Simulation-based assessment of model selection criteria during the application of benchmark dose method to quantal response data

Background To employ the benchmark dose (BMD) method in toxicological risk assessment, it is critical to understand how the BMD lower bound for reference dose calculation is selected following statistical fitting procedures of multiple mathematical models. The purpose of this study was to compare the performances of various combinations of model exclusion and selection criteria for quantal response data. Methods Simulation-based evaluation of model exclusion and selection processes was conducted by comparing validity, reliability, and other model performance parameters. Three different empirical datasets for different chemical substances were analyzed for the assessment, each having different characteristics of the dose-response pattern (i.e. datasets with rich information in high or low response rates, or approximately linear dose-response patterns). Results The best performing criteria of model exclusion and selection were different across the different datasets. Model averaging over the three models with the lowest three AIC (Akaike information criteria) values (MA-3) did not produce the worst performance, and MA-3 without model exclusion produced the best results among the model averaging. Model exclusion including the use of the Kolmogorov-Smirnov test in advance of model selection did not necessarily improve the validity and reliability of the models. Conclusions If a uniform methodological suggestion for the guideline is required to choose the best performing model for exclusion and selection, our results indicate that using MA-3 is the recommended option whenever applicable.

[1]  Joseph G. Ibrahim,et al.  Bayesian Model Averaging With Applications to Benchmark Dose Estimation for Arsenic in Drinking Water , 2006 .

[2]  Jiri Aubrecht,et al.  Comparison of toxicogenomics and traditional approaches to inform mode of action and points of departure in human health risk assessment of benzo[a]pyrene in drinking water , 2015, Critical reviews in toxicology.

[3]  Adrian E. Raftery,et al.  Bayesian model averaging: a tutorial (with comments by M. Clyde, David Draper and E. I. George, and a rejoinder by the authors , 1999 .

[4]  H. Akaike A Bayesian analysis of the minimum AIC procedure , 1978 .

[5]  Matthew W Wheeler,et al.  Properties of Model‐Averaged BMDLs: A Study of Model Averaging in Dichotomous Response Risk Estimation , 2007, Risk analysis : an official publication of the Society for Risk Analysis.

[6]  Salomon Sand,et al.  The current state of knowledge on the use of the benchmark dose concept in risk assessment , 2008, Journal of applied toxicology : JAT.

[7]  B C Allen,et al.  Dose-response assessment for developmental toxicity. III. Statistical models. , 1994, Fundamental and applied toxicology : official journal of the Society of Toxicology.

[8]  R. Hertzberg,et al.  A new method for determining allowable daily intakes. , 1986, Fundamental and applied toxicology : official journal of the Society of Toxicology.

[9]  N. Hjort,et al.  Frequentist Model Average Estimators , 2003 .

[10]  Matthew W Wheeler,et al.  An empirical comparison of low-dose extrapolation from points of departure (PoD) compared to extrapolations based upon methods that account for model uncertainty. , 2013, Regulatory toxicology and pharmacology : RTP.

[11]  A. Ono,et al.  Validation of the statistical parameters and model selection criteria of the benchmark dose methods for the evaluation of various endpoints in repeated-dose toxicity studies , 2019, Fundamental Toxicological Sciences.

[12]  T. Byford Principles for modelling dose-response for the risk assessment of chemicals , 2014 .

[13]  Adrian E. Raftery,et al.  Bayesian Model Averaging: A Tutorial , 2016 .

[14]  David R. Anderson,et al.  Understanding AIC and BIC in Model Selection , 2004 .

[15]  Stefan D Muri,et al.  The benchmark dose approach in food risk assessment: is it applicable and worthwhile? , 2009, Food and chemical toxicology : an international journal published for the British Industrial Biological Research Association.

[16]  Statistical uncertainty in the no-observed-adverse-effect level , 1989 .

[17]  D. Barnes,et al.  Reference dose (RfD): description and use in health risk assessments. , 1988, Regulatory toxicology and pharmacology : RTP.

[18]  Fred A. Wright,et al.  Standardizing Benchmark Dose Calculations to Improve Science-Based Decisions in Human Health Assessments , 2014, Environmental health perspectives.

[19]  Kan Shao,et al.  Potential Uncertainty Reduction in Model‐Averaged Benchmark Dose Estimates Informed by an Additional Dose Study , 2011, Risk analysis : an official publication of the Society for Risk Analysis.

[20]  W Leisenring,et al.  Statistical properties of the NOAEL. , 1992, Regulatory toxicology and pharmacology : RTP.

[21]  F. Massey The Kolmogorov-Smirnov Test for Goodness of Fit , 1951 .

[22]  Hilde van der Togt,et al.  Publisher's Note , 2003, J. Netw. Comput. Appl..

[23]  Salomon Sand,et al.  Evaluation of the benchmark dose method for dichotomous data: model dependence and model selection. , 2002, Regulatory toxicology and pharmacology : RTP.

[24]  Lingling An,et al.  Information‐theoretic model‐averaged benchmark dose analysis in environmental risk assessment , 2013, Environmetrics.

[25]  D W Gaylor,et al.  Issues in qualitative and quantitative risk analysis for developmental toxicology. , 1988, Risk analysis : an official publication of the Society for Risk Analysis.

[26]  C. Kimmel,et al.  Dose-response assessment for developmental toxicity. II. Comparison of generic benchmark dose estimates with no observed adverse effect levels. , 1994, Fundamental and applied toxicology : official journal of the Society of Toxicology.

[27]  R. Zamar,et al.  A multivariate Kolmogorov-Smirnov test of goodness of fit , 1997 .

[28]  T. Lewandowski,et al.  Derivation of the critical effect size/benchmark response for the dose-response analysis of the uptake of radioactive iodine in the human thyroid. , 2016, Toxicology letters.

[29]  K. G. Brown,et al.  Statistical uncertainty in the no-observed-adverse-effect level. , 1989, Fundamental and applied toxicology : official journal of the Society of Toxicology.

[30]  R L Kodell,et al.  Incorporating model uncertainties along with data uncertainties in microbial risk assessment. , 2000, Regulatory toxicology and pharmacology : RTP.

[31]  A. John Bailer,et al.  Comparing model averaging with other model selection strategies for benchmark dose estimation , 2009, Environmental and Ecological Statistics.

[32]  A. John Bailer,et al.  Model Averaging Software for Dichotomous Dose Response Risk Estimation , 2008 .

[33]  N. L. Johnson,et al.  The probability integral transformation when parameters are estimated from the sample. , 1948, Biometrika.

[34]  Matthew W Wheeler,et al.  Model Uncertainty and Risk Estimation for Experimental Studies of Quantal Responses , 2005, Risk analysis : an official publication of the Society for Risk Analysis.

[35]  Daniel Turek,et al.  Model-Averaged Profile Likelihood Intervals , 2012 .

[36]  José Cortiñas Abrahantes,et al.  Update: use of the benchmark dose approach in risk assessment , 2017, EFSA journal. European Food Safety Authority.

[37]  Kan Shao,et al.  Model Uncertainty and Bayesian Model Averaged Benchmark Dose Estimation for Continuous Data , 2014, Risk analysis : an official publication of the Society for Risk Analysis.

[38]  Jian Bi Using the benchmark dose (BMD) methodology to determine an appropriate reduction of certain ingredients in food products. , 2010, Journal of food science.