IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/wly/envmet/v35y2024i5ne2854.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Bayesian benchmark dose risk assessment with mixed‐factor quantal data

Author

Listed:
  • Mirjana Glisovic‐Bensa
  • Walter W. Piegorsch
  • Edward J. Bedrick

Abstract

Benchmark analysis is a general risk estimation strategy for identifying the benchmark dose (BMD) past which the risk of exhibiting an adverse environmental response exceeds a fixed, target value of benchmark response. Estimation of BMD and of its lower confidence limit (BMDL) is well understood for the case of an adverse response to a single stimulus. In many environmental settings, however, one or more additional, secondary, qualitative factor(s) may collude to affect the adverse outcome, such that the risk changes with differential levels of the secondary factor. Bayesian methods for estimation of the BMD and BMDL have grown in popularity, and a large variety of candidate dose–response models is available for applying these methods. This article applies Bayesian strategies to a mixed‐factor setting with a secondary qualitative factor possessing two levels to derive two‐factor Bayesian BMDs and BMDLs. We present reparameterized dose–response models that allow for explicit use of prior information on the target parameter of interest, the BMD. We also enhance our Bayesian estimation technique for BMD analysis by applying Bayesian model averaging to produce the BMDs and BMDLs, overcoming associated questions of model adequacy when multimodel uncertainty is present. An example from environmental carcinogenicity testing illustrates the calculations.

