CEBP CTRC-AACR San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium Cancer Health Disparities Conference 2009
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
Cancer Research Clinical Cancer Research
Cancer Epidemiology Biomarkers & Prevention Molecular Cancer Therapeutics
Molecular Cancer Research Cancer Prevention Research
Cancer Prevention Journals Portal Cancer Reviews Online
Annual Meeting Education Book Meeting Abstracts Online

This Article
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Rundle, A.
Right arrow Articles by Schwartz, S.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Rundle, A.
Right arrow Articles by Schwartz, S.
Cancer Epidemiology Biomarkers & Prevention Vol. 12, 491-496, June 2003
© 2003 American Association for Cancer Research

Issues in the Epidemiological Analysis and Interpretation of Intermediate Biomarkers1

Andrew Rundle2 and Sharon Schwartz

Department of Epidemiology, Mailman School of Public Health, Columbia University, New York, New York 10032

We critically reviewed the validity and interpretation of two analytical approaches that have been used in the molecular epidemiological literature to investigate the role of gene-environment (GxE) interactions in disease (D) causation. Several studies have attempted to use biomarkers of biologically effective dose (BBED) such as polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbon-DNA and alfatoxin-albumin adducts to assess possible GxE interactions. To truly determine whether BBED results from a GxE interaction that is causally implicated in disease development would require data on G, E, BBED, and D, and thus far, few studies have had data on each of these components. In the absence of data on an antecedent E, one approach has been to assess interactions between G and BBED on D and to interpret the results as providing information on the presence of GxE interactions. In the absence of data on G, another approach has been to control for E in analyses of BBED and D and to interpret nonnull risk estimates for BBED as reflecting the role of G. We show that neither approach is valid. Analyses of interactions between G and BBED cannot be used to draw conclusions about the presence or absence of GxE interactions. Similarly, analyses of BBED and D, controlling for E, do not provide insight into the role of G. We discuss how differences in the risk estimate for BBED, with and without control for E may be interpreted.




This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
Clin. Cancer Res.Home page
B. A. Rybicki, C. Neslund-Dudas, C. H. Bock, A. Rundle, A. T. Savera, J. J. Yang, N. L. Nock, and D. Tang
Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbon-DNA Adducts in Prostate and Biochemical Recurrence after Prostatectomy
Clin. Cancer Res., February 1, 2008; 14(3): 750 - 757.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Cancer Epidemiol. Biomarkers Prev.Home page
A. Rundle
Molecular Epidemiology of Physical Activity and Cancer
Cancer Epidemiol. Biomarkers Prev., January 1, 2005; 14(1): 227 - 236.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]




HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
Cancer Research Clinical Cancer Research
Cancer Epidemiology Biomarkers & Prevention Molecular Cancer Therapeutics
Molecular Cancer Research Cancer Prevention Research
Cancer Prevention Journals Portal Cancer Reviews Online
Annual Meeting Education Book Meeting Abstracts Online
Copyright © 2003 by the American Association for Cancer Research.