2EVOLUTION OF THE CASE-CONTROL STUDY What is a case?Consolidating several different signs and symptoms into "caseness" was a key development in medicine.(for more details see: Paneth N, Susser E, Susser: The early history and development of the case-control study. Social & Preventive Medicine 2002; 47: and )
3Key figure - PCA Louis in France. "The numerical method". 2. CASE-SERIESAggregating many individual cases into a group, and describing the features of the group, began in earnest in the 18th century.Key figure - PCA Louis in France "The numerical method".Currently perhaps the single commonest kind of medical article.
43. CASE-CONTROL STUDYIn its simplest form, comparing a case series to a matched control series.Possibly the first c-c study was by Whitehead in Broad Street pump episode, 1854 (Snow did not do a c-c study).First modern c-c study was Janet Lane-Claypon’s study of Breast cancer and reproductive history in 1926.Four c-c studies implicating smoking and lung cancer appeared in 1950, establishing the method in epidemiology.
5FEATURES OF CASE-CONTROL STUDIES 1. DIRECTIONALITY:Outcome to exposure2. TIMING:Retrospective for exposure, but case-ascertainment can be either retrospective or concurrent.3. SAMPLING: Almost always on outcome, with matching of controls to cases
6TWO CHARACTERISTICS OF CASES 1. REPRESENTATIVENESS:Ideally, cases are a random sample of all cases of interest in the source population (e.g. from vital data, registry data). More commonly they are a selection of available cases from a medical care facility (e.g. from hospitals, clinics)
72. METHOD OF SELECTIONSelection may be from incident or prevalent cases:Incident cases are those derived from ongoing ascertainment of cases over time.Prevalent cases are derived from a cross-sectional survey.
8CHARACTERISTICS OF CONTROLS Who is the best control?Where should controls come from?If cases are a random sample of all cases in the population, then controls should be a random sample of all non-cases in the population sampled at the same time (i.e. from the same study base)But if study cases are not a random sample of the university of all cases, it is not likely that a random sample of the population of non-cases will constitute a good control population.
9 THREE QUALITIES NEEDED IN CONTROLS Key concept: Comparability is more important than representativeness in the selection of controlsThe control must be at risk of getting the disease.The control should resemble the case in all respects except for the presence of disease
10COMPARABILITY VS. REPRESENTATIVENESS Usually, study cases are not a random sample of all cases in the population, and therefore controls must be selected so as to mirror the same biases that entered into the selection of cases
11It follows from the above that a pool of potential controls must be defined.This pool must mirror the study base of the cases.
12STUDY BASE Therefore, imagining the study base is a useful exercise before deciding on control selection.The study base is composed of a population at risk of exposure over a period of risk of exposure.
13Cases emerge within a study base Cases emerge within a study base. Controls should emerge from the same study base, except that they are not cases.For example, if cases are selected exclusively from hospitalized patients, controls must also be selected from hospitalized patients.
14If cases must have gone through a certain ascertainment process (e. g If cases must have gone through a certain ascertainment process (e.g. screening), controls must have also. (e.g. mammogram-detected breast cancer)If cases must have reached a certain age before they can become cases, so must controls. (thus we always match on age)If the exposure of interest is cumulative over time, the controls and cases must each have the same opportunity to be exposed to that exposure. (if the case has to work in a factory to be exposed to benzene, the control must also have worked where he/she could be exposed to benzene)
15SIX ISSUES IN MATCHING CONTROLS IN CASE-CONTROL STUDIES 1. Identify the pool from which controls may come. This pool is likely to reflect the way controls were ascertained (hospital, screening test, telephone survey).2. Control selection is usually through matching.Matching variables (e.g. age), and matching criteria (e.g. control must be within the same 5 year age group) must be set up in advance.
163. Controls can be individually matched or frequency matched INDIVIDUAL MATCHING: search for one (or more) controls who have the required MATCHING CRITERIA. PAIRED or TRIPLET MATCHING is when there is one or two controls individually matched to each case.FREQUENCY MATCHING: select a population of controls such that the overall characteristics of the group match the overall characteristics of the cases. e.g. if 15% of cases are under age 20, 15% of the controls are also.
