Risk Prediction Measures for Case-cohort and Nested Case-control Designs: an Application to Cardiovascular Disease

Overview

Journal Am J Epidemiol

Publisher Oxford University Press

Specialty Public Health

Date 2012 Mar 8

PMID 22396388

Citations 42

Authors

Andrea Ganna

Marie Reilly

Ulf de Faire

Nancy Pedersen

Patrik Magnusson

Erik Ingelsson

Affiliations

Soon will be listed here.

Abstract

Case-cohort and nested case-control designs are often used to select an appropriate subsample of individuals from prospective cohort studies. Despite the great attention that has been given to the calculation of association estimators, no formal methods have been described for estimating risk prediction measures from these 2 sampling designs. Using real data from the Swedish Twin Registry (2004-2009), the authors sampled unstratified and stratified (matched) case-cohort and nested case-control subsamples and compared them with the full cohort (as "gold standard"). The real biomarker (high density lipoprotein cholesterol) and simulated biomarkers (BIO1 and BIO2) were studied in terms of association with cardiovascular disease, individual risk of cardiovascular disease at 3 years, and main prediction metrics. Overall, stratification improved efficiency, with stratified case-cohort designs being comparable to matched nested case-control designs. Individual risks and prediction measures calculated by using case-cohort and nested case-control designs after appropriate reweighting could be assessed with good efficiency, except for the finely matched nested case-control design, where matching variables could not be included in the individual risk estimation. In conclusion, the authors have shown that case-cohort and nested case-control designs can be used in settings where the research aim is to evaluate the prediction ability of new markers and that matching strategies for nested case-control designs may lead to biased prediction measures.

Citing Articles

Nested case-control sampling without replacement.

Shin Y, Saegusa T Lifetime Data Anal. 2024; 30(4):776-799.

PMID: 39235702 PMC: 11502564. DOI: 10.1007/s10985-024-09633-y.

Markers of imminent myocardial infarction.

Gustafsson S, Lampa E, Jensevik Eriksson K, Butterworth A, Elmstahl S, Engstrom G Nat Cardiovasc Res. 2024; 3(2):130-139.

PMID: 39196201 PMC: 11357982. DOI: 10.1038/s44161-024-00422-2.

Weighted metrics are required when evaluating the performance of prediction models in nested case-control studies.

Rentroia-Pacheco B, Bellomo D, Lakeman I, Wakkee M, Hollestein L, van Klaveren D BMC Med Res Methodol. 2024; 24(1):115.

PMID: 38760688 PMC: 11533296. DOI: 10.1186/s12874-024-02213-6.

Asthma and COVID-19 Outcomes: A Prospective Study in a Large Health Care Delivery System.

Finkas L, Ramesh N, Block L, Yu B, Lee M, Lu M J Asthma Allergy. 2023; 16:1041-1051.

PMID: 37791041 PMC: 10543077. DOI: 10.2147/JAA.S418144.

Polygenic risk scores: the future of cancer risk prediction, screening, and precision prevention.

Wang Y, Zhu M, Ma H, Shen H Med Rev (2021). 2023; 1(2):129-149.

PMID: 37724297 PMC: 10471106. DOI: 10.1515/mr-2021-0025.

References

. The Atherosclerosis Risk in Communities (ARIC) Study: design and objectives. The ARIC investigators. Am J Epidemiol. 1989; 129(4):687-702. View

May S, Hosmer D . A simplified method of calculating an overall goodness-of-fit test for the Cox proportional hazards model. Lifetime Data Anal. 1998; 4(2):109-20. DOI: 10.1023/a:1009612305785. View

Gail M, Brinton L, Byar D, Corle D, Green S, Schairer C . Projecting individualized probabilities of developing breast cancer for white females who are being examined annually. J Natl Cancer Inst. 1989; 81(24):1879-86. DOI: 10.1093/jnci/81.24.1879. View

Pencina M, DAgostino Sr R, DAgostino Jr R, Vasan R . Evaluating the added predictive ability of a new marker: from area under the ROC curve to reclassification and beyond. Stat Med. 2007; 27(2):157-72. DOI: 10.1002/sim.2929. View

