Screening for possible human carcinogens and mutagens. False positives, false negatives: statistical implications.
A screening method aimed at identifying potential human carcinogens using either animal cancer bioassays or short-term genotoxic assays has 4 possible results: true positive, true negative, false positive and false negative. Such a categorisation is superficially similar to the results of hypothesis testing in a statistical analysis. In this latter case the false positive rate is determined by the significance level of the test and the false negative rate by the statistical power of the test. Although the two types of categorisation appear somewhat similar, different statistical issues are involved in their interpretation. Statistical methods appropriate for the analysis of the results of a series of assays include the use of Bayes' theorem and multivariate methods such as clustering techniques for the selection of batteries of short-term test capable of a better prediction of potential carcinogens. The conclusions drawn from such studies are dependent upon the estimates of values of sensitivity and specificity used, the choice of statistical method and the nature of the data set. The statistical issues resulting from the analysis of specific genotoxicity experiments involve the choice of suitable experimental designs and appropriate analyses together with the relationship of statistical significance to biological importance. The purpose of statistical analysis should increasingly be to estimate and explore effects rather than for formal hypothesis testing.
Lovell
D P
DP
British Industrial Biological Research Association, Carshalton, Surrey, Great Britain.
D001499:Bayes Theorem; D015197:Carcinogenicity Tests; D002273:Carcinogens / Q000145:classification*; D005188:False Negative Reactions; D005189:False Positive Reactions; D006801:Humans; D009152:Mutagenicity Tests; D009153:Mutagens / Q000145:classification*
D002273:Carcinogens; D009153:Mutagens