Various tests on trend in toxicological studies are reviewed, and the advantages and the disadvantages involved with such procedures are discussed. New tests are introduced to overcome difficulties common to many current procedures, such as downturns at higher doses, and missing numerical availability.
WakataA., MiyamaeY., SatoS., SuzukiT., MoritaT., AsanoN., AwogiT., KondoK., & HayashiM. (1998). Evaluation of the rat micronucleus test with bone marrow and peripheral blood: summary of the 9th collaborative study by CSGMT/JEMS MMS. Environmental Molecular Mutagenesis32, 84–100.
2.
CombesR.D. (1997). Statistical analysis of dose–response data from in vitro assays: an illustration using Salmonella mutagenicity data. Toxicology in Vitro11, 683–687.
3.
BartholomewD.J. (1959). A test of homogeneity for ordered alternatives. Biometrika46, 36–48.
4.
BartholomewD.J. (1961). Ordered tests in the analysis of variance. Biometrika48, 325–332.
5.
TangD.I., & LinS.P. (1997). An approximate likelihood ratio test for comparing several treatments to a control. Journal of the American Statistical Association92, 1155–1162.
6.
AgrestiA., & CoullB.A. (1998). An empirical comparison of inference using order-restricted and linear logit models for a binary response. Communications in Statistics — Computation and Simulation27, 147–166.
7.
BretzF., & SeidelD. (2000). SAS/IML programs for exact calculations of orthant probabilities for arbitrary dimensions. Computational Statistics and Data Analysis33, 220–221.
8.
WilliamsD.A. (1971). A test for differences between treatment means when several dose levels are compared with a zero dose control. Biometrics27, 103–117. Correction: Biometrics 31 (1975), 1019.
9.
WilliamsD.A. (1972). The comparison of several dose levels with a zero dose control. Biometrics28, 519–531.
10.
ShirleyE.A. (1996). A literature review of statistical methods for the analysis of general toxicology data. In Statistics in Toxicology (ed. MorganB.J.T.), pp. 20–32. Oxford, UK: Clarendon Press.
11.
BretzF., & HothornL.A. (2000). A powerful alternative to Williams’ test with application to toxicological dose–response relationships of normally distributed data. Environmental and Ecological Statistics7, 135–154.
12.
HothornL.A. (1989). Robustness study on Williams’ and Shirley procedure, with application in toxicology. Biometrical Journal31, 891–903.
13.
MukerjeeH., RobertsonT., & WrightF.T. (1986). Multiple contrast tests for testing against a simple tree ordering. In Advances in Order Restricted Statistical Inference (ed. DykstraR.), pp. 203–230. Berlin, Germany: Springer-Verlag.
14.
MukerjeeH., RoberstonT., & WrightF.T. (1987). Comparison of several treatments with a control using multiple contrasts. Journal of the American Statistical Association82, 902–910.
15.
MarcusR. (1976). The power of some tests of the equality of normal means against an ordered alternative. Biometrika63, 177–183.
16.
DunnettC.W. (1955). A multiple comparison procedure for comparing several treatments with a control. Journal of the American Statistical Association50, 1096–1121.
17.
DunnettC.W. (1964). New tables for multiple comparison with a control. Biometrics20, 482–491.
18.
SteelR.G.D. (1959). A multiple comparison rank sum test: treatments versus control. Biometrics15, 560–572.
19.
BauerP. (1997). A note on multiple testing procedures in dose finding. Biometrics53, 1125–1128.
20.
HothornL.A. (1997). New statistical methods for analyzing mutagenicity assays: real data problems in biopharmaceutical drug developments. In Industrial Statistics (ed. KitsosC.P., & EdlerL.), pp. 201–208. Heidelberg, Germany: Physica-Verlag.
21.
SimpsonD.G., & MargolinB.H. (1986). Recursive nonparametric testing for dose–response relationships subject to downturns at high doses. Biometrika73, 589–596.
22.
BarlowR.E., BartholomewD.J., BremnerJ.M., & BrunkH.D. (1972). Statistical Inference Under Order Restrictions.London, UK: Wiley.
