ArticleElectronic journal of statistics2022
Improved inference for vaccine-induced immune responses via shape-constrained methods.
Article in Electronic journal of statistics, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
We study the performance of shape-constrained methods for evaluating immune response profiles from early-phase vaccine trials. The motivating problem for this work involves quantifying and comparing the IgG binding immune responses to the first and second variable loops (V1V2 region) arising in HVTN 097 and HVTN 100 HIV vaccine trials. We consider unimodal and log-concave shape-constrained methods to compare the immune profiles of the two vaccines, which is reasonable because the data support that the underlying densities of the immune responses could have these shapes. To this end, we develop novel shape-constrained tests of stochastic dominance and shape-constrained plug-in estimators of the squared Hellinger distance between two densities. Our techniques are either tuning parameter free, or rely on only one tuning parameter, but their performance is either better (the tests of stochastic dominance) or comparable with the nonparametric methods (the estimators of the squared Hellinger distance). The minimal dependence on tuning parameters is especially desirable in clinical contexts where analyses must be prespecified and reproducible. Our methods are supported by theoretical results and simulation studies.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.