Borgan O, Langholz B, Samuelsen S, Goldstein L, Pogoda J . Exposure stratified case-cohort designs. Lifetime Data Anal. 2000; 6(1):39-58. DOI: 10.1023/a:1009661900674. View

Kim H, Greenland P, Rossouw J, Manson J, Cochrane B, Lasser N . Multimarker prediction of coronary heart disease risk: the Women's Health Initiative. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2010; 55(19):2080-91. DOI: 10.1016/j.jacc.2009.12.047. View

Lichtenstein P, de Faire U, Floderus B, Svartengren M, Svedberg P, Pedersen N . The Swedish Twin Registry: a unique resource for clinical, epidemiological and genetic studies. J Intern Med. 2002; 252(3):184-205. DOI: 10.1046/j.1365-2796.2002.01032.x. View

Steyerberg E, Harrell Jr F, Borsboom G, Eijkemans M, Vergouwe Y, Habbema J . Internal validation of predictive models: efficiency of some procedures for logistic regression analysis. J Clin Epidemiol. 2001; 54(8):774-81. DOI: 10.1016/s0895-4356(01)00341-9. View

Saha-Chaudhuri P, Umbach D, Weinberg C . Pooled exposure assessment for matched case-control studies. Epidemiology. 2011; 22(5):704-12. PMC: 3160274. DOI: 10.1097/EDE.0b013e318227af1a. View

10.

Gronnesby J, Borgan O . A method for checking regression models in survival analysis based on the risk score. Lifetime Data Anal. 1996; 2(4):315-28. DOI: 10.1007/BF00127305. View

11.

Stolk R, Rosmalen J, Postma D, de Boer R, Navis G, Slaets J . Universal risk factors for multifactorial diseases: LifeLines: a three-generation population-based study. Eur J Epidemiol. 2007; 23(1):67-74. DOI: 10.1007/s10654-007-9204-4. View

12.

Janes H, Pepe M . Matching in studies of classification accuracy: implications for analysis, efficiency, and assessment of incremental value. Biometrics. 2007; 64(1):1-9. DOI: 10.1111/j.1541-0420.2007.00823.x. View

13.

Cook N, Paynter N . Genetics and breast cancer risk prediction--are we there yet?. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2010; 102(21):1605-6. DOI: 10.1093/jnci/djq413. View

14.

Wilson P, DAgostino R, Levy D, Belanger A, Silbershatz H, Kannel W . Prediction of coronary heart disease using risk factor categories. Circulation. 1998; 97(18):1837-47. DOI: 10.1161/01.cir.97.18.1837. View

15.

Weinberg C, Umbach D . Using pooled exposure assessment to improve efficiency in case-control studies. Biometrics. 2001; 55(3):718-26. DOI: 10.1111/j.0006-341x.1999.00718.x. View

16.

Almqvist C, Adami H, Franks P, Groop L, Ingelsson E, Kere J . LifeGene--a large prospective population-based study of global relevance. Eur J Epidemiol. 2010; 26(1):67-77. PMC: 7087900. DOI: 10.1007/s10654-010-9521-x. View

17.

Schmid A, Blank L . Systems biology: Hypothesis-driven omics integration. Nat Chem Biol. 2010; 6(7):485-7. DOI: 10.1038/nchembio.398. View

18.

Hays J, Hunt J, Hubbell F, Anderson G, Limacher M, Allen C . The Women's Health Initiative recruitment methods and results. Ann Epidemiol. 2003; 13(9 Suppl):S18-77. DOI: 10.1016/s1047-2797(03)00042-5. View

19.

Elliott P, Peakman T . The UK Biobank sample handling and storage protocol for the collection, processing and archiving of human blood and urine. Int J Epidemiol. 2008; 37(2):234-44. DOI: 10.1093/ije/dym276. View

20.

Pencina M, DAgostino R, Vasan R . Statistical methods for assessment of added usefulness of new biomarkers. Clin Chem Lab Med. 2010; 48(12):1703-11. PMC: 3155999. DOI: 10.1515/CCLM.2010.340. View