1984
DOI: 10.2307/3429859
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Statistical Issues in the Design, Analysis and Interpretation of Animal Carcinogenicity Studies

Abstract: JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.. The National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences (NIEHS) and Brogan & Partners are collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Environmental Hea… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
32
0

Year Published

1986
1986
2016
2016

Publication Types

Select...
8

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 37 publications
(32 citation statements)
references
References 22 publications
(24 reference statements)
0
32
0
Order By: Relevance
“…(3) Data from concurrent negative controls in a TG-GLP experiment are allowed (OECD, 2012b) to be diluted, even overridden, by historical control data drawn from experiments carried out in a wide range of different conditions (accordingly, they are used in many risk assessments). Some of the variables not well controlled when using the often secret historical controls include strain and origin of animals, laboratory in which the experiment was carried out, dietary factors; environmental contaminants in air, bedding, food, and water; differences in diagnostic criteria among pathologists, and the year in which the experiment was performed; all which can produce very different results (Haseman, 1984;Hardisty, 1985). (4) Positive controls (when feasible) limit false negative results (Myers et al, 2009), but are never mentioned in the TGs or in guidance.…”
Section: What Makes Tg-glp Tests So Insensitive?mentioning
confidence: 98%
“…(3) Data from concurrent negative controls in a TG-GLP experiment are allowed (OECD, 2012b) to be diluted, even overridden, by historical control data drawn from experiments carried out in a wide range of different conditions (accordingly, they are used in many risk assessments). Some of the variables not well controlled when using the often secret historical controls include strain and origin of animals, laboratory in which the experiment was carried out, dietary factors; environmental contaminants in air, bedding, food, and water; differences in diagnostic criteria among pathologists, and the year in which the experiment was performed; all which can produce very different results (Haseman, 1984;Hardisty, 1985). (4) Positive controls (when feasible) limit false negative results (Myers et al, 2009), but are never mentioned in the TGs or in guidance.…”
Section: What Makes Tg-glp Tests So Insensitive?mentioning
confidence: 98%
“…For the analysis of tumor incidence data, survival-adjusted procedures were used to assess dose-reponse trends and to make pairwise comparisons between dosed groups and controls (Haseman, 1984). Fisher exact tests and Cochran-Armitage trend tests were also utilized to assess tumor : incidence data.…”
Section: Two-year Study Designmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Haseman (1983) acknowledges that although his paper deals primarily with false positives, examination of the statistical properties of the standard bioassay would be incomplete without consideration of the false negative rate. Haseman (1984) provides a table that shows the false negative rate to be 30% for a chemical that induces a rare tumor in 13% of animals at the high dose. For a chemical that doubles the tumor incidence for a common tumor from 30% in the controls to 60% at the high dose, the false negative rate is also 30%.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 98%