23.
RobertsonT., WrightF.T., & DykstraR.L. (1988). Order Restricted Statistical Inference.New York, NY, USA: Wiley.
24.
SAS Institute (1997). SAS/STAT Software: Changes and Enhancements through Release 6.12.Cary, NC, USA: SAS Institute.
25.
HayterA.J., KurikiS., & ShimodairaH. (2002). The isotonic range statistic for testing against an ordered alternative. Journal of Statistical Planning on Inference105, 347–362.
26.
HayterA.J., & LiuW. (1999). A new test against an umbrella alternative and the associated simultaneous confidence intervals, Computational Statistics and Data Analysis30, 393–401.
27.
Chuang-SteinC., & AgrestiA. (1997). A review of tests for detecting a monotone dose–response relationship with ordinal response data. Statistics in Medicine16, 2599–2618.
28.
HirotsuC. (1979). The cumulative chi-squares method and a Studentised maximal contrast method for testing an ordered alternative in a one-way analysis of variance model. Reports of Statistics: Application Research26, 12–21.
29.
HirotsuC. (1997). Isotonic inference with particular interest in application to clinical trials. In Industrial Statistics (ed. KitsosC.P., & EdlerL.), pp. 233–241. Heidelberg, Germany: Physica-Verlag.
30.
TukeyJ.W., CimineraJ.L., & HeyseJ.F. (1985). Testing the statistical certainty of a response to increasing doses of a drug. Biometrics41, 295–301.
31.
CapizziT., SurvillT.T., HeyseJ.F., & MalaniH. (1992). An empirical and simulated comparison of some tests for detecting progressiveness of response with increasing doses of a compound. Biometrical Journal34, 275–289.
32.
AntonelloJ.M., ClarkR.L., & HeyseJ.F. (1993). Application of the Tukey trend test procedure to assess developmental and reproductive toxicity. I. Measurement data. Fundamentals in Applied Toxicology21, 52–58.
33.
MudholkarG., & McDermottM. (1989). A class of tests for equality of ordered means. Biometrika76, 161–168.
34.
McDermottM.P., & MudholkarG.S. (1993). A simple approach to testing homogeneity of order-constrained means. Journal of the American Statistical Association88, 1371–1379.
35.
McDermottM.P. (1999). Generalised orthogonal contrast tests for homogeneity of ordered means. The Canadian Journal of Statistics27, 457–470.
36.
HayterA.J. (1990). A one-sided Studentised range test for testing against a simple ordered alternative. Journal of the American Statistical Association85, 778–785.
37.
TukeyJ.W. (1953). The problem of multiple comparisons. Unpublished manuscript reprinted in: The Collected Works of John W. Tukey, Volume 8 (ed. BraunH.I.), (1994). New York, NY, USA: Chapman and Hall.
38.
CohenA., & SackrowitzH.B. (1992). Improved tests for comparing treatments against a control and other one-sided problems. Journal of the American Statistical Association87, 1137–1144.
39.
GenzA., & BretzF. (1999). Numerical computation of multivariate t-probabilities with application to power calculation of multiple contrasts. Journal of Statistical Computation and Simulation63, 361–378.
40.
GenzA., & BretzF. (2002). Methods for the computation of multivariate t-probabilities. Journal of Computational and Graphical Statistics11, 950–971.
41.
TamhaneA.C., DunnettC.W., & HochbergY. (1996). Multiple test procedures for dose finding. Biometrics52, 21–37.
42.
HothornL.A., & HauschkeD. (1998). Principles in statistical testing in randomised toxicological studies. In Design and Analysis of Animal Studies in Pharmaceutical Development (ed. ChowS.C., & LiuJ.P.), pp. 79–134. New York, NY, USA: Marcel Dekker.
43.
BaileyS. (1998). Subchronic toxicity studies. In Design and Analysis of Animal Studies in Pharmaceutical Development (ed. ChowS.C., & LiuJ.P.), pp. 135–196. New York, NY, USA: Marcel Dekker.
44.
LeeR.E., & SpurrierJ.D. (1995). Successive comparisons between ordered treatments. Journal of Statistical Planning and Inference43, 323–330.
45.
SavilleD.J., & WoodG.R. (1991). Statistical Methods: The Geometric Approach.New York, NY, USA: Springer-Verlag.
46.
AbelsonR.P., & TukeyJ.W. (1963). Efficient utilisation of non-numerical information in quantitative analysis: general theory and the case of simple order. The Annals of Mathematical Statistics34, 1347–1369.
47.
SchaafsmaW., & SmidL.J. (1966). Most stringent somewhere most powerful tests against alternatives restricted by a number of linear inequalities. The Annals of Mathematical Statistics37, 1161–1172.
NeuhäuserM., & HothornL.A. (2000). Parametric location-scale and scale trend tests based on Levene's transformation. Computational Statistics and Data Analysis33, 189–200.
50.
DunnettC.W. (1980). Pairwise multiple comparisons in the unequal variance case. Journal of the American Statistical Association75, 796–800.
MengC.Y.K., DavisS.B., & RothA.J. (1993). Robust contrast based trend tests. ASA Proceedings of the Biopharmaceutical Section, 127–132.
53.
HettmanspergerT.P., & NortonR.M. (1987). Tests for patterned alternatives in k-sample problems. Journal of the American Statistical Association82, 292–299.
54.
SeidelD. (2001). Gerichtete Tests für geordnet kategoriale Daten bei sehr kleinen Fallzahlen. PhD Thesis, University of Hannover.
55.
CochranW.G. (1954). Some methods for strengthening the common χ2-test. Biometrics10, 417–451.
56.
ArmitageP. (1955). Tests for linear trends in proportions and frequencies. Biometrics11, 375–386.
57.
National Archives and Record Service (1985). Federal Register No. 50.
58.
TaroneR.E., & GartJ.J. (1980). On the robustness of combined tests for trends in proportions. Journal of the American Statistical Association75, 110–116.
59.
BretzF., & HothornL.A. (2002). Asymptotic power and sample size determination for contrast tests with binomial data. Statistics in Medicine21, 3325–3335.
60.
LiuQ. (1998). An order-directed score test for trend in ordered 2 × K tables. Biometrics54, 1147–1154.
61.
SchmoorC., & SchumacherM. (1992). Adaptive statistical procedures for the analysis of nonmonotone dose–response relationships. Biometrie und Informatik in Medizin und Biologie23, 113–126.
62.
RomD.M., CostelloR.J., & ConnellL.T. (1994). On closed test procedures for dose–response analysis. Statistics in Medicine13, 1583–1596.
63.
ShiN.Z. (1988). A test of homogeneity for umbrella alternatives and tables of the level probabilities. Communications in Statistics: Theory and Methods17, 657–670.
64.
MarcusR., & GeniziA. (1994). Simultaneous confidence intervals for umbrella contrasts of normal means. Computational Statistics and Data Analysis17, 393–407.
65.
LimD.H., & WolfeD.A. (1997). Nonparametric tests for comparing umbrella pattern treatment effects with a control in a randomized block design. Biometrics53, 410–418.
66.
MackG.A., & WolfeD.A. (1981). K-sample rank tests for umbrella alternatives. Journal of the American Statistical Association76, 175–181. Correction: Biometrics 77, 954 (1982).
67.
BretzF., & HothornL.A. (2001). Testing dose– response relationships with a priori unknown, possibly non-monotone shapes. Journal of Biopharmaceutical Statistics11, 193–207.
68.
RubergS.J. (1989). Contrasts for identifying the minimum effective dose. Journal of the American Statistical Association84, 816–822.
69.
FlignerM.A., & WolfeD.A. (1982). Distribution-free tests for comparing several treatments with a control. Statistica Neelandica36, 119–127.
70.
NeuhäuserM. (1996). Trendtests bei a-priori unbekanntem Erwartungswertprofil. PhD Thesis, University of Dortmund.
71.
HothornL.A., & BretzF. (2003). Dose–response and thresholds in mutagenicity studies: a statistical testing approach. ATLA31, Suppl. 1, 97–103.
