Abstract Statistically significant findings are more likely to be published than non-significant or null findings, leaving scientists and healthcare personnel to make decisions based on distorted scientific evidence. Continuously expanding ´file drawers’ of unpublished data from well-designed experiments waste resources creates problems for researchers, the scientific community and the public. There is limited awareness of the negative impact that publication bias and selective reporting have on the scientific literature. Alternative publication formats have recently been introduced that make it easier to publish research that is difficult to publish in traditional peer reviewed journals. These include micropublications, data repositories, data journals, preprints, publishing platforms, and journals focusing on null or neutral results. While these alternative formats have the potential to reduce publication bias, many scientists are unaware that these formats exist and don’t know how to use them. Our open source file drawer data liberation effort (fiddle) tool (RRID:SCR_017327 available at: http://s-quest.bihealth.org/fiddle/) is a match-making Shiny app designed to help biomedical researchers to identify the most appropriate publication format for their data. Users can search for a publication format that meets their needs, compare and contrast different publication formats, and find links to publishing platforms. This tool will assist scientists in getting otherwise inaccessible, hidden data out of the file drawer into the scientific community and literature. We briefly highlight essential details that should be included to ensure reporting quality, which will allow others to use and benefit from research published in these new formats.
Breast Cancer Risk and Use of Nonsteroidal Anti-inflammatory Agents After a Benign Breast Biopsy
Abstract Over one million women in the United States receive biopsy diagnoses of benign breast disease (BBD) each year, which confer a 1.5–4.0-fold increase in breast cancer risk. Studies in the general population suggest that nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory agents (NSAID) lower breast cancer risk; however, associations among women with BBD are unknown. We assessed whether NSAID use among women diagnosed with BBD is associated with lower breast cancer risk. Participants included 3,080 women (mean age = 50.3 ± 13.5 years) in the Mayo BBD surgical biopsy cohort diagnosed between January 1, 1992 and December 31, 2001 who completed breast cancer risk factor questionnaires that assessed NSAID use, and whose biopsies underwent detailed pathology review, masked to outcome. Women were followed from date of BBD biopsy to breast cancer diagnosis (main outcome) or censoring (death, prophylactic mastectomy, reduction mammoplasty, lobular carcinoma in situ or last contact). Median follow-up time was 16.4 ± 6.0 years. Incident breast cancer was diagnosed among 312 women over a median follow-up of 9.9 years. Regular non-aspirin NSAID use was associated with lower breast cancer risk [HR = 0.63; 95% confidence interval (CI) = 0.46–0.85; P = 0.002] with trends of lower risk (highest tertiles of use vs. nonuse) for greater number of years used [HR = 0.55; 95% CI = 0.31–0.97; Ptrend = 0.003), days used per month (HR = 0.51; 95% CI = 0.33–0.80; Ptrend = 0.001) and lifetime number of doses taken (HR = 0.53; 95% CI = 0.31–0.89; Ptrend = 0.003). We conclude that nonaspirin NSAID use is associated with statistically significant lower breast cancer risk after a BBD biopsy, including a dose–response effect, suggesting a potential role for NSAIDs in breast cancer prevention among patients with BBD.
