Different Study Designs in the Epidemiology of Cancer: Case-Control vs. Cohort Studies

  • Harminder Singh
  • Salaheddin M. Mahmud
Part of the Methods in Molecular Biology book series (MIMB, volume 471)


It is only since the 1950s that most of the epidemiology studies on cancer have been conducted. The principal study designs for epidemiologic study of cancer etiology are case-control and cohort studies. These study designs have complimentary roles and distinct advantages and disadvantages. This chapter provides historical perspectives, description of the traditional and variant designs of case-control and cohort studies, and the relative advantages and disadvantages of these study designs.

Key words

Case control study cancer etiology neoplasia screening 


  1. 1.
    Mahmud SM, Dean A, Franco EL. (2007). Epidemiological methods, a view from the Americas. In: Holland W, Olsen J, Florey C (eds.). The development of modern epidemiology. Oxford University Press, New York.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Breslow NE, Day NE. (1980). Statistical methods in cancer research. Volume I--The analysis of case-control studies. IARC Scientific Publications32, 1–350.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Cornfield, J. (1951). A method of estimating comparative rates from clinical data; applica tions to cancer of the lung, breast, and cervix. J Natl Cancer Inst11(6), 1269–1275.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Mantel, N, Haenszel, W. (1959). Statistical aspects of the analysis of data from retrospec tive studies of disease. J Natl Cancer Inst22(4), 719–748.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Cornfield, J. (1962). Joint dependence of risk of coronary heart disease on serum cholesterol and systolic blood pressure: a discriminant function analysis. Fed Proc21(4)Pt 2, 58–61.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Doll R. (2001). Cohort studies: history of the method. I. Prospective cohort studies. Soz Praventivmed46(2), 75–86.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Doll R, Peto R, Boreham J, Sutherland I. (2004). Mortality in relation to smoking: 50 years' observations on male British doctors. BMJ328(7455), 1519.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Doll R, Hill AB. (2004). The mortality of doctors in relation to their smoking habits: a preliminary report. 1954. BMJ328(7455), 1529–1533.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Singh H, Turner D, Xue L, Targownik LE, Bernstein CN. (2006). Risk of developing colorectal cancer following a negative colonoscopy examination: evidence for a 10-year interval between colonoscopies. Jama295(20), 2366–2373.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Diggle PJ. (2002). The analysis of longitudinal data. Oxford University Press, New York.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Franco E, Villa L, Rohan T, Ferenczy A, Petzl-Erler M, Matlashewski G. (1999). Design and methods of the Ludwig-McGill longitudinal study of the natural history of human papillomavirus infection and cer vical neoplasia in Brazil. Ludwig-McGill Study Group. Rev Panam Salud Publica6(4), 223–233.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Zeger SL, Liang KY. (1986). Longitudinal data analysis for discrete and continuous outcomes. Biometrics42(1), 121–130.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Zeger SL, Liang KY, Albert PS. (1988). Models for longitudinal data: a generalized estimating equation approach. Biometrics44(4), 1049–1060.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Rothman KJ, Greeenland S. (1998). Types of epidemiologic studies. In: Rothman KJ, Greeenland S (eds.). Modern epidemio-logy. Lippincott-Raven Publishers, Philadelphia, PA.Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Wynder EL, Graham EA. (1985). Tobacco Smoking as a possible etiologic factor in bronchiogenic carcinoma. A study of six hundred and eighty-four proved cases. By Ernest L. Wynder and Evarts A. Graham. Jama253(20), 2986–2994.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Wacholder S, Silverman DT, McLaughlin JK, Mandel JS. (1992). Selection of controls in case-control studies. III. Design options. Am J Epidemiol135(9), 1042–1050.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Chan JM, Stampfer MJ, Giovannucci E, Gann PH, Ma J, Wilkinson P et al. (1998). Plasma insulin-like growth factor-I and prostate cancer risk: a prospective study. Science279(5350), 563–566.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Wacholder S, Silverman DT, McLaughlin JK, Mandel JS. (1992). Selection of controls in case-control studies. III. Design options. Am J Epidemiol135(9), 1042–1050.PubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2009

Authors and Affiliations

  • Harminder Singh
    • 1
  • Salaheddin M. Mahmud
    • 2
  1. 1.Department of MedicineUniversity of ManitobaWinnipegCanada
  2. 2.Department of Community Health SciencesUniversity of ManitobaWinnipegCanada

Personalised recommendations