Extent of regression dilution for established and novel coronary risk factors: results from the British Regional Heart Study

Background Imprecision in measurement of risk factors leads to underestimation of associations with disease outcomes (through regression dilution bias). We examine the extent of this bias for established and novel risk factors for coronary heart disease (CHD) and consider the consequences for CHD prevention. Design Prospective cardiovascular study of middle-aged British men followed up over 20 years. Methods Repeated measurements of blood lipids, blood pressure and insulin were available at intervals of 1 week, 4, 16 and 20 years; repeated measurements of homocysteine and haemostatic factors were available over 1 week and 4 years. Results The use of single baseline measures of both established and novel risk factors in analysis results in marked underestimation of risk associations, increasing over time. The use of a single baseline measurement of total cholesterol results in a 47% (95% confidence interval 44 to 50%) underestimation of its association with CHD risk during the third decade of follow-up; for diastolic blood pressure the corresponding underestimation is 76% (95% confidence interval 73 to 78%). Ignoring the consequences of regression dilution can also lead to error in the assessment of other risk markers, even those measured precisely. Conclusions The importance of risk factors for CHD can be greatly underestimated by using a single baseline measure in prospective study analyses. Studies that wish to estimate associations between disease risk and usual exposure levels need to take regression dilution effects into account. Failure to do so can lead to serious misinterpretation of the importance of CHD risk factors. Eur J Cardiovasc Prevention Rehab 11:125–134 © 2004 The European Society of Cardiology.

[1]  J. Danesh,et al.  Low grade inflammation and coronary heart disease: prospective study and updated meta-analyses , 2000, BMJ : British Medical Journal.

[2]  H. Keen,et al.  Cardiorespiratory disease and diabetes among middle-aged male Civil Servants. A study of screening and intervention. , 1974, Lancet.

[3]  S. Thompson,et al.  Sources of Variability in Coagulation Factor Assays , 1987, Thrombosis and Haemostasis.

[4]  K. Anderson,et al.  An updated coronary risk profile. A statement for health professionals. , 1991, Circulation.

[5]  B Rosner,et al.  Correction of logistic regression relative risk estimates and confidence intervals for measurement error: the case of multiple covariates measured with error. , 1990, American journal of epidemiology.

[6]  R. Holman,et al.  Underestimation of the Importance of Homocysteine as a Risk Factor for Cardiovascular Disease in Epidemiological Studies , 2001, Journal of cardiovascular risk.

[7]  J. Ziegenhorn,et al.  Reagent for the enzymatic determination of serum total cholesterol with improved lipolytic efficiency. , 1983, Clinical chemistry.

[8]  S. Thompson,et al.  Correcting for regression dilution bias: comparison of methods for a single predictor variable , 