The potential value of sibling controls compared with population controls for association studies of lifestyle-related risk factors: An example from the breast cancer family registry

International Journal of Epidemiology

Volumn 40, Issue 5, 2011, Pages 1342-1354

  Milne, Roger L ^a,b   John, Esther M ^c,d   Knight, Julia A ^e,f   Dite, Gillian S ^b   Southey, Melissa C ^b   Giles, Graham G ^g   Apicella, Carmel ^b   West, Dee W ^c,d   Andrulis, Irene L ^e,h,i   Whittemore, Alice S ^d   Hopper, John L ^b  

^a Structural Biology and Biocomputing Programme   (Spain)

^b UNIVERSITY OF MELBOURNE   (Australia)

^c CANCER PREVENTION INSTITUTE OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

^d STANFORD UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF MEDICINE   (United States)

^e MOUNT SINAI HOSPITAL   (Canada)

^f UNIVERSITY OF TORONTO   (Canada)

^g CANCER EPIDEMIOLOGY CENTRE   (Australia)

^h UNIVERSITY OF TORONTO   (Canada)

ⁱ CANCER CARE ONTARIO   (Canada)

Author keywords

Breast cancer; Case control; Lifestyle; Risk factors; Sister

Indexed keywords

AGE; CANCER; HEALTH RISK; POPULATION REGULATION; REGRESSION ANALYSIS; RISK FACTOR; WOMENS HEALTH;

ACADEMIC ACHIEVEMENT; ADULT; AGED; ARTICLE; AUSTRALIA; BIRTH RATE; BREAST CANCER; CANADA; CANCER EPIDEMIOLOGY; CASE CONTROL STUDY; COMPARATIVE STUDY; CONTROLLED STUDY; DISEASE ASSOCIATION; FAMILY; FEMALE; HUMAN; LIFESTYLE; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MATERNAL AGE; MENARCHE; POPULATION RESEARCH; PRIORITY JOURNAL; REGISTER; RISK ASSESSMENT; RISK FACTOR; SIBLING; UNITED STATES;

ADOLESCENT; ADULT; AGED; AUSTRALIA; BREAST NEOPLASMS; CASE-CONTROL STUDIES; FAMILY; FEMALE; HUMANS; LIFE STYLE; MIDDLE AGED; MULTIVARIATE ANALYSIS; ONTARIO; QUESTIONNAIRES; REGISTRIES; RESEARCH SUBJECTS; RISK FACTORS; SAN FRANCISCO; SIBLINGS; YOUNG ADULT;

AUSTRALIA; CALIFORNIA; CANADA; ONTARIO [CANADA]; UNITED STATES;

EID: 80755169470     PISSN: 03005771     EISSN: 14643685     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1093/ije/dyr110     Document Type: Article

References (19)

1. McCredie MR, Dite GS, Giles GG, Hopper JL. Breast cancer in Australian women under the age of 40. Cancer Causes Control 1998;9:189-98.
2. Kelsey JL, Horn-Ross PL. Breast cancer: magnitude of the problem and descriptive epidemiology. Epidemiol Rev 1993; 15:7-16.
3. Kelsey JL. A review of the epidemiology of human breast cancer. Epidemiol Rev 1979;1:74-109.
4. van den Brandt PA, Spiegelman D, Yaun SS et al. Pooled analysis of prospective cohort studies on height, weight, and breast cancer risk. Am J Epidemiol 2000;152:514-27.
5. Pharoah PD, Day NE, Duffy S, Easton DF, Ponder BA. Family history and the risk of breast cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Int J Cancer 1997;71:800-9.
6. Collaborative Group on Hormonal Factors in Breast Cancer. Familial breast cancer: collaborative reanalysis of individual data from 52 epidemiological studies including 58,209 women with breast cancer and 101,986 women without the disease. Lancet 2001;358: 1389-99.
7. John EM, Hopper JL, Beck JC et al. The Breast Cancer Family Registry: an infrastructure for cooperative multinational, interdisciplinary and translational studies of the genetic epidemiology of breast cancer. Breast Cancer Res 2004;6:R375-89.
8. John EM, Phipps AI, Knight JA et al. Medical radiation exposure and breast cancer risk: findings from the Breast Cancer Family Registry. Int J Cancer 2007;121:386-94.
9. Knight JA, John EM, Milne RL et al. An inverse association between ovarian cysts and breast cancer in the breast cancer family registry. Int J Cancer 2006;118: 197-202.
10. Dite GS, Jenkins MA, Southey MC et al. Familial risks, early-onset breast cancer, and BRCA1 and BRCA2 germline mutations. J Natl Cancer Inst 2003;95:448-57.
11. Knight JA, Sutherland HJ, Glendon G, Boyd NF, Andrulis IL. Characteristics associated with participation at various stages at the Ontario site of the cooperative family registry for breast cancer studies. Ann Epidemiol 2002;12:27-33.
12. Whittemore AS, Halpern J. Logistic regression of family data from retrospective study designs. Genet Epidemiol 2003;25:177-89.
13. Weinberg CR, Wacholder S. The design and analysis of case-control studies with biased sampling. Biometrics 1990;46:963-75.
14. StataCorp. Stata Statistical Software: Release 10.0. College Station, TX, USA: Stata Corporation LP, 2007.
15. Strandhagen E, Berg C, Lissner L et al. Selection bias in a population survey with registry linkage: potential effect on socioeconomic gradient in cardiovascular risk. Eur J Epidemiol 2010;25:163-72.
16. Wigertz A, Lonn S, Hall P, Feychting M. Non-participant characteristics and the association between socioeconomic factors and brain tumour risk. J Epidemiol Community Health 2010;64:736-43.
17. Sogaard AJ, Selmer R, Bjertness E, Thelle D. The Oslo Health Study: The impact of self-selection in a large, population-based survey. Int J Equity Health 2004;3:3.
18. Euling SY, Selevan SG, Pescovitz OH, Skakkebaek NE. Role of environmental factors in the timing of puberty. Pediatrics 2008;121(Suppl 3):S167-71.
19. Rothman KJ, Greenland S (eds). Modern Epidemiology. 2nd edn. Philadelphia, PA: Lippincott-Raven, Publishers, 1998.