Comparison of occupational exposure assessment methods in a case-control study of lead, genetic susceptibility and risk of adult brain tumours.
OBJECTIVE
There is great interest in evaluating gene-environment interactions with chemical exposures, but exposure assessment poses a unique challenge in case-control studies. Expert assessment of detailed work history data is usually considered the best approach, but it is a laborious and time-consuming process. We set out to determine if a less intensive method of exposure assessment (a job exposure matrix (JEM)) would produce similar results to a previous analysis that found evidence of effect modification of the association between expert-assessed lead exposure and risk of brain tumours by a single nucleotide polymorphism in the ALAD gene (rs1800435).


METHODS
We used data from a study of 355 patients with glioma, 151 patients with meningioma and 505 controls. Logistic regression models were used to examine associations between brain tumour risk and lead exposure and effect modification by genotype. We evaluated Cohen's κ, sensitivity and specificity for the JEM compared to the expert-assessed exposure metrics.


RESULTS
Although effect estimates were imprecise and driven by a small number of cases, we found evidence of effect modification between lead exposure and ALAD genotype when using expert- but not JEM-derived lead exposure estimates. κ Values indicated only modest agreement (<0.5) for the exposure metrics, with the JEM indicating high specificity (∼0.9) but poor sensitivity (∼0.5). Disagreement between the two methods was generally due to having additional information in the detailed work history.


CONCLUSIONS
These results provide preliminary evidence suggesting that high quality exposure data are likely to improve the ability to detect genetic effect modification.
Bhatti
Parveen
P
Division of Public Health Sciences, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle, WA 98109, USA. pbhatti@fhcrc.org
Stewart
Patricia A
PA
Linet
Martha S
MS
Blair
Aaron
A
Inskip
Peter D
PD
Rajaraman
Preetha
P
D000328:Adult; D001932:Brain Neoplasms / Q000139:chemically induced* / Q000235:genetics; D004812:Epidemiologic Methods; D020022:Genetic Predisposition to Disease; D005838:Genotype; D005910:Glioma / Q000139:chemically induced / Q000235:genetics; D006801:Humans; D007854:Lead / Q000633:toxicity*; D008579:Meningioma / Q000139:chemically induced / Q000235:genetics; D009784:Occupational Diseases / Q000139:chemically induced* / Q000235:genetics; D016273:Occupational Exposure / Q000009:adverse effects / Q000032:analysis*; D020641:Polymorphism, Single Nucleotide; D000623:Porphobilinogen Synthase / Q000235:genetics*
D007854:Lead; D000623:Porphobilinogen Synthase
Am J Epidemiol. 1989 Dec;130(6):1236-46
2589314
Am J Epidemiol. 1994 Dec 1;140(11):1029-37
7985651
Appl Occup Environ Hyg. 2001 Jan;16(1):84-91
11202032
Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev. 2006 Dec;15(12):2514-20
17164378
Am J Ind Med. 2005 May;47(5):443-50
15828074
Int J Epidemiol. 1993;22 Suppl 2:S106-12
8132383
Int J Epidemiol. 1993;22 Suppl 2:S113-20
8132384
J Occup Med. 1985 Jun;27(6):420-6
4020500
N Engl J Med. 2001 Jan 11;344(2):79-86
11150357
Occup Environ Med. 2009 Jun;66(6):374-80
19017698
Occup Environ Med. 2002 Sep;59(9):575-93; discussion 594
12205230
Am J Ind Med. 1994 Sep;26(3):297-312
7977404
J Occup Environ Med. 1998 Nov;40(11):937-42
9830598
JAMA. 1994 Jul 27;272(4):284-91
8028141
Am J Ind Med. 1994 Sep;26(3):313-26
7977405
Int J Epidemiol. 1993;22 Suppl 2:S72-82
8132397
Int J Epidemiol. 2004 Oct;33(5):945-6
15319401
Am J Ind Med. 1997 Jan;31(1):36-43
8986252
Int J Epidemiol. 1996 Aug;25(4):744-52
8921451
Biometrics. 1977 Mar;33(1):159-74
843571
Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev. 1999 Dec;8(12):1043-50
10613335
Annu Rev Public Health. 1998;19:35-53
9611611
Environ Health Perspect. 2005 Sep;113(9):1209-11
16140629
J Occup Med. 1980 Nov;22(11):722-6
7441390
Occup Environ Med. 1999 Mar;56(3):145-51
10448321