To pool or not to pool, from whether to when: applications of pooling to biospecimens subject to a limit of detection.

Pooling of biological specimens has been utilised as a cost-efficient sampling strategy, but cost is not the unique limiting factor in biomarker development and evaluation. We examine the effect of different sampling strategies of biospecimens for exposure assessment that cannot be detected below a detection threshold (DT). The paper compares use of pooled samples to a randomly selected sample from a cohort in order to evaluate the efficiency of parameter estimates. The proposed approach shows that a pooling design is more efficient than a random sample strategy under certain circumstances. Moreover, because pooling minimises the amount of information lost below the DT, the use of pooled data is preferable (in a context of a parametric estimation) to using all available individual measurements, for certain values of the DT. We propose a combined design, which applies pooled and unpooled biospecimens, in order to capture the strengths of the different sampling strategies and overcome instrument limitations (i.e. DT). Several Monte Carlo simulations and an example based on actual biomarker data illustrate the results of the article.

[1]  Paul Gustafson Measurement Error and Misclassification in Statistics and Epidemiology , 2003 .

[2]  Enrique F. Schisterman,et al.  Comparison of Diagnostic Accuracy of Biomarkers With Pooled Assessments , 2003 .

[3]  D. G. Chapman,et al.  Estimating the Parameters of a Truncated Gamma Distribution , 1956 .

[4]  R. Hornung,et al.  Estimation of Average Concentration in the Presence of Nondetectable Values , 1990 .

[5]  A. Ciampi,et al.  Effects of exposure measurement error when an exposure variable is constrained by a lower limit. , 2003, American journal of epidemiology.

[6]  Enrique F Schisterman,et al.  The limitations due to exposure detection limits for regression models. , 2006, American journal of epidemiology.

[7]  J. Cerhan,et al.  Epidemiologic Evaluation of Measurement Data in the Presence of Detection Limits , 2004, Environmental Health Perspectives.

[8]  N. Perkins,et al.  Optimal Cut-point and Its Corresponding Youden Index to Discriminate Individuals Using Pooled Blood Samples , 2005, Epidemiology.

[9]  C R Weinberg,et al.  Using Pooled Exposure Assessment to Improve Efficiency in Case‐Control Studies , 1999, Biometrics.

[10]  D. Ruppert,et al.  Measurement Error in Nonlinear Models , 1995 .

[11]  Predictors of plasma concentrations of DDE and PCBs in a group of U.S. women. , 1999 .

[12]  Enrique F. Schisterman,et al.  Sample Size and Power Calculation in Comparing Diagnostic Accuracy of Biomarkers with Pooled Assessments , 2004 .

[13]  D. Verma,et al.  Exposure estimation in the presence of nondetectable values: another look. , 2001, AIHAJ : a journal for the science of occupational and environmental health and safety.

[14]  B. Whitcomb,et al.  Environmental PCB exposure and risk of endometriosis. , 2005, Human reproduction.

[15]  Enrique F Schisterman,et al.  Roc Curve Analysis for Biomarkers Based on Pooled Assessments , 2022 .

[16]  A. Gupta,et al.  ESTIMATION OF THE MEAN AND STANDARD DEVIATION OF A NORMAL POPULATION FROM A CENSORED SAMPLE , 1952 .

[17]  B Reiser,et al.  Statistical inference for the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve in the presence of random measurement error. , 2001, American journal of epidemiology.