Statistical issues in the use of the comet assay

被引:212
作者
Lovell, David P. [1 ]
Omori, Takashi [2 ]
机构
[1] Univ Surrey, Dept Biostat, Postgrad Med Sch, Surrey GU2 7WG, England
[2] Kyoto Univ, Sch Publ Hlth, Dept Biostat, Tsukuba, Ibaraki, Japan
关键词
D O I
10.1093/mutage/gen015
中图分类号
Q3 [遗传学];
学科分类号
071007 ; 090102 ;
摘要
The comet or single-cell gel electrophoresis assay is now widely used in regulatory, mechanistic and biomonitoring studies using a range of in vitro and in vivo systems. Each of these has issues associated with the experimental design which determine to a large extent the statistical analyses than can be used. A key concept is that the experimental unit is the smallest 'amount' of experimental material that can be randomly assigned to a treatment: the animal for in vivo studies and the culture for in vitro studies. Biomonitoring studies, being observational rather than experimental, are vulnerable to confounding and biases. Critical factors in any statistical analysis include the identification of suitable end points, the choice of measure to represent the distribution of the comet end point in a sample of cells, estimates of variability between experimental units and the identification of the size of effects that could be considered biologically important. Power and sample size calculations can be used in conjunction with this information to identify optimum experimental sizes and provide help in combining the results of statistical analyses with other information to aid interpretation. Interpretation based upon the size of effects and their confidence intervals is preferred to that based solely upon statistical significance tests. Statistical issues associated with the design and subsequent analyses of current validation studies for the comet assay include the identification of acceptable levels of intra- and inter-laboratory repeatability and reproducibility and criteria for dichotomizing results into positive or negative.
引用
收藏
页码:171 / 182
页数:12
相关论文
共 54 条
[1]   Statistics notes - The cost of dichotomising continuous variables [J].
Altman, DG ;
Royston, P .
BRITISH MEDICAL JOURNAL, 2006, 332 (7549) :1080-1080
[2]  
*ASTM, 1999, E69199 ASTM
[3]  
Bland JM, 1997, BRIT MED J, V315, P600
[4]   Tail profile: a more accurate system for analyzing DNA damage using the Comet assay [J].
Bowden, RD ;
Buckwalter, MR ;
McBride, JF ;
Johnson, DA ;
Murray, BK ;
O'Neill, KL .
MUTATION RESEARCH-GENETIC TOXICOLOGY AND ENVIRONMENTAL MUTAGENESIS, 2003, 537 (01) :1-9
[5]  
Box G. E., 1978, Statistics for experimenters: An introduction to design, data analysis, and model building
[6]   AN ANALYSIS OF TRANSFORMATIONS [J].
BOX, GEP ;
COX, DR .
JOURNAL OF THE ROYAL STATISTICAL SOCIETY SERIES B-STATISTICAL METHODOLOGY, 1964, 26 (02) :211-252
[7]   The in vivo comet assay:: use and status in genotoxicity testing [J].
Brendler-Schwaab, S ;
Hartmann, A ;
Pfuhler, S ;
Speit, G .
MUTAGENESIS, 2005, 20 (04) :245-254
[8]   Fourth International Workgroup on Genotoxicity Testing: Results of the in vivo Comet assay workgroup [J].
Burlinson, Brian ;
Tice, Raymond R. ;
Speit, Gunter ;
Agurell, Eva ;
Brendler-Schwaab, Susanne Y. ;
Collins, Andrew R. ;
Escobar, Patricia ;
Honma, Masamitsu ;
Kumaravel, Tirukalikundram S. ;
Nakajima, Madoka ;
Sasaki, Yu F. ;
Thybaud, Veronique ;
Uno, Yoshifumi ;
Vasquez, Marie ;
Hartmann, Andreas .
MUTATION RESEARCH-GENETIC TOXICOLOGY AND ENVIRONMENTAL MUTAGENESIS, 2007, 627 (01) :31-35
[9]  
Campbell M.J., 2001, STAT SQUARE 2 UNDERS
[10]  
Cohen J., 1988, POWERSTATISTICALSCIE, DOI 10.4324/9780203771587