Institute for Medical Informatics, Statistics, and Epidemiology, University of Leipzig, Leipzig, Germany.
University Clinic Leipzig, Leipzig, Germany.
PLoS One. 2022 Dec 1;17(12):e0278069. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0278069. eCollection 2022.
Information about the direct comparability of big data of epidemiological cohort studies and the general population still is lacking, especially regarding all-cause mortality rates. The aim of this study was to investigate the overall survival and the influence of several diagnoses in the medical history on survival time, adjusted to common risk factors in a populations-based cohort.
From 10,000 subjects of the population-based cohort LIFE-Adult-Study (Leipzig Research Centre for Civilization Diseases), the medical history and typical risk factors such as age, smoking status and body-mass-index (BMI) were assessed. The survival status was identified from the saxonian population register. Univariate and multivariate analyses were used to determine the influence of the medical history and risk factors on overall survival. To develope an optimal model, the method by Collet [1] was used.
The mortality rate of the participants is approximately half the mortality rate expected for the german population. The selection bias in epidemiological studies needs to be considered whenever interpreting results of epidemiological cohort studies. Nevertheless we have shown that several diagnoses proved to have a negative influence on overall survival time even in this relatively healthy cohort. This study showed the significantly increased mortality risk if the following diseases are reported in medical history of the participants in a large population-based cohort study including adults aged 18 and over: diabetes mellitus (HR 1.533, p = 0.002), hypertension (HR 1.447, p = 0.005), liver cirrhosis (HR 4.251, p < 0.001), osteoporosis (HR 2.165, p = 0.011), chronic bronchitis (HR 2.179, p < 0.001), peptic ulcer disease (HR 1.531, p = 0.024) and cancer (HR 1.797, p < 0.001). Surprisingly, asthma has the opposite effect on survival time (HR 0.574, p = 0.024), but we believe this may be due to an overrepresentation of mild to moderate asthma and its management, which includes educating patients about a healthy lifestyle.
In the LIFE-Adult-Study, common risk factors and several diseases had relevant effect on overall survival. However, selection bias in epidemiological studies needs to be considered whenever interpreting results of epidemiological cohort studies. Nevertheless it was shown that the general cause-and-effect principles also apply in this relatively healthy cohort.
关于流行病学队列研究的大数据与一般人群的直接可比性的信息仍然缺乏,尤其是全因死亡率方面。本研究旨在调查基于人群的队列中,整体生存率以及既往病史中的多种诊断对生存时间的影响,并调整常见的风险因素。
从基于人群的 LIFE-Adult-Study(莱比锡文明疾病研究中心)的 10000 名受试者中,评估了既往病史和典型风险因素,如年龄、吸烟状况和体重指数(BMI)。生存状态从萨克森人口登记处确定。使用单变量和多变量分析来确定既往病史和风险因素对整体生存的影响。为了开发最佳模型,使用了 Collet [1] 的方法。
参与者的死亡率约为德国人口预期死亡率的一半。在解释流行病学队列研究的结果时,需要考虑到流行病学研究中的选择偏倚。然而,我们已经表明,即使在这个相对健康的队列中,几种诊断也被证明对整体生存时间有负面影响。本研究表明,在大型基于人群的成年队列研究中,如果参与者的既往病史中报告了以下疾病,则死亡率显著增加:糖尿病(HR 1.533,p = 0.002)、高血压(HR 1.447,p = 0.005)、肝硬化(HR 4.251,p < 0.001)、骨质疏松症(HR 2.165,p = 0.011)、慢性支气管炎(HR 2.179,p < 0.001)、消化性溃疡病(HR 1.531,p = 0.024)和癌症(HR 1.797,p < 0.001)。令人惊讶的是,哮喘对生存时间有相反的影响(HR 0.574,p = 0.024),但我们认为这可能是由于轻度至中度哮喘及其管理的代表性过高,包括教育患者关于健康生活方式。
在 LIFE-Adult-Study 中,常见的风险因素和多种疾病对整体生存率有显著影响。然而,在解释流行病学队列研究的结果时,需要考虑到流行病学研究中的选择偏倚。尽管如此,本研究表明,一般的因果关系原则也适用于这个相对健康的队列。