Literature DB >> 8187731

A comparison of continuous- and discrete- time three-state models for rodent tumorigenicity experiments.

J C Lindsey1, L M Ryan.   

Abstract

The three-state illness-death model provides a useful way to characterize data from a rodent tumorigenicity experiment. Most parametrizations proposed recently in the literature assume discrete time for the death process and either discrete or continuous time for the tumor onset process. We compare these approaches with a third alternative that uses a piecewise continuous model on the hazards for tumor onset and death. All three models assume proportional hazards to characterize tumor lethality and the effect of dose on tumor onset and death rate. All of the models can easily be fitted using an Expectation Maximization (EM) algorithm. The piecewise continuous model is particularly appealing in this context because the complete data likelihood corresponds to a standard piecewise exponential model with tumor presence as a time-varying covariate. It can be shown analytically that differences between the parameter estimates given by each model are explained by varying assumptions about when tumor onsets, deaths, and sacrifices occur within intervals. The mixed-time model is seen to be an extension of the grouped data proportional hazards model [Mutat. Res. 24:267-278 (1981)]. We argue that the continuous-time model is preferable to the discrete- and mixed-time models because it gives reasonable estimates with relatively few intervals while still making full use of the available information. Data from the ED01 experiment illustrate the results.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1994        PMID: 8187731      PMCID: PMC1566894          DOI: 10.1289/ehp.94102s19

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Environ Health Perspect        ISSN: 0091-6765            Impact factor:   9.031


  11 in total

1.  Log-linear models in the analysis of disease prevalence data from survival/sacrifice experiments.

Authors:  T J Mitchell; B W Turnbull
Journal:  Biometrics       Date:  1979-03       Impact factor: 2.571

2.  A proportional hazards model for interval-censored failure time data.

Authors:  D M Finkelstein
Journal:  Biometrics       Date:  1986-12       Impact factor: 2.571

3.  Nonparametric methods for survival/sacrifice experiments.

Authors:  A Dewanji; J D Kalbfleisch
Journal:  Biometrics       Date:  1986-06       Impact factor: 2.571

4.  Estimating tumor incidence rates in animal carcinogenicity experiments.

Authors:  G E Dinse
Journal:  Biometrics       Date:  1988-06       Impact factor: 2.571

5.  Statistical analysis of survival experiments.

Authors:  D G Hoel; H E Walburg
Journal:  J Natl Cancer Inst       Date:  1972-08       Impact factor: 13.506

6.  Semiparametric analysis of tumor incidence rates in survival/sacrifice experiments.

Authors:  C J Portier; G E Dinse
Journal:  Biometrics       Date:  1987-03       Impact factor: 2.571

7.  Regression analysis of grouped survival data with application to breast cancer data.

Authors:  R L Prentice; L A Gloeckler
Journal:  Biometrics       Date:  1978-03       Impact factor: 2.571

8.  The ED01 study: summary and conclusions.

Authors:  D W Gaylor
Journal:  J Environ Pathol Toxicol       Date:  1980

9.  Constant risk differences in the analysis of animal tumorigenicity data.

Authors:  G E Dinse
Journal:  Biometrics       Date:  1991-06       Impact factor: 2.571

10.  Editorial: Guidelines on the analysis of tumour rates and death rates in experimental animals.

Authors:  R Peto
Journal:  Br J Cancer       Date:  1974-02       Impact factor: 7.640

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.