Towards a Clearer Causal Question Underlying the Association Between Cancer and Dementia.

IF 4.7 2区 医学 Q1 PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH
Epidemiology Pub Date : 2024-05-01 Epub Date: 2024-03-04 DOI:10.1097/EDE.0000000000001712
L Paloma Rojas-Saunero, Kimberly D van der Willik, Sanne B Schagen, M Arfan Ikram, Sonja A Swanson
{"title":"Towards a Clearer Causal Question Underlying the Association Between Cancer and Dementia.","authors":"L Paloma Rojas-Saunero, Kimberly D van der Willik, Sanne B Schagen, M Arfan Ikram, Sonja A Swanson","doi":"10.1097/EDE.0000000000001712","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Several observational studies have described an inverse association between cancer diagnosis and subsequent dementia risk. Multiple biologic mechanisms and potential biases have been proposed in attempts to explain this association. One proposed explanation is the opposite expression of Pin1 in cancer and dementia, and we use this explanation and potential drug target to illustrate the required assumptions and potential sources of bias for inferring an effect of Pin1 on dementia risk from analyses measuring cancer diagnosis as a proxy for Pin1 expression.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We used data from the Rotterdam Study, a population-based cohort. We estimate the association between cancer diagnosis (as a proxy for Pin1) and subsequent dementia diagnosis using two different proxy methods and with confounding and censoring for death addressed with inverse probability weights. We estimate and compare the complements of a weighted Kaplan-Meier survival estimator at 20 years of follow-up.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Out of 3634 participants, 899 (25%) were diagnosed with cancer, of whom 53 (6%) had dementia, and 567 (63%) died. Among those without cancer, 15% (411) were diagnosed with dementia, and 667 (24%) died over follow-up. Depending on the confounding and selection bias control, and the way in which cancer was used as a time-varying proxy exposure, the risk ratio for dementia diagnosis ranged from 0.71 (95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.49, 0.95) to 1.1 (95% CI = 0.79, 1.3).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Being explicit about the underlying mechanism of interest is key to maximizing what we can learn from this cancer-dementia association given available or readily collected data, and to defining, detecting, and preventing potential biases.</p>","PeriodicalId":11779,"journal":{"name":"Epidemiology","volume":" ","pages":"281-288"},"PeriodicalIF":4.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11022995/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Epidemiology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/EDE.0000000000001712","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/3/4 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Several observational studies have described an inverse association between cancer diagnosis and subsequent dementia risk. Multiple biologic mechanisms and potential biases have been proposed in attempts to explain this association. One proposed explanation is the opposite expression of Pin1 in cancer and dementia, and we use this explanation and potential drug target to illustrate the required assumptions and potential sources of bias for inferring an effect of Pin1 on dementia risk from analyses measuring cancer diagnosis as a proxy for Pin1 expression.

Methods: We used data from the Rotterdam Study, a population-based cohort. We estimate the association between cancer diagnosis (as a proxy for Pin1) and subsequent dementia diagnosis using two different proxy methods and with confounding and censoring for death addressed with inverse probability weights. We estimate and compare the complements of a weighted Kaplan-Meier survival estimator at 20 years of follow-up.

Results: Out of 3634 participants, 899 (25%) were diagnosed with cancer, of whom 53 (6%) had dementia, and 567 (63%) died. Among those without cancer, 15% (411) were diagnosed with dementia, and 667 (24%) died over follow-up. Depending on the confounding and selection bias control, and the way in which cancer was used as a time-varying proxy exposure, the risk ratio for dementia diagnosis ranged from 0.71 (95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.49, 0.95) to 1.1 (95% CI = 0.79, 1.3).

Conclusion: Being explicit about the underlying mechanism of interest is key to maximizing what we can learn from this cancer-dementia association given available or readily collected data, and to defining, detecting, and preventing potential biases.

为更清楚地了解癌症与痴呆症之间的因果关系而努力。
背景:一些观察性研究描述了癌症诊断与随后的痴呆风险之间的反比关系。为了解释这种关联,人们提出了多种生物机制和潜在偏差。其中一种解释是 Pin1 在癌症和痴呆症中的表达相反,我们利用这种解释和潜在的药物靶点来说明从测量癌症诊断作为 Pin1 表达的替代物的分析中推断 Pin1 对痴呆症风险的影响所需的假设和潜在的偏倚来源:我们使用了鹿特丹研究(Rotterdam Study)的数据,这是一项基于人群的队列研究。我们使用两种不同的替代方法估算了癌症诊断(作为 Pin1 的替代指标)与随后的痴呆诊断之间的关联,并使用反概率加权法处理了混杂因素和死亡删减。我们估算并比较了随访 20 年的加权卡普兰-梅耶生存率估算值:在 3634 名参与者中,899 人(25%)被诊断出患有癌症,其中 53 人(6%)患有痴呆症,567 人(63%)死亡。在未患癌症的参与者中,15%(411人)被诊断出患有痴呆症,667人(24%)在随访期间死亡。根据混杂和选择偏差的控制情况,以及将癌症作为时变替代暴露的方式,痴呆症诊断的风险比从0.70(95%CI:0.49,0.93)到1.05(95%CI:0.79,1.29)不等:明确相关的潜在机制是最大限度地利用现有或随时收集到的数据从癌症与痴呆症之间的联系中获益的关键,也是界定、检测和预防潜在偏差的关键。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Epidemiology
Epidemiology 医学-公共卫生、环境卫生与职业卫生
CiteScore
6.70
自引率
3.70%
发文量
177
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: Epidemiology publishes original research from all fields of epidemiology. The journal also welcomes review articles and meta-analyses, novel hypotheses, descriptions and applications of new methods, and discussions of research theory or public health policy. We give special consideration to papers from developing countries.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信