Flexible Matching in Case-Control Studies of Gene-Environment Interactions

American Journal of Epidemiology

Volumn 159, Issue 1, 2004, Pages 17-22

  Saunders, Catherine L ^a   Barrett, Jennifer H ^a  

^a IMPERIAL CANCER RESEARCH FUND   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Case control studies; Epidemiologic methods; Interaction; Research design; Statistics

Indexed keywords

EPIDEMIOLOGY;

ARTICLE; CASE CONTROL STUDY; ENVIRONMENTAL EXPOSURE; ENVIRONMENTAL FACTOR; EPIDEMIOLOGICAL DATA; GENETIC SUSCEPTIBILITY; GENOTYPE; INTERMETHOD COMPARISON; MEDICAL RESEARCH; METHODOLOGY; RISK FACTOR; STATISTICAL ANALYSIS; VARIANCE;

CASE-CONTROL STUDIES; COMPUTER SIMULATION; ENVIRONMENTAL EXPOSURE; EPIDEMIOLOGIC METHODS; GENETIC PREDISPOSITION TO DISEASE; HUMANS; NEOPLASMS; RESEARCH DESIGN; STATISTICS;

EID: 0345737128     PISSN: 00029262     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1093/aje/kwg250     Document Type: Article

References (19)

1. Smith PG, Day NE. The design of case-control studies: the influence of confounding and interaction effects. Int J Epidemiol 1984;13:356-65.
2. Thomas DC, Greenland S. The efficiency of matching in case-control studies of risk-factor interactions. J Chronic Dis 1985;38:569-74.
3. Sturmer T, Brenner H. Flexible matching strategies to increase power and efficiency to detect and estimate gene-environment interactions in case-control studies. Am J Epidemiol 2002;155:593-602.
4. Sturmer T, Brenner H. Potential gain in efficiency and power to detect gene-environment interactions by matching in case-control studies. Genet Epidemiol 2000;18:63-80.
5. Brennan P. Gene-environment interaction and aetiology of cancer: what does it mean and how can we measure it? Carcinogenesis 2002;23:381-7.
6. Gauderman WJ. Sample size requirements for association studies of gene-gene interaction. Am J Epidemiol 2002;155:478-84.
7. Gauderman WJ. Sample size requirements for matched case-control studies of gene-environment interaction. Stat Med 2002;21:35-50.
8. Witte JS, Gauderman WJ, Thomas DC. Asymptotic bias and efficiency in case-control studies of candidate genes and gene-environment interactions: basic family designs. Am J Epidemiol 1999;149:693-705.
9. Schaid DJ, Rowland C. Use of parents, sibs, and unrelated controls for detection of associations between genetic markers and disease. Am J Hum Genet 1998;63:1492-506.
10. Piegorsch WW, Weinberg CR, Taylor JA. Non-hierarchical logistic models and case-only designs for assessing susceptibility in population-based case-control studies. Stat Med 1994;13:153-62.
11. Albert PS, Ratnasinghe D, Tangrea J, et al. Limitations of the case-only design for identifying gene-environment interactions. Am J Epidemiol 2001;154:687-93.
12. Cuzick J. Interaction, subgroup analysis and sample size. In: Boffetta P, Caporaso N, Cuzick J, et al, eds. Metabolic polymorphisms and susceptibility to cancer. Lyon, France: International Agency for Research on Cancer, 1999:109-21. (IARC Scientific Publication no. 148).
13. Self SG, Mauritsen RH, Ohara J. Power calculations for likelihood ratio tests in generalized linear models. Biometrics 1992;48:31-9.
14. Brown BW, Lovato J, Russell K. Asymptotic power calculations: description, examples, computer code. Stat Med 1999;18:3137-51.
15. Longmate JA. Complexity and power in case-control association studies. Am J Hum Genet 2001;68:1229-37.
16. Cain KC, Breslow NE. Logistic regression analysis and efficient design for two-stage studies. Am J Epidemiol 1988;128:1198-206.
17. Breslow NE, Cain KC. Logistic regression for two-stage case-control data. Biometrika 1988;75:11-20.
18. Saunders CL, Gooptu C, Bishop DT, et al. The use of case only studies for the detection of interactions, and the non-independence of genetic and environmental risk factors for disease. (Abstract). Genet Epidemiol 2001;21:174.
19. Begg CB, Berwick M. A note on the estimation of relative risks of rare genetic susceptibility markers. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 1997;6:99-103.