Marcus Michael W, Raji Olaide Y, Chen Ying, Duffy Stephen W, Field John K
Roy Castle Lung Cancer Research Programme, The University of Liverpool Cancer Research Centre, Institute of Translational Medicine, The University of Liverpool, Liverpool L3 9TA, UK.
Wolfson Institute of Preventive Medicine, Barts and The London School of Medicine and Dentistry, Queen Mary University of London, London EC1M 6BQ, UK.
Int J Oncol. 2014 Jun;44(6):2146-52. doi: 10.3892/ijo.2014.2371. Epub 2014 Apr 7.
In long-term longitudinal cohort studies the dropout of participants occurring as a result of withdrawal or lost to follow-up may have greater impact on the effect estimates, if characteristics of participants who drop out and those still active in the study differ significantly. The study aimed to investigate factors associated with dropout in a 5-year follow-up of individuals at 'high‑risk' of lung cancer. We studied 'high‑risk' group of 1,486 individuals aged 45-79 selected from the Liverpool Lung Prospective (LLP) cohort study using a strategy reflecting only age, smoking duration and history of pulmonary disease. Study subjects were recalled annually from 2005-2009 for follow-up collection of specimens and questionnaire data. The dropout rate over the follow-up time was investigated using the Kaplan‑Meier survival curve and the Cox proportional hazard model. Dropout rate was 31% after an average of 3 annual visits. Female gender hazard ratio (HR) 1.35 (95% CI 1.09-1.66), current smoking 1.26 (1.02-1.57), prior diagnosis of malignant disease 0.54 (0.36-0.79), home visits 0.67 (0.48-0.94) and systolic blood pressure 1.46 (1.10-1.94) were significantly associated with the dropout rate. Nearly 40% of individuals selected into the 'high‑risk' group by the old criteria were low risk with predicted 5-year absolute risk of less than 2.5%. In conclusion, follow-up of individuals is feasible within the LLP, but may be prone to selective withdrawal attributable to patient's state of health and mobility. We recommend future design of 'high‑risk' follow‑up studies to consider home visit as a useful strategy to encourage continued participation.
在长期纵向队列研究中,如果退出研究或失访的参与者特征与仍在研究中的参与者特征存在显著差异,那么由此导致的参与者退出可能会对效应估计产生更大影响。本研究旨在调查肺癌“高危”个体5年随访中与退出相关的因素。我们从利物浦肺癌前瞻性(LLP)队列研究中选取了1486名年龄在45 - 79岁的“高危”个体,采用仅反映年龄、吸烟时长和肺部疾病史的策略进行研究。研究对象在2005年至2009年期间每年被召回,以便后续收集标本和问卷数据。使用Kaplan-Meier生存曲线和Cox比例风险模型对随访期间的退出率进行了调查。平均经过3次年度随访后,退出率为31%。女性性别风险比(HR)为1.35(95%CI 1.09 - 1.66),当前吸烟者为1.26(1.02 - 1.57),既往有恶性疾病诊断者为0.54(0.36 - 0.79),家访为0.67(0.48 - 0.94),收缩压为1.46(1.10 - 1.94),这些均与退出率显著相关。按照旧标准被选入“高危”组的个体中,近40%为低风险,预计5年绝对风险低于2.5%。总之,在LLP内对个体进行随访是可行的,但可能因患者的健康状况和行动能力而容易出现选择性退出。我们建议未来“高危”随访研究的设计将家访视为鼓励持续参与的有用策略。