RESUMO
Agreement to participate in case-control studies has become low. Healthy participant bias resulting from differential response proportions in cases and controls can distort results; however, the magnitude of bias is difficult to assess. We investigated the effect in a large population-based case-control study on breast cancer, with a participation rate of 43.4% and 64.1% for controls and cases. We performed a mortality follow-up in 2020 for 3,813 cases and 7,335 controls recruited between 2002-2005. Standardized mortality ratios (SMR) for overall mortality and selected causes of death were estimated. The mean age at recruitment was 63.1 years. The overall mortality for controls was 0.66 times lower (95%CI 0.62-0.69) than for the reference population. For causes of death other than breast cancer, SMRs were similar in cases and controls (0.70 and 0.64). Higher education was associated with lower SMRs in both cases and controls. Options for adjusting the healthy participant bias are limited if the true risk factor distribution in the underlying population is unknown. However, a relevant bias in this particular case-control study is considered unlikely since a similar healthy participant effect was observed for both controls and cases.
RESUMO
BACKGROUND: Survival after a diagnosis of breast cancer varies considerably between patients, and some of this variation may be because of germline genetic variation. We aimed to identify genetic markers associated with breast cancer-specific survival. METHODS: We conducted a large meta-analysis of studies in populations of European ancestry, including 37954 patients with 2900 deaths from breast cancer. Each study had been genotyped for between 200000 and 900000 single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) across the genome; genotypes for nine million common variants were imputed using a common reference panel from the 1000 Genomes Project. We also carried out subtype-specific analyses based on 6881 estrogen receptor (ER)-negative patients (920 events) and 23059 ER-positive patients (1333 events). All statistical tests were two-sided. RESULTS: We identified one new locus (rs2059614 at 11q24.2) associated with survival in ER-negative breast cancer cases (hazard ratio [HR] = 1.95, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.55 to 2.47, P = 1.91 x 10(-8)). Genotyping a subset of 2113 case patients, of which 300 were ER negative, provided supporting evidence for the quality of the imputation. The association in this set of case patients was stronger for the observed genotypes than for the imputed genotypes. A second locus (rs148760487 at 2q24.2) was associated at genome-wide statistical significance in initial analyses; the association was similar in ER-positive and ER-negative case patients. Here the results of genotyping suggested that the finding was less robust. CONCLUSIONS: This is currently the largest study investigating genetic variation associated with breast cancer survival. Our results have potential clinical implications, as they confirm that germline genotype can provide prognostic information in addition to standard tumor prognostic factors.