Suggested Citation

  • Mirjana Glisovic‐Bensa & Walter W. Piegorsch & Edward J. Bedrick, 2024. "Bayesian benchmark dose risk assessment with mixed‐factor quantal data," Environmetrics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 35(5), August.
  • Handle: RePEc:wly:envmet:v:35:y:2024:i:5:n:e2854
    DOI: 10.1002/env.2854
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1002/env.2854
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1002/env.2854?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Sturtz, Sibylle & Ligges, Uwe & Gelman, Andrew, 2005. "R2WinBUGS: A Package for Running WinBUGS from R," Journal of Statistical Software, Foundation for Open Access Statistics, vol. 12(i03).
    2. Kenny S. Crump, 1995. "Calculation of Benchmark Doses from Continuous Data," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 15(1), pages 79-89, February.
    3. Wheeler, Matthew W. & Bailer, A. John, 2008. "Model Averaging Software for Dichotomous Dose Response Risk Estimation," Journal of Statistical Software, Foundation for Open Access Statistics, vol. 26(i05).
    4. Harriet Namata & Marc Aerts & Christel Faes & Peter Teunis, 2008. "Model Averaging in Microbial Risk Assessment Using Fractional Polynomials," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 28(4), pages 891-905, August.
    5. Matthew W. Wheeler & A. John Bailer & Tarah Cole & Robert M. Park & Kan Shao, 2017. "Bayesian Quantile Impairment Threshold Benchmark Dose Estimation for Continuous Endpoints," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 37(11), pages 2107-2118, November.
    6. A. John Bailer & Robert B. Noble & Matthew W. Wheeler, 2005. "Model Uncertainty and Risk Estimation for Experimental Studies of Quantal Responses," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 25(2), pages 291-299, April.
    7. Q. Fang & W. W. Piegorsch & K. Y. Barnes, 2015. "Bayesian benchmark dose analysis," Environmetrics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 26(5), pages 373-382, August.
    8. Roland C. Deutsch & Walter W. Piegorsch, 2012. "Benchmark Dose Profiles for Joint-Action Quantal Data in Quantitative Risk Assessment," Biometrics, The International Biometric Society, vol. 68(4), pages 1313-1322, December.
    9. Naha J. Farhat & Edward L. Boone & David J. Edwards, 2020. "A new method for determining the benchmark dose tolerable region and endpoint probabilities for toxicology experiments," Journal of Applied Statistics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 47(5), pages 775-803, April.
    10. David J. Spiegelhalter & Nicola G. Best & Bradley P. Carlin & Angelika Linde, 2014. "The deviance information criterion: 12 years on," Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series B, Royal Statistical Society, vol. 76(3), pages 485-493, June.
    11. Matthew W. Wheeler & A. John Bailer, 2007. "Properties of Model‐Averaged BMDLs: A Study of Model Averaging in Dichotomous Response Risk Estimation," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 27(3), pages 659-670, June.
    12. repec:bla:biomet:v:71:y:2015:i:4:p:1168-1175 is not listed on IDEAS
    13. Lelys Bravo Guenni & Susan J. Simmons & R. Webster West & Walter W. Piegorsch & Edsel A. Peña & Lingling An & Wensong Wu & Alissa A. Wickens & Hui Xiong & Wenhai Chen, 2012. "The impact of model uncertainty on benchmark dose estimation," Environmetrics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 23(8), pages 706-716, December.
    14. Signe M. Jensen & Christian Ritz, 2015. "Simultaneous Inference for Model Averaging of Derived Parameters," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 35(1), pages 68-76, January.
    15. Hojin Moon & Hyun‐Joo Kim & James J. Chen & Ralph L. Kodell, 2005. "Model Averaging Using the Kullback Information Criterion in Estimating Effective Doses for Microbial Infection and Illness," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 25(5), pages 1147-1159, October.
    16. Christel Faes & Marc Aerts & Helena Geys & Geert Molenberghs, 2007. "Model Averaging Using Fractional Polynomials to Estimate a Safe Level of Exposure," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 27(1), pages 111-123, February.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Signe M. Jensen & Felix M. Kluxen & Christian Ritz, 2019. "A Review of Recent Advances in Benchmark Dose Methodology," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 39(10), pages 2295-2315, October.
    2. Walter W. Piegorsch & Hui Xiong & Rabi N. Bhattacharya & Lizhen Lin, 2014. "Benchmark Dose Analysis via Nonparametric Regression Modeling," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 34(1), pages 135-151, January.
    3. Maria A. Sans‐Fuentes & Walter W. Piegorsch, 2021. "Benchmark dose risk analysis with mixed‐factor quantal data in environmental risk assessment," Environmetrics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 32(5), August.
    4. Steven B. Kim & Ralph L. Kodell & Hojin Moon, 2014. "A Diversity Index for Model Space Selection in the Estimation of Benchmark and Infectious Doses via Model Averaging," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 34(3), pages 453-464, March.
    5. Hojin Moon & Steven B. Kim & James J. Chen & Nysia I. George & Ralph L. Kodell, 2013. "Model Uncertainty and Model Averaging in the Estimation of Infectious Doses for Microbial Pathogens," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 33(2), pages 220-231, February.
    6. Marc Aerts & Matthew W. Wheeler & José Cortiñas Abrahantes, 2020. "An extended and unified modeling framework for benchmark dose estimation for both continuous and binary data," Environmetrics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 31(7), November.
    7. Edsel A. Peña & Wensong Wu & Walter Piegorsch & Ronald W. West & LingLing An, 2017. "Model Selection and Estimation with Quantal‐Response Data in Benchmark Risk Assessment," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 37(4), pages 716-732, April.
    8. Matthew W. Wheeler & Todd Blessinger & Kan Shao & Bruce C. Allen & Louis Olszyk & J. Allen Davis & Jeffrey S Gift, 2020. "Quantitative Risk Assessment: Developing a Bayesian Approach to Dichotomous Dose–Response Uncertainty," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 40(9), pages 1706-1722, September.
    9. Signe M. Jensen & Christian Ritz, 2015. "Simultaneous Inference for Model Averaging of Derived Parameters," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 35(1), pages 68-76, January.
    10. Harriet Namata & Marc Aerts & Christel Faes & Peter Teunis, 2008. "Model Averaging in Microbial Risk Assessment Using Fractional Polynomials," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 28(4), pages 891-905, August.
    11. Nilabja Guha & Anindya Roy & Leonid Kopylev & John Fox & Maria Spassova & Paul White, 2013. "Nonparametric Bayesian Methods for Benchmark Dose Estimation," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 33(9), pages 1608-1619, September.
    12. Robert B. Noble & A. John Bailer & Robert Park, 2009. "Model‐Averaged Benchmark Concentration Estimates for Continuous Response Data Arising from Epidemiological Studies," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 29(4), pages 558-564, April.
    13. Walter W. Piegorsch, 2010. "Translational benchmark risk analysis," Journal of Risk Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 13(5), pages 653-667, July.
    14. Lizhen Lin & Walter W. Piegorsch & Rabi Bhattacharya, 2015. "Nonparametric Benchmark Dose Estimation with Continuous Dose-Response Data," Scandinavian Journal of Statistics, Danish Society for Theoretical Statistics;Finnish Statistical Society;Norwegian Statistical Association;Swedish Statistical Association, vol. 42(3), pages 713-731, September.
    15. Kan Shao & Jeffrey S. Gift, 2014. "Model Uncertainty and Bayesian Model Averaged Benchmark Dose Estimation for Continuous Data," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 34(1), pages 101-120, January.
    16. Jin‐Hua Chen & Chun‐Shu Chen & Meng‐Fan Huang & Hung‐Chih Lin, 2016. "Estimating the Probability of Rare Events Occurring Using a Local Model Averaging," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 36(10), pages 1855-1870, October.
    17. Matthew W. Wheeler & Jose Cortiñas Abrahantes & Marc Aerts & Jeffery S. Gift & Jerry Allen Davis, 2022. "Continuous model averaging for benchmark dose analysis: Averaging over distributional forms," Environmetrics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 33(5), August.
    18. Walter W. Piegorsch & Susan L. Cutter & Frank Hardisty, 2007. "Benchmark Analysis for Quantifying Urban Vulnerability to Terrorist Incidents," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 27(6), pages 1411-1425, December.
    19. Fereshteh Kalantari & Joakim Ringblom & Salomon Sand & Mattias Öberg, 2017. "Influence of Distribution of Animals between Dose Groups on Estimated Benchmark Dose and Animal Distress for Quantal Responses," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 37(9), pages 1716-1728, September.
    20. Enrique López Droguett & Ali Mosleh, 2008. "Bayesian Methodology for Model Uncertainty Using Model Performance Data," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 28(5), pages 1457-1476, October.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:wly:envmet:v:35:y:2024:i:5:n:e2854. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.interscience.wiley.com/jpages/1180-4009/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.