Rothman N, Stewart W F, Caporaso N E, Hayes R B
Environmental Epidemiology Branch, National Cancer Institute, NIH, Bethesda, Maryland 20892.
Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev. 1993 Jul-Aug;2(4):299-303.
Phenotype and genotype markers of genetic susceptibility are of increasing interest in case-control studies of cancer. It is well established that bias to the odds ratio is caused by less-than-perfect assay sensitivity and specificity and varies with risk factor prevalence. As such, the observed variation in odds ratio between studies of genetic markers and cancer risk may be real, or may be attributed, in part, to variation in assay accuracy or in risk factor prevalence (e.g., prevalence differences between racial groups). The latter can be a particular concern when the prevalence of the "at risk" polymorphism in one or more populations is either very high (e.g., > 85%) or very low (e.g., < 15%). For example, even very high sensitivity (e.g., 98%) can produce substantial bias to the odds ratio when the risk factor prevalence is high. Under some prevalence conditions, however, assays with only moderate accuracy are sufficient and result in minimal bias to the odds ratio. Understanding misclassification in the context of marker prevalence may help to explain disparate findings in the literature and should assist investigators in selecting markers that are appropriate for future studies.
在癌症病例对照研究中,遗传易感性的表型和基因型标记越来越受到关注。众所周知,检测灵敏度和特异性不够完美会导致比值比出现偏差,且这种偏差会随危险因素患病率而变化。因此,遗传标记与癌症风险研究之间观察到的比值比差异可能是真实的,也可能部分归因于检测准确性或危险因素患病率的差异(例如,不同种族群体之间的患病率差异)。当一个或多个群体中“有风险”多态性的患病率非常高(例如,>85%)或非常低(例如,<15%)时,后者可能会成为一个特别需要关注的问题。例如,当危险因素患病率较高时,即使检测灵敏度非常高(例如,98%),也会对比值比产生相当大的偏差。然而,在某些患病率条件下,准确性仅为中等的检测就足够了,并且对比值比的偏差最小。在标记物患病率的背景下理解错误分类,可能有助于解释文献中不同的研究结果,并应帮助研究人员选择适合未来研究的标记物。