Assessment of cone beam computed tomography techniques for imaging lung damage in mice in vivo

Lung damage is a common side effect of chemotherapeutic drugs such as bleomycin. This study used a bleomycin mouse model which simulates the lung damage observed in humans. Noninvasive, in vivo cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) was used to visualize and quantify fibrotic and inflammatory damage over the entire lung volume of mice. Bleomycin was used to induce pulmonary damage in vivo and the results from two CBCT systems, a micro-CT and flat panel CT (fpCT), were compared to histologic measurements, the standard method of murine lung damage quantification. Twenty C57BL/6 mice were given either 3 U/kg of bleomycin or saline intratracheally. The mice were scanned at baseline, before the administration of bleomycin, and then 10, 14, and 21 days afterward. At each time point, a subset of mice was sacrificed for histologic analysis. The resulting CT images were used to assess lung volume. Percent lung damage (PLD) was calculated for each mouse on both the fpCT (PLDfpcT) and the micro-CT (PLDμCT). Histologic PLD (PLDH) was calculated for each histologic section at each time point (day 10, n = 4; day 14, n = 4; day 21, n = 5; control group, n = 5). A linear regression was applied to the PLDfpCT vs. PLDH, PLDμCT vs. PLDH and PLDfpCT vs. PLDμCT distributions. This study did not demonstrate strong correlations between PLDCT and PLDH. The coefficient of determination, R, was 0.68 for PLDμCT vs. PLDH and 0.75 for the PLD fpCT vs. PLDH. The experimental issues identified from this study were: (1) inconsistent inflation of the lungs from scan to scan, (2) variable distribution of damage (one histologic section not representative of overall lung damage), (3) control mice not scanned with each group of bleomycin mice, (4) two CT systems caused long anesthesia time for the mice, and (5) respiratory gating did not hold the volume of lung constant throughout the scan. Addressing these issues might allow for further improvement of the correlation between PLDCT and PLDH. ^

Bayesian generalized linear models for meta-analysis of diagnostic tests

With the recognition of the importance of evidence-based medicine, there is an emerging need for methods to systematically synthesize available data. Specifically, methods to provide accurate estimates of test characteristics for diagnostic tests are needed to help physicians make better clinical decisions. To provide more flexible approaches for meta-analysis of diagnostic tests, we developed three Bayesian generalized linear models. Two of these models, a bivariate normal and a binomial model, analyzed pairs of sensitivity and specificity values while incorporating the correlation between these two outcome variables. Noninformative independent uniform priors were used for the variance of sensitivity, specificity and correlation. We also applied an inverse Wishart prior to check the sensitivity of the results. The third model was a multinomial model where the test results were modeled as multinomial random variables. All three models can include specific imaging techniques as covariates in order to compare performance. Vague normal priors were assigned to the coefficients of the covariates. The computations were carried out using the 'Bayesian inference using Gibbs sampling' implementation of Markov chain Monte Carlo techniques. We investigated the properties of the three proposed models through extensive simulation studies. We also applied these models to a previously published meta-analysis dataset on cervical cancer as well as to an unpublished melanoma dataset. In general, our findings show that the point estimates of sensitivity and specificity were consistent among Bayesian and frequentist bivariate normal and binomial models. However, in the simulation studies, the estimates of the correlation coefficient from Bayesian bivariate models are not as good as those obtained from frequentist estimation regardless of which prior distribution was used for the covariance matrix. The Bayesian multinomial model consistently underestimated the sensitivity and specificity regardless of the sample size and correlation coefficient. In conclusion, the Bayesian bivariate binomial model provides the most flexible framework for future applications because of its following strengths: (1) it facilitates direct comparison between different tests; (2) it captures the variability in both sensitivity and specificity simultaneously as well as the intercorrelation between the two; and (3) it can be directly applied to sparse data without ad hoc correction. ^

Assessment of the effect on statistical power of regression model misspecification by using techniques of mathematical statistics and simulation study

Objectives. This paper seeks to assess the effect on statistical power of regression model misspecification in a variety of situations. ^ Methods and results. The effect of misspecification in regression can be approximated by evaluating the correlation between the correct specification and the misspecification of the outcome variable (Harris 2010).In this paper, three misspecified models (linear, categorical and fractional polynomial) were considered. In the first section, the mathematical method of calculating the correlation between correct and misspecified models with simple mathematical forms was derived and demonstrated. In the second section, data from the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES 2007-2008) were used to examine such correlations. Our study shows that comparing to linear or categorical models, the fractional polynomial models, with the higher correlations, provided a better approximation of the true relationship, which was illustrated by LOESS regression. In the third section, we present the results of simulation studies that demonstrate overall misspecification in regression can produce marked decreases in power with small sample sizes. However, the categorical model had greatest power, ranging from 0.877 to 0.936 depending on sample size and outcome variable used. The power of fractional polynomial model was close to that of linear model, which ranged from 0.69 to 0.83, and appeared to be affected by the increased degrees of freedom of this model.^ Conclusion. Correlations between alternative model specifications can be used to provide a good approximation of the effect on statistical power of misspecification when the sample size is large. When model specifications have known simple mathematical forms, such correlations can be calculated mathematically. Actual public health data from NHANES 2007-2008 were used as examples to demonstrate the situations with unknown or complex correct model specification. Simulation of power for misspecified models confirmed the results based on correlation methods but also illustrated the effect of model degrees of freedom on power.^