Development and Validation of the Gene Expression Predictor of High-grade Serous Ovarian Carcinoma Molecular SubTYPE (PrOTYPE)
Abstract Purpose: Gene expression–based molecular subtypes of high-grade serous tubo-ovarian cancer (HGSOC), demonstrated across multiple studies, may provide improved stratification for molecularly targeted trials. However, evaluation of clinical utility has been hindered by nonstandardized methods, which are not applicable in a clinical setting. We sought to generate a clinical grade minimal gene set assay for classification of individual tumor specimens into HGSOC subtypes and confirm previously reported subtype-associated features. Experimental Design: Adopting two independent approaches, we derived and internally validated algorithms for subtype prediction using published gene expression data from 1,650 tumors. We applied resulting models to NanoString data on 3,829 HGSOCs from the Ovarian Tumor Tissue Analysis consortium. We further developed, confirmed, and validated a reduced, minimal gene set predictor, with methods suitable for a single-patient setting. Results: Gene expression data were used to derive the predictor of high-grade serous ovarian carcinoma molecular subtype (PrOTYPE) assay. We established a de facto standard as a consensus of two parallel approaches. PrOTYPE subtypes are significantly associated with age, stage, residual disease, tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes, and outcome. The locked-down clinical grade PrOTYPE test includes a model with 55 genes that predicted gene expression subtype with >95% accuracy that was maintained in all analytic and biological validations. Conclusions: We validated the PrOTYPE assay following the Institute of Medicine guidelines for the development of omics-based tests. This fully defined and locked-down clinical grade assay will enable trial design with molecular subtype stratification and allow for objective assessment of the predictive value of HGSOC molecular subtypes in precision medicine applications. See related commentary by McMullen et al., p. 5271
Why we need to report more than 'Data were Analyzed by t-tests or ANOVA'
Transparent reporting is essential for the critical evaluation of studies. However, the reporting of statistical methods for studies in the biomedical sciences is often limited. This systematic review examines the quality of reporting for two statistical tests, t-tests and ANOVA, for papers published in a selection of physiology journals in June 2017. Of the 328 original research articles examined, 277 (84.5%) included an ANOVA or t-test or both. However, papers in our sample were routinely missing essential information about both types of tests: 213 papers (95% of the papers that used ANOVA) did not contain the information needed to determine what type of ANOVA was performed, and 26.7% of papers did not specify what post-hoc test was performed. Most papers also omitted the information needed to verify ANOVA results. Essential information about t-tests was also missing in many papers. We conclude by discussing measures that could be taken to improve the quality of reporting.
Sex hormones in alcohol consumption: a systematic review of evidence
AbstractSex hormones play an important role in establishing sex‐distinctive brain structural and functional variations that could contribute to the sex differences in alcohol consumption behavior. Here, we systematically reviewed articles that studied sex hormone impacts on alcohol consumption and alcohol use disorder (AUD). An extensive literature search conducted in MEDLINE, PubMed, Scopus and CINAHL databases identified 776 articles, which were then evaluated for pre‐specified criteria for relevance and quality assurance. A total of 50 articles, including 19 human studies and 31 animal studies, were selected for this review. Existing evidence supports the association of increased testosterone level and increased risk for alcohol use and AUD in males but results are inconclusive in females. In contrast, the evidence supports the association of increased estrogen level and increased alcohol use in females, with mixed findings reported in males. Much less is known about the impact of progestins on alcohol use and misuse in human subjects. Future observational and experimental studies conducted in both sexes with a comprehensive hormone panel are needed to elucidate the impact of the interplay between various sex hormone levels during various developmental stages on alcohol use‐related phenotypes and AUD.
An integrative approach to assess X‐chromosome inactivation using allele‐specific expression with applications to epithelial ovarian cancer
ABSTRACTX‐chromosome inactivation (XCI) epigenetically silences transcription of an X chromosome in females; patterns of XCI are thought to be aberrant in women's cancers, but are understudied due to statistical challenges. We develop a two‐stage statistical framework to assess skewed XCI and evaluate gene‐level patterns of XCI for an individual sample by integration of RNA sequence, copy number alteration, and genotype data. Our method relies on allele‐specific expression (ASE) to directly measure XCI and does not rely on male samples or paired normal tissue for comparison. We model ASE using a two‐component mixture of beta distributions, allowing estimation for a given sample of the degree of skewness (based on a composite likelihood ratio test) and the posterior probability that a given gene escapes XCI (using a Bayesian beta‐binomial mixture model). To illustrate the utility of our approach, we applied these methods to data from tumors of ovarian cancer patients. Among 99 patients, 45 tumors were informative for analysis and showed evidence of XCI skewed toward a particular parental chromosome. For 397 X‐linked genes, we observed tumor XCI patterns largely consistent with previously identified consensus states based on multiple normal tissue types. However, 37 genes differed in XCI state between ovarian tumors and the consensus state; 17 genes aberrantly escaped XCI in ovarian tumors (including many oncogenes), whereas 20 genes were unexpectedly inactivated in ovarian tumors (including many tumor suppressor genes). These results provide evidence of the importance of XCI in ovarian cancer and demonstrate the utility of our two‐stage analysis.
Longitudinal Changes in Volumetric Breast Density with Tamoxifen and Aromatase Inhibitors