Estimating the mean and standard deviation of concentration distributions using censored samples

Environmental data sets of pollutant concentrations in air, water, and soil frequently include unquantified sample values reported only as being below the analytical method detection limit. These values, referred to as censored values, should be considered in the estimation of distribution parameters as each represents some value of pollutant concentration between zero and the detection limit. Most of the currently accepted methods for estimating the population parameters of environmental data sets containing censored values rely upon the assumption of an underlying normal (or transformed normal) distribution. This assumption can result in unacceptable levels of error in parameter estimation due to the unbounded left tail of the normal distribution. With the beta distribution, which is bounded by the same range of a distribution of concentrations, $\rm\lbrack0\le x\le1\rbrack,$ parameter estimation errors resulting from improper distribution bounds are avoided. This work developed a method that uses the beta distribution to estimate population parameters from censored environmental data sets and evaluated its performance in comparison to currently accepted methods that rely upon an underlying normal (or transformed normal) distribution. Data sets were generated assuming typical values encountered in environmental pollutant evaluation for mean, standard deviation, and number of variates. For each set of model values, data sets were generated assuming that the data was distributed either normally, lognormally, or according to a beta distribution. For varying levels of censoring, two established methods of parameter estimation, regression on normal ordered statistics, and regression on lognormal ordered statistics, were used to estimate the known mean and standard deviation of each data set. The method developed for this study, employing a beta distribution assumption, was also used to estimate parameters and the relative accuracy of all three methods were compared. For data sets of all three distribution types, and for censoring levels up to 50%, the performance of the new method equaled, if not exceeded, the performance of the two established methods. Because of its robustness in parameter estimation regardless of distribution type or censoring level, the method employing the beta distribution should be considered for full development in estimating parameters for censored environmental data sets. ^

BEST SUBSET SELECTION FOR CATEGORICAL DATA

When choosing among models to describe categorical data, the necessity to consider interactions makes selection more difficult. With just four variables, considering all interactions, there are 166 different hierarchical models and many more non-hierarchical models. Two procedures have been developed for categorical data which will produce the "best" subset or subsets of each model size where size refers to the number of effects in the model. Both procedures are patterned after the Leaps and Bounds approach used by Furnival and Wilson for continuous data and do not generally require fitting all models. For hierarchical models, likelihood ratio statistics (G('2)) are computed using iterative proportional fitting and "best" is determined by comparing, among models with the same number of effects, the Pr((chi)(,k)('2) (GREATERTHEQ) G(,ij)('2)) where k is the degrees of freedom for ith model of size j. To fit non-hierarchical as well as hierarchical models, a weighted least squares procedure has been developed.^ The procedures are applied to published occupational data relating to the occurrence of byssinosis. These results are compared to previously published analyses of the same data. Also, the procedures are applied to published data on symptoms in psychiatric patients and again compared to previously published analyses.^ These procedures will make categorical data analysis more accessible to researchers who are not statisticians. The procedures should also encourage more complex exploratory analyses of epidemiologic data and contribute to the development of new hypotheses for study. ^

Bayesian Adaptive Designs for Early Phase Clinical Trials

My dissertation focuses mainly on Bayesian adaptive designs for phase I and phase II clinical trials. It includes three specific topics: (1) proposing a novel two-dimensional dose-finding algorithm for biological agents, (2) developing Bayesian adaptive screening designs to provide more efficient and ethical clinical trials, and (3) incorporating missing late-onset responses to make an early stopping decision. Treating patients with novel biological agents is becoming a leading trend in oncology. Unlike cytotoxic agents, for which toxicity and efficacy monotonically increase with dose, biological agents may exhibit non-monotonic patterns in their dose-response relationships. Using a trial with two biological agents as an example, we propose a phase I/II trial design to identify the biologically optimal dose combination (BODC), which is defined as the dose combination of the two agents with the highest efficacy and tolerable toxicity. A change-point model is used to reflect the fact that the dose-toxicity surface of the combinational agents may plateau at higher dose levels, and a flexible logistic model is proposed to accommodate the possible non-monotonic pattern for the dose-efficacy relationship. During the trial, we continuously update the posterior estimates of toxicity and efficacy and assign patients to the most appropriate dose combination. We propose a novel dose-finding algorithm to encourage sufficient exploration of untried dose combinations in the two-dimensional space. Extensive simulation studies show that the proposed design has desirable operating characteristics in identifying the BODC under various patterns of dose-toxicity and dose-efficacy relationships. Trials of combination therapies for the treatment of cancer are playing an increasingly important role in the battle against this disease. To more efficiently handle the large number of combination therapies that must be tested, we propose a novel Bayesian phase II adaptive screening design to simultaneously select among possible treatment combinations involving multiple agents. Our design is based on formulating the selection procedure as a Bayesian hypothesis testing problem in which the superiority of each treatment combination is equated to a single hypothesis. During the trial conduct, we use the current values of the posterior probabilities of all hypotheses to adaptively allocate patients to treatment combinations. Simulation studies show that the proposed design substantially outperforms the conventional multi-arm balanced factorial trial design. The proposed design yields a significantly higher probability for selecting the best treatment while at the same time allocating substantially more patients to efficacious treatments. The proposed design is most appropriate for the trials combining multiple agents and screening out the efficacious combination to be further investigated. The proposed Bayesian adaptive phase II screening design substantially outperformed the conventional complete factorial design. Our design allocates more patients to better treatments while at the same time providing higher power to identify the best treatment at the end of the trial. Phase II trial studies usually are single-arm trials which are conducted to test the efficacy of experimental agents and decide whether agents are promising to be sent to phase III trials. Interim monitoring is employed to stop the trial early for futility to avoid assigning unacceptable number of patients to inferior treatments. We propose a Bayesian single-arm phase II design with continuous monitoring for estimating the response rate of the experimental drug. To address the issue of late-onset responses, we use a piece-wise exponential model to estimate the hazard function of time to response data and handle the missing responses using the multiple imputation approach. We evaluate the operating characteristics of the proposed method through extensive simulation studies. We show that the proposed method reduces the total length of the trial duration and yields desirable operating characteristics for different physician-specified lower bounds of response rate with different true response rates.