176. Obtain GENERALIZABILITY by matching more than ONE TYPE OF CONTROL 4. AVOID OVER-MATCHING. match only on factors known to be causes of the disease.5. Obtain POWER by matching MORE THAN ONE CONTROL PER CASE. In general, N of controls should be < 4, because there is no further gain of power above four controls per case.6. Obtain GENERALIZABILITY by matching more than ONE TYPE OF CONTROL
18ADVANTAGES AND DISADVANTAGES OF C-C STUDIES 1. only realistic study design for uncovering etiology in rare diseases2. important in understanding new diseases3. commonly used in outbreak investigation4. useful if induction period is long5. relatively inexpensive
19Disadvantages: 1. Susceptible to bias if not carefully designed (and matched)2. Especially susceptible to exposure misclassification3. Especially susceptible to recall bias4. Restricted to single outcome5. Incidence rates not usually calculable6. Cannot assess effects of matching variables
20EXAMPLES OF PROBLEMSDoll’s 1951 study of smoking and lung cancer. The problem was that the control population (lung diseases other than cancer) was biased in relation to the exposure.McMahon’s 1981 study of coffee and pancreatic cancer. Problem was that some of the controls may have been biased in relation to the exposure, because gastro-intestinal diseases were excluded from the control series, and these diseases might have people who reduced coffee intake on medical advice or because of symptoms.
21SOME IMPORTANT DISCOVERIES MADE IN CASE CONTROL STUDIES Cigarette smoking and lung cancer1970'sDiethyl stilbestrol and vaginal adenocarcinomaPost-menopausal estrogens and endometrial cancer
22 1980'sAspirin and Reyes syndromeTampon use and toxic shock syndromeL-tryptophan and eosinophilia-myalgia syndromeAIDS and sexual practices1990'sVaccine effectivenessDiet and cancer
23BASIC ANALYSIS OF CASE CONTROL STUDIES FOR ONE CONTROLData is expressed in a four-fold table, and an odds ratio is calculated (relative risks have no meaning here – why?). Cases ControlsExposed a bUnexposed c dOR = ad/bc
24PAIRED ANALYSIS FOR ONE CONTROL Data is expressed in a four-fold table, and the number of concordant and discordant pairs are calculated. Test is McNemar’s chi squared test for paired data.Case Exposed UnexposedExposed Both MixedControlsUnexposed Mixed Neither
25PAIRED ANALYSIS FOR ONE CONTROL Case Exposed Unexposed Exposed r s ControlsUnexposed t uMcNemar chi2 = (t + s)2(t – s)
26CASE-CONTROL ANALYSIS MORE POINTS ABOUTCASE-CONTROL ANALYSISThe odds ratio is a good estimate of the relative risk when the disease is rare (prevalence < 20%).Can be extended to N > 1 controls.statistical testing is by simple chi-square (unmatched analysis) or by McNemar’s chi square (matched-pairs analysis).Can be extended to multiple strata (Mantel-Haenzel chi-square)
27THEORETICAL FOUNDATION of case-control studies per McMahon and Trichopoulos 1. "Case-control studies should be viewed as efficient sampling schemes of the disease experience of the underlying open or closed cohorts" (McMahon & Trichopoulos, p. 230)2. "The exposure odds ratio derived from case-control studies equals the disease odds ratio derived from cohort studies" (p.231)
283.The incidence rate ratio: Xe divided by XoTe Tocan also be written as:Xe divided by TeXo To
294. "In a case-control study based on a dynamic population, Xe and Xo (exposed and unexposed cases) are directly ascertained, and the ratio Te/To can be estimated in an unbiased way not dependent on any rare disease assumption by the ratio of exposed versus unexposed prevalent individuals at risk in the study base (the total study period cancels out).
305. "any particular group of prevalent individuals at risk for the disease in the source population during the study period (i.e. the study base) that correctly reflects the ratio of exposed to unexposed person-time in this population over this period can be used for this purpose."6. "To the extent that Ye/Yo (the exposure odds among the controls) is an unbiased estimate of Te/To, controls may be viewed as reflecting the person-time by exposure status," (p.231)