Comparing and combining data across multiple sources via integration of paired‐sample data to correct for measurement error

In biomedical research such as the development of vaccines for infectious diseases or cancer, study outcomes measured by an assay or device are often collected from multiple sources or laboratories. Measurement error that may vary between laboratories needs to be adjusted for when combining samples across data sources. We incorporate such adjustment in the main study by comparing and combining independent samples from different laboratories via integration of external data, collected on paired samples from the same two laboratories. We propose the following: (i) normalization of individual-level data from two laboratories to the same scale via the expectation of true measurements conditioning on the observed; (ii) comparison of mean assay values between two independent samples in the main study accounting for inter-source measurement error; and (iii) sample size calculations of the paired-sample study so that hypothesis testing error rates are appropriately controlled in the main study comparison. Because the goal is not to estimate the true underlying measurements but to combine data on the same scale, our proposed methods do not require that the true values for the error-prone measurements are known in the external data. Simulation results under a variety of scenarios demonstrate satisfactory finite sample performance of our proposed methods when measurement errors vary. We illustrate our methods using real enzyme-linked immunosorbent spot assay data generated by two HIV vaccine laboratories.

[1]  J. Buonaccorsi Estimation in Two‐Stage Models with Heteroscedasticity , 2006 .

[2]  Xuesong Yu,et al.  Development and implementation of an international proficiency testing program for a neutralizing antibody assay for HIV-1 in TZM-bl cells. , 2012, Journal of immunological methods.

[3]  S. Self,et al.  Equivalence of ELISpot Assays Demonstrated between Major HIV Network Laboratories , 2010, PloS one.

[4]  Paige L. Williams,et al.  A comparison of regression calibration approaches for designs with internal validation data , 2005 .

[5]  Wayne A. Fuller,et al.  Measurement Error Models , 1988 .

[6]  R. Carroll,et al.  Efficient regression calibration for logistic regression in main study/internal validation study designs with an imperfect reference instrument. , 2001, Statistics in medicine.

[7]  John Staudenmayer,et al.  Measurement Error in Linear Autoregressive Models , 2005 .

[8]  Donald K Carter,et al.  HIV-1 vaccine-induced immunity in the test-of-concept Step Study: a case–cohort analysis , 2008, The Lancet.

[9]  Devan V Mehrotra,et al.  Efficacy assessment of a cell-mediated immunity HIV-1 vaccine (the Step Study): a double-blind, randomised, placebo-controlled, test-of-concept trial , 2008, The Lancet.

[10]  R. Prentice Covariate measurement errors in the analysis of cohort and case-control studies , 1982 .

[11]  C. Gouttefangeas,et al.  Serum is not required for ex vivo IFN-γ ELISPOT: a collaborative study of different protocols from the European CIMT Immunoguiding Program , 2010, Cancer Immunology, Immunotherapy.

[12]  A. Mackensen,et al.  The CIMT-monitoring panel: a two-step approach to harmonize the enumeration of antigen-specific CD8+ T lymphocytes by structural and functional assays , 2007, Cancer Immunology, Immunotherapy.

[13]  Raymond J. Carroll,et al.  Approximate Quasi-likelihood Estimation in Models with Surrogate Predictors , 1990 .

[14]  Shalabh Measurement Error: Models, Methods and Applications , 2011 .