent. Screening mammography is evaluated using observational data from the SEER-Medicare linked database. Measuring the benefit of screening mammography is difficult due to the impact of lead-time bias, length bias and over-detection. The underlying conceptual model divides the disease into two stages: pre-clinical (T0) and symptomatic (T1) breast cancer. Treating the time in these phases as a pair of dependent bivariate observations, (t0,t1), estimates are derived to describe the distribution of this random vector. To quantify the effect of screening mammography, statistical inference is made about the mammography parameters that correspond to the marginal distribution of the symptomatic phase duration (T1). This shows the hazard ratio of death from breast cancer comparing women with screen-detected tumors to those detected at their symptom onset is 0.36 (0.30, 0.42), indicating a benefit among the screen-detected cases. ^