Presentation Transcript
Statistics and Ethics in ResearchDavid L. DeMets, Ph.D.Department of Biostatistics and Medical Informatics : Statistics and Ethics in Research David L. DeMets, Ph.D. Department of Biostatistics and Medical Informatics
Data Analysis and Ethics : Data Analysis and Ethics “Fishing, Trimming, and Cooking”
Statistician Vulnerable to Pressures
Fishing : Fishing Find the Right Definition
or Cutpoint
Dichotomizing Outcome : Dichotomizing Outcome Common practice to define a response (S,F) from a non-dichotomous variable
By changing our definition, we can alter results
Thus, definitions stated in advance
Example
Heart Rate
Trt A Trt B
Subject Pre Post D Pre Post D
1 72 72 0 72 70 2
2 74 73 1 71 68 3
--
25 73 73 0 79 79 0
Mean 74.0 73.2 .8 74.4 74.0 .4
Proper Analysis vs Fishing : Proper Analysis vs Fishing Data set constructed such that there is not difference between to treatment arms
Comparison of means or medians produce no significant results, so no abstract or publication
Investigator begins to explore other analyses (with your help)
“Cutpoint” Analysis : “Cutpoint” Analysis Break continuous data into categories of success or failure
Define various cut points for the categorization
Examine results for various cut points
3 Possible Analyses (1) : 3 Possible Analyses (1)
Change D Trt A Trt B P-Value
F = < 7 23 25
.49
S = > 7 2 0 Analysis 1
3 Possible Analyses (2) : 3 Possible Analyses (2)
Change D Trt A Trt B P-Value
F = < 5 19 25
.02
S = > 5 6 0 Analysis 2
3 Possible Analyses (3) : 3 Possible Analyses (3)
Change D Trt A Trt B P-Value
F = < 3 17 18
.99
S = > 3 8 7 Analysis 3
Choosing the Right Analysis : Choosing the Right Analysis Which of the three analyses is the correct one?
Which should be reported?
Analysis Principles to Consider : Analysis Principles to Consider Intention-to-treat Analysis
Subgroup Cautions
Multiple Outcomes Cautions
Surrogate Outcomes Cautions
Cooked or Fabricated Data : Cooked or Fabricated Data Tough to detect
Even tougher if detected
Investigating A Fraud CaseA Personal Experience : Investigating A Fraud Case A Personal Experience Hopefully, no one will experience a similar case
May, however, have experiences that involve some level of inappropriate scientific conduct
Such circumstances challenge statistician’s professional standards
Research in Minimizing Impact of Heart Attacks : Research in Minimizing Impact of Heart Attacks Heart attacks cause serious morbidity and mortality
Need to seeks ways to reduce the burden
Prevention
Treatment
Treatments considered to reduce impact by reducing damage to heart muscle
Variation in Animal Models : Variation in Animal Models Typically, drugs are tested in an appropriate animal model before testing in humans
Several laboratories tested drugs (eg verapamil, ibuprofen) believed to limit the size of the infarct
Results varied from laboratory to laboratory, even with the same drug
AMPIM Study : AMPIM Study Dog trial evaluating drugs to protect heart muscle during ischemia
Four laboratory centers
One statistical center
Data analysis compared centers
Discovered treatment by center interaction
AMPIM StudyBethesda Four : AMPIM Study Bethesda Four Richard Schwartz, PhD
Project Officer
Patrick Sullivan
Contract Officer Kent Bailey, PhD
Biostatistician
David DeMets PhD
Biostatistician
AMPIM Investigator MeetingSeptember 1981 : AMPIM Investigator Meeting September 1981 Discussed center differences
No rational explanation forthcoming
Learned about May fabrication of EKG strip on AMPIM dog
Slide20 : Figure 1B. Ventricle weight versus dog weight, sites C and D.
AMPIM Analysis Challenged : AMPIM Analysis Challenged Division director challenged statistician analyses and probing
Senior leadership at NIH became uncomfortable; director vacancy
Analysis team “threatened”
NIH Division of Research grants formed external review committee
Analysis team became support staff
AMPIM Study : AMPIM Study Ross Committee Report - February 1982 (Science)
Formed by host institution to investigate allegations
Concluded that problem limited to single fabricated EKG
Morgan Committee - January 1982
Begins a 6-month investigation
AMPIM Review : AMPIM Review AMPIM hallmark was lack of variability
Seven previously published papers conducted experiments with similar components
Morgan committee member noticed remarkable reproducibility across studies (papers)
Panel/Center Review Meeting : Panel/Center Review Meeting Analyses presented to University senior leadership
Lab director challenged statistical analyses of additional papers as being possibly fraudulent
Analyses Implicated years of research & lab prestige
Quick Response needed
AMPIM Review : AMPIM Review Violation of Central Limit Theorem
95% Confidence Intervals
Mean Difference
AMPIM Analyses : AMPIM Analyses Evidence of fraudulent data largely based on statistical arguments
Up till then, no hard evidence
Criminal case being considered by US Dept of Justice
Thoughts of testifying ……..
