Skip Navigation



Carcinogenesis Advance Access published online on June 19, 2003
Carcinogenesis, doi:10.1093/carcin/bgg104
© 2003 by Oxford University Press
This Article
Right arrow Advance Access manuscript (PDF) Freely available
Right arrow All Versions of this Article:
24/9/1429    most recent
bgg104v1
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Ahsan, H.
Right arrow Articles by Rundle, A. G.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Ahsan, H.
Right arrow Articles by Rundle, A. G.
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

© 2003 Oxford University Press

MOLECULAR EPIDEMIOLOGY AND CANCER PREVENTION

Measures of genotype vs. gene products: promise and pitfalls in cancer prevention

Habibul Ahsan 1* and Andrew G. Rundle 1

1 Department of Epidemiology, Mailman School of Public Health, Columbia University, New York, New York; Herbert Irving Comprehensive Cancer Center, Columbia University, New York, New York

* Corresponding author. E-mail: habibul.ahsan{at}columbia.edu.

Received 13 March 2003 ; revised 14 May 2003 ; accepted 14 June 2003

Abstract

We present a critical assessment of the promise and pitfalls of genotype vs. gene function measures in cancer epidemiology studies. While both measures have pros and cons and are complementary, in terms of potential for contributing knowledge that directly leads to prevention, we argue that attention should be given to research relating functional parameters (single protein expression, functional or phenotypic assays, or patterns of gene/protein expression) to disease risk. We present the theoretical and conceptual basis of why studies focusing on polymorphisms in the low-penetrance genes may be logically less fruitful for making inroads to cancer prevention than appropriately designed studies using validated functional parameters. We then substantiate these arguments with some concrete examples based on the current literature. We also discuss the limitations of including functional parameters in epidemiological studies and technical improvements required before such studies can truly fulfill their promise. Finally, we offer some specific recommendations for future research directions in this area.


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 Cancer Epidemiol. Biomarkers Prev.Home page
A. Rundle
Molecular Epidemiology of Physical Activity and Cancer
Cancer Epidemiol. Biomarkers Prev., January 1, 2005; 14(1): 227 - 236.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Disclaimer: Please note that abstracts for content published before 1996 were created through digital scanning and may therefore not exactly replicate the text of the original print issues. All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, but the Publisher will not be held responsible for any remaining inaccuracies. If you require any further clarification, please contact our Customer Services Department.