BACKGROUND: The nested case-control study is an efficient epidemiological design whereby a case-control approach is employed within an established cohort. The large number of recent prospective studies and randomized trials conducted in cardiology provide cohorts within which the nested case-control approach is increasingly used. METHODS: This paper describes the design of the nested case-control study, and evaluates its role in cardiology by reviewing all such studies indexed in Medline from 1966 to 2000. The example of homocysteine is used to illustrate how discrepancies between results of nested case-control and case-control studies played an important role in the decisions and recommendations of national and international organizations. RESULTS: Seventy-seven nested case-control studies in cardiology were reviewed. The number of studies per year has been increasing since the first publication in 1987. The majority (96%) of studies evaluated potential risk factors for cardiovascular disease while the remainder evaluated drugs with cardiac adverse effects. In studies of homocysteine and coronary artery disease, nested case-control studies did not confirm the strong association suggested by early case-control studies that may have been influenced by bias (eg, selection, publication, or reverse causality). This led national and international organizations to advise against routine screening. CONCLUSIONS: The nested case-control study is increasingly used to study causal relationships in cardiology. The large cohorts of cardiac patients created by prospective studies, clinical trials, and administrative databases should be exploited using this methodology to assess potential cardiac risk factors and other causal relationships that cannot be studied in randomized trials.
BACKGROUND: The nested case-control study is an efficient epidemiological design whereby a case-control approach is employed within an established cohort. The large number of recent prospective studies and randomized trials conducted in cardiology provide cohorts within which the nested case-control approach is increasingly used. METHODS: This paper describes the design of the nested case-control study, and evaluates its role in cardiology by reviewing all such studies indexed in Medline from 1966 to 2000. The example of homocysteine is used to illustrate how discrepancies between results of nested case-control and case-control studies played an important role in the decisions and recommendations of national and international organizations. RESULTS: Seventy-seven nested case-control studies in cardiology were reviewed. The number of studies per year has been increasing since the first publication in 1987. The majority (96%) of studies evaluated potential risk factors for cardiovascular disease while the remainder evaluated drugs with cardiac adverse effects. In studies of homocysteine and coronary artery disease, nested case-control studies did not confirm the strong association suggested by early case-control studies that may have been influenced by bias (eg, selection, publication, or reverse causality). This led national and international organizations to advise against routine screening. CONCLUSIONS: The nested case-control study is increasingly used to study causal relationships in cardiology. The large cohorts of cardiac patients created by prospective studies, clinical trials, and administrative databases should be exploited using this methodology to assess potential cardiac risk factors and other causal relationships that cannot be studied in randomized trials.
Authors: Arduino A Mangoni; Richard J Woodman; Paraskevi Gaganis; Andrew L Gilbert; Kathleen M Knights Journal: Br J Clin Pharmacol Date: 2010-06 Impact factor: 4.335
Authors: Christel Renoux; Lisa M Lix; Valérie Patenaude; Lauren C Bresee; J Michael Paterson; Jean-Philippe Lafrance; Hala Tamim; Salaheddin M Mahmud; Mhd Wasem Alsabbagh; Brenda Hemmelgarn; Colin R Dormuth; Pierre Ernst Journal: Clin J Am Soc Nephrol Date: 2015-07-31 Impact factor: 8.237
Authors: Meghan B Brennan; Marylou Guihan; Elly Budiman-Mak; Hyojung Kang; Jennifer M Lobo; Bryn L Sutherland; Nicholas Emanuele; Elbert S Huang; Min-Woong Sohn Journal: J Hypertens Date: 2018-11 Impact factor: 4.844
Authors: Margalida Rotger; Tracy R Glass; Thomas Junier; Jens Lundgren; James D Neaton; Estella S Poloni; Angélique B van 't Wout; Rubin Lubomirov; Sara Colombo; Raquel Martinez; Andri Rauch; Huldrych F Günthard; Jacqueline Neuhaus; Deborah Wentworth; Danielle van Manen; Luuk A Gras; Hanneke Schuitemaker; Laura Albini; Carlo Torti; Lisa P Jacobson; Xiuhong Li; Lawrence A Kingsley; Federica Carli; Giovanni Guaraldi; Emily S Ford; Irini Sereti; Colleen Hadigan; Esteban Martinez; Mireia Arnedo; Lander Egaña-Gorroño; Jose M Gatell; Matthew Law; Courtney Bendall; Kathy Petoumenos; Jürgen Rockstroh; Jan-Christian Wasmuth; Kabeya Kabamba; Marc Delforge; Stephane De Wit; Florian Berger; Stefan Mauss; Mariana de Paz Sierra; Marcelo Losso; Waldo H Belloso; Maria Leyes; Antoni Campins; Annalisa Mondi; Andrea De Luca; Ignacio Bernardino; Mónica Barriuso-Iglesias; Ana Torrecilla-Rodriguez; Juan Gonzalez-Garcia; José R Arribas; Iuri Fanti; Silvia Gel; Jordi Puig; Eugenia Negredo; Mar Gutierrez; Pere Domingo; Julia Fischer; Gerd Fätkenheuer; Carlos Alonso-Villaverde; Alan Macken; James Woo; Tara McGinty; Patrick Mallon; Alexandra Mangili; Sally Skinner; Christine A Wanke; Peter Reiss; Rainer Weber; Heiner C Bucher; Jacques Fellay; Amalio Telenti; Philip E Tarr Journal: Clin Infect Dis Date: 2013-03-26 Impact factor: 9.079