Then 3 smoking pistols emerge
AMPIM Study3 Smoking Pistols : AMPIM Study 3 Smoking Pistols The Bagged Dog
More Dogs Than Logs
No “Hot” Dogs
The Bagged Dog : The Bagged Dog To conduct experiment, dog had to be sacrificed with heart extracted
Research fellows noticed colleague working on AMPIM left lab early and put an experimental AMPIM dog into the freezer in a bag
Fellows went into freezer and removed heart from experimental dog
Challenged fellow at lab meeting about measurements obtained from this dog
More Dogs than Logs : More Dogs than Logs Many papers written from a series of experiments, each using dogs in either experimental or control arms
All of the experiments funded by NIH research grants/contracts
Contract officer noticed that the number of dogs in the papers exceeded the number of dogs paid for in the contract
Later, discovered more dogs in the papers than in the dog lab logs
No “Hot” Dogs : No “Hot” Dogs To conduct the measurements on the dog hearts, a radioactive substance is introduced
Radioactive substance allows identifying the amount of blood flow to various regions of the heart
Sacrificed dogs with radioactive substance must be disposed of using special procedures
Ashes of these dogs retrieved and no radioactivity could be found
Suggested experiments never done on several dogs included in the AMPIM paper
3 Smoking Pistols : 3 Smoking Pistols This evidence gave investigating team hard evidence for fraud
Removed the need to base arguments on probabilities of unusual results
Allowed investigative team to rapidly conclude their report
Impact of Darsee Case : Impact of Darsee Case Affected the careers of research fellows, junior faculty member, senior faculty member
Brought new standards for conduct of laboratory research
Led to investigation of Darsee’s research at previous training institutions
Darsee barred from NIH funding
Bethesda Four survived
Summary: AMPIM Study : Summary: AMPIM Study One center quite different
Plots of data revealed implausible relationships
Further investigation leads to discovery of possible fraud
Data lacked appropriate variability
Montreal Breast Cancer Fraud Case : Montreal Breast Cancer Fraud Case References
Fisher (Nov, 1995) Breast Cancer, NEJM
Christian (Nov, 1995) Breast Cancer, NEJM
Multicenter Breast cancer trial evaluating radical vs modified mastectomy plus adjuvant chemo therapy
Statistical Center and Study Chair at the University of Pittsburg
Montreal Investigator modified dates of xrays to meet eligibility criteria
Montreal Fraud Case : Montreal Fraud Case Records of 6 patients affected
Real patients, real disease, real treatment & real outcomes
Statistician at Coordinating Center discovered discrepancies in dates on the data forms in 1991
Reported the problem to Study Chair and the funding agency, the National Cancer Institute
Montreal Fraud Case : Montreal Fraud Case The analysis indicated that the results of the published paper did not change as a result of including or excluding affected patients
Modified mastectomy as effective as radical mastectomy
No updated analysis presented until 1996
No communication of the fraud case was presented to public in 1991
A couple of years later, story broke in Chicago newspaper about the previous discovery of fraud in a key breast cancer study
Montreal Fraud Case : Montreal Fraud Case Following the news story
The biostatistician was fired
The Study chair was fired
Public advocacy groups challenged all the results from this breast cancer research team
Congress got involved in hearings
Congress & Public expected research such as this trial to have no errors (same as their bank)
Montreal Fraud Case : Montreal Fraud Case Congressional pressure eventually forced NCI Director to resign
In 1995, NCI conducted a thorough investigation, reported by Christian et al
No real changes in the statistical analysis, or the conclusions about the role of modified mastectomy
Analysis excluded 6 patients with modified records & exclude all patients from Montreal site
Montreal Fraud Case : Montreal Fraud Case Law suits ensued by Study Chair against the University of Pittsburg
Eventually
Study chair re-instated
Statistician (whistle-blower) re-instated
Neither’s career was the same
Montreal investigator disbarred from the cancer research group
Slide45 :
With whom should he/she seek advice?
How sure is “sure enough”
Are the “whistleblower” risks worth the chance? If Statistician Discovers Possible Cooking or Fraud
Catch the
buzz on authorSTREAM
Copyright © 2002-2008 authorSTREAM. All rights reserved.