A full pedigree based method for the statistical assessment of genetic anticipation

Genetic anticipation is defined as a decrease in age of onset or increase in severity as the disorder is transmitted through subsequent generations. Anticipation has been noted in the literature for over a century. Recently, anticipation in several diseases including Huntington's Disease, Myotonic Dystrophy and Fragile X Syndrome were shown to be caused by expansion of triplet repeats. Anticipation effects have also been observed in numerous mental disorders (e.g. Schizophrenia, Bipolar Disorder), cancers (Li-Fraumeni Syndrome, Leukemia) and other complex diseases. ^ Several statistical methods have been applied to determine whether anticipation is a true phenomenon in a particular disorder, including standard statistical tests and newly developed affected parent/affected child pair methods. These methods have been shown to be inappropriate for assessing anticipation for a variety of reasons, including familial correlation and low power. Therefore, we have developed family-based likelihood modeling approaches to model the underlying transmission of the disease gene and penetrance function and hence detect anticipation. These methods can be applied in extended families, thus improving the power to detect anticipation compared with existing methods based only upon parents and children. The first method we have proposed is based on the regressive logistic hazard model. This approach models anticipation by a generational covariate. The second method allows alleles to mutate as they are transmitted from parents to offspring and is appropriate for modeling the known triplet repeat diseases in which the disease alleles can become more deleterious as they are transmitted across generations. ^ To evaluate the new methods, we performed extensive simulation studies for data simulated under different conditions to evaluate the effectiveness of the algorithms to detect genetic anticipation. Results from analysis by the first method yielded empirical power greater than 87% based on the 5% type I error critical value identified in each simulation depending on the method of data generation and current age criteria. Analysis by the second method was not possible due to the current formulation of the software. The application of this method to Huntington's Disease and Li-Fraumeni Syndrome data sets revealed evidence for a generation effect in both cases. ^

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. ^