More accurate dose-response estimation using Monte-Carlo uncertainty analysis: The data cube approach

The traditional q(1)* methodology for constructing upper confidence limits (UCLs) for the low-dose slopes of quantal dose-response functions has two limitations: (i) it is based on an asymptotic statistical result that has been shown via Monte Carlo simulation not to hold in practice for small, real bioassay experiments (Portier and Hoel, 1983); and (ii) it assumes that the multistage model (which represents cumulative hazard as a polynomial function of dose) is correct. This paper presents an uncertainty analysis approach for fitting dose-response functions to data that does not require specific parametric assumptions or depend on asymptotic results. It has the advantage that the resulting estimates of the dose-response function (and uncertainties about it) no longer depend on the validity of an assumed parametric family nor on the accuracy of the asymptotic approximation. The method derives posterior densities for the true response rates in the dose groups, rather than deriving posterior densities for model parameters, as in other Bayesian approaches (Sielken, 1991), or resampling the observed data points, as in the bootstrap and other resampling methods. It does so by conditioning constrained maximum-entropy priors on the observed data. Monte Carlo sampling of the posterior (constrained, conditioned) probability distributions generate values of response probabilities that might be observed if the of the unknown dose-response function is fit to each simulated dataset using ''model-free'' methods. The simulation-based frequency distribution of all the dose-response curves fit to the simulated datasets yields a posterior distribution function for the low-dose slope of the dose-response curve. An upper confidence limit on the low-dose slope is obtained directly from this posterior distribution. This ''Data Cube'' procedure is illustrated with a real dataset for benzene, and is seen to produce more policy-relevant insights than does the traditional q(1)* methodology. For example, it shows how far apart are the 90%, 95%, and 99% limits and reveals how uncertainty about total and incremental risk vary with dose level (typically being dominated at low doses by uncertainty about the response of the control group, and being dominated at high doses by sampling variability). Strengths and limitations of the Data Cube approach are summarized, and potential decision-analytic applications to making better informed risk management decisions are briefly discussed.