Anyone with good knowledge of medical research - question on study type.

Watch
minor bun engine
Badges: 8
Rep:
?
#1
Report Thread starter 6 years ago
#1
I'm proposing a study to determine whether the presence of a particular genetic mutation in certain premalignant tissue is correlated with future growth of cancer (thus whether it can be used as an early screening tool). I'm a little stuck as to whether this study should be a case control study or a retrospective cohort study:

Case control - Using archival tissue samples, 100 samples of premalignant tissue where the patient went on to develop the cancer (case), and 100 samples of premalignant tissue where the patient did not develop cancer (control). Samples would be tested for mutation and then the rate of mutation (exposure) in each group compared to see if it is higher in the cancer group.

Retrospective cohort - 100 samples of premalignant tissue which present with mutation upon analysis (exposed), and 100 samples of premalignant tissue which do not present with mutation (non exposed). See using medical records if the rate at which each group developed cancer is different (outcome).

Hopefully I haven't misunderstood something in the above descriptions of each study. So my question is, which type of study would be better for the sake of this type of question, or are both equally valid?

Thanks
0
reply
nexttime
Badges: 22
Rep:
?
#2
Report 6 years ago
#2
It depends on the characteristics of the population you're testing which of these will be most useful. E.g. if this mutation is very rare, study a) might not have sufficient sample size to draw a firm conclusion. Equally, if most of these samples do not go on to get cancer then study b might not be useful either. I'd choose the type that will illustrate the difference best (this should be possible - you will know the frequency of cancer amongst your samples even if you don't know the frequency of your mutation).
0
reply
minor bun engine
Badges: 8
Rep:
?
#3
Report Thread starter 6 years ago
#3
(Original post by nexttime)
It depends on the characteristics of the population you're testing which of these will be most useful. E.g. if this mutation is very rare, study a) might not have sufficient sample size to draw a firm conclusion. Equally, if most of these samples do not go on to get cancer then study b might not be useful either. I'd choose the type that will illustrate the difference best (this should be possible - you will know the frequency of cancer amongst your samples even if you don't know the frequency of your mutation).
I see, so are you saying if the mutation is very rare then we would have to examine a huge number of samples to find enough mutations to have a large enough "exposed" group, so a case control would be better? And vice versa if the incidence of cancer is rare?
0
reply
nexttime
Badges: 22
Rep:
?
#4
Report 6 years ago
#4
(Original post by minor bun engine)
I see, so are you saying if the mutation is very rare then we would have to examine a huge number of samples to find enough mutations to have a large enough "exposed" group, so a case control would be better? And vice versa if the incidence of cancer is rare?
That would seem logical yes.
1
reply
X

Quick Reply

Attached files
Write a reply...
Reply
new posts
Back
to top
Latest
My Feed

See more of what you like on
The Student Room

You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

Personalise

Have you made your mind up on your five uni choices?

Yes, and I've sent off my application! (90)
57.69%
I've made my choices but havent sent my application yet (18)
11.54%
I've got a good idea about the choices I want to make (20)
12.82%
I'm researching but still not sure which universities I want to apply to (11)
7.05%
I haven't started researching yet (8)
5.13%
Something else (let us know in the thread!) (9)
5.77%

Watched Threads

View All