Recent methods for the analysis of carcinogenicity experiments are summarized and discussed. The discussion centers around survival models aimed at estimating tumor incidence. Practical applications of these models to typical carcinogenicity experiments and to historical control data are discussed. In addition, a simple survival adjustment to the usual trend test in proportions is presented.
References
1.
1. Fisher, R., and Tippett, C. (1928). Limiting forms of the frequency distribution of the largest or smallest member of a sample. Proc. Cambridge Philosoph. Soc.24, 180–190.
2.
2. Kaplan, E., and Meier, P. (1958). Nonparametric estimation from incomplete observations. J. Am. Statist. Assoc.53, 267–277.
3.
3. Cox, D.R. (1972). Regression models and life tables. J. R. Statist. Soc.[B]34, 187–226.
4.
4. Mcknight, H., and Crowley, J. (1984). Tests for differences in tumor incidence based on animal carcinogenesis experiments. J. Am. Statist. Assoc.79, 639–648.
5.
5. Lagakos, S., and Ryan, L. (1985). On the representativeness assumption in prevalence tests of carcinogenicity. Appl. Statistics34, 54–62.
6.
6. Hoel, D., and Walburg, H. (1972). Statistical analysis of survival experiments. JNCI49, 361–372.
7.
7. Tarone, R. (1975). Tests for trend in life table analysis. Biometrika62, 679–682.
8.
8. Dinse, G., and Lagakos, S. (1983). Regression analysis of tumor prevalence data. Appl. Statistics32, 236–248.
9.
9. Portier, C., Hedges, J., and Hoel, D. (1986). Age-specific models of mortality and tumor onset for historical control animals in the National Toxicology Program's carcinogenicity experiments. Cancer Res.46, 4372–4378.
10.
10. Bailer, A. J., and Portier, C. (1988). The effects of treatment-induced mortality and tumor-induced mortality on tests of carcinogenicity in small samples. Biometrics44, 417–432.
11.
11. Sawyer, C., Peto, R., Bernstein, L., and Pike, M. (1984). Calculation of carcinogenic potency from long-term animal carcinogenesis experiments. Biometrics40, 27–40.
12.
12. Peto, R., Pike, M., Bernstein, L., Gold, L., and Ames, B. (1984). The TD50: A proposed general convention for the numerical description of the carcinogenic potency of chemicals in chronic exposure animal experiments. Environ. Health Perspect.58, 1–8.
13.
13. Portier, C., and Hoel, D. (1987). Issues concerning the estimation of the TD50. Risk Analysis7, 437–447.
14.
14. Dewanji, A., and Kalbfleisch, J. (1986). Nonparametric methods for survival/sacrifice experiments. Biometrics42, 325–342.
15.
15. Portier, C. (1986). Estimating the tumor onset distribution in animal carcinogenesis experiments. Biometrika73, 371–378.
16.
16. Dinse, G. (1988). Estimating tumor incidence rates in animal carcinogenicity experiments. Biometrics44, 405–415.
17.
17. Portier, C., and Dinse, G. (1987). Semi-parametric analysis of tumor incidence rates in survival/sacrifice experiments. Biometrics43, 107–114.
18.
18. Gart, J., Chu, K., and Tarone, R. (1979). Statistical issues in the interpretation of chronic bioassay tests of carcinogenicity. JNCI62, 957–974.