Editorial: Family Preservation: Collaboration and Teamwork

Tis the season of the National Basketball Association finals and the beginning of the Professional Women's Basketball Association. The skills of collaboration and teamwork required to achieve the ballet of basketball is learned by players over a number of years. On school grounds everywhere, children are learning the techniques and skills necessary to play the game of basketball. Recently, I saw a coach on the sidelines screaming at a young player to make her free-throws, and if she missed, she would have to run laps. This reminded me of traditional services to families which threaten, or at best demand a certain level of performance of parents without providing any true "coaching". I often watch our college coach work from a strengths perspective with the team on minute techniques such as the match-up defense and in-bounds plays. This is the approach that family preservation must employ with families, programs, and their communities.

Data quality in trauma transfusion studies and the impact of missing data on predicting massive transfusion

Maximizing data quality may be especially difficult in trauma-related clinical research. Strategies are needed to improve data quality and assess the impact of data quality on clinical predictive models. This study had two objectives. The first was to compare missing data between two multi-center trauma transfusion studies: a retrospective study (RS) using medical chart data with minimal data quality review and the PRospective Observational Multi-center Major Trauma Transfusion (PROMMTT) study with standardized quality assurance. The second objective was to assess the impact of missing data on clinical prediction algorithms by evaluating blood transfusion prediction models using PROMMTT data. RS (2005-06) and PROMMTT (2009-10) investigated trauma patients receiving ≥ 1 unit of red blood cells (RBC) from ten Level I trauma centers. Missing data were compared for 33 variables collected in both studies using mixed effects logistic regression (including random intercepts for study site). Massive transfusion (MT) patients received ≥ 10 RBC units within 24h of admission. Correct classification percentages for three MT prediction models were evaluated using complete case analysis and multiple imputation based on the multivariate normal distribution. A sensitivity analysis for missing data was conducted to estimate the upper and lower bounds of correct classification using assumptions about missing data under best and worst case scenarios. Most variables (17/33=52%) had <1% missing data in RS and PROMMTT. Of the remaining variables, 50% demonstrated less missingness in PROMMTT, 25% had less missingness in RS, and 25% were similar between studies. Missing percentages for MT prediction variables in PROMMTT ranged from 2.2% (heart rate) to 45% (respiratory rate). For variables missing >1%, study site was associated with missingness (all p≤0.021). Survival time predicted missingness for 50% of RS and 60% of PROMMTT variables. MT models complete case proportions ranged from 41% to 88%. Complete case analysis and multiple imputation demonstrated similar correct classification results. Sensitivity analysis upper-lower bound ranges for the three MT models were 59-63%, 36-46%, and 46-58%. Prospective collection of ten-fold more variables with data quality assurance reduced overall missing data. Study site and patient survival were associated with missingness, suggesting that data were not missing completely at random, and complete case analysis may lead to biased results. Evaluating clinical prediction model accuracy may be misleading in the presence of missing data, especially with many predictor variables. The proposed sensitivity analysis estimating correct classification under upper (best case scenario)/lower (worst case scenario) bounds may be more informative than multiple imputation, which provided results similar to complete case analysis.^