Dataset Information

Limitations and risks of meta-analyses of longevity studies.

ABSTRACT: Searching for genetic determinants of human longevity has been challenged by the rarity of data sets with large numbers of individuals who have reached extreme old age, inconsistent definitions of the phenotype, and the difficulty of defining appropriate controls. Meta-analysis - a statistical method to summarize results from different studies - has become a common tool in genetic epidemiology to accrue large sample sizes for powerful genetic association studies. In conducting a meta-analysis of studies of human longevity however, particular attention must be made to the definition of cases and controls (including their health status) and on the effect of possible confounders such as sex and ethnicity upon the genetic effect to be estimated. We will show examples of how a meta-analysis can inflate the false negative rates of genetic association studies or it can bias estimates of the association between a genetic variant and extreme longevity.

SUBMITTER: Sebastiani P

PROVIDER: S-EPMC5533653 | biostudies-literature | 2017 Jul

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Limitations and risks of meta-analyses of longevity studies.

Sebastiani Paola P Bae Harold H Gurinovich Anastasia A Soerensen Mette M Puca Annibale A Perls Thomas T TT

Mechanisms of ageing and development 20170128 Pt B

Searching for genetic determinants of human longevity has been challenged by the rarity of data sets with large numbers of individuals who have reached extreme old age, inconsistent definitions of the phenotype, and the difficulty of defining appropriate controls. Meta-analysis - a statistical method to summarize results from different studies - has become a common tool in genetic epidemiology to accrue large sample sizes for powerful genetic association studies. In conducting a meta-analysis of ...[more]

PMID: 28143747

Similar Datasets

Project description:Over the last decades, neoadjuvant treatment has been established as a standard of care for a variety of tumor types in visceral oncology. Neoadjuvant treatment is recommended in locally advanced esophageal and gastric cancer as well as in rectal cancer. In borderline resectable pancreatic cancer, neoadjuvant therapy is an emerging treatment concept, whereas in resectable colorectal liver metastases, neoadjuvant treatment is often used, although the evidence for improvement of survival outcomes is rather weak. What makes neoadjuvant treatment attractive from a surgical oncology viewpoint is its ability to shrink tumors to a smaller size and to increase the chances for complete resection with clear surgical margins, which is a prerequisite for cure. Studies suggest that local tumor control is increased in some visceral tumor types, especially with neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy. In some other studies, a better control of systemic disease has contributed to significantly improved survival rates. Additionally, delaying surgery offers the chance to bring the patient into a better general condition for major surgery, but it also confers the risk of progression. Although it is a relatively rare event, cancers may progress locally during neoadjuvant treatment or distant metastases may occur, jeopardizing a curative surgical treatment approach. Although this is seen as risk of neoadjuvant treatment, it can also be seen as a chance to select only those patients for surgery who have a better control of systemic disease. Some studies showed increased perioperative morbidity in patients who underwent neoadjuvant treatment, which is another potential disadvantage. Optimal multidisciplinary teamwork is key to controlling that risk. Meanwhile, the neoadjuvant treatment period is also used as a "window of opportunity" for studying the activity of novel drugs and for investigating predictive and prognostic biomarkers of chemoradiotherapy and radiochemotherapy. Although the benefits of neoadjuvant treatment have been clearly established, the risk of overtreatment of cancers with an unfavorable prognosis remains an issue. All indications for neoadjuvant treatment are based on clinical staging. Even if staging is done meticulously, making use of all recommended diagnostic modalities, the risk of overstaging and understaging remains considerable and may lead to false indications for neoadjuvant treatment. Finally, despite all developments and emerging concepts in medical oncology, many cancers remain resistant to the currently available drugs and radiation. This may in part be due to specific molecular resistance mechanisms that are marginally understood thus far. Neoadjuvant treatment has been one of the major advances in multidisciplinary oncology in the last decades, requiring a dedicated treatment team and an optimal infrastructure for complex oncology care. This article discusses the goals and novel directions as well as limitations in neoadjuvant treatment of visceral cancers.

Dataset Information

Limitations and risks of meta-analyses of longevity studies.

Publications

Limitations and risks of meta-analyses of longevity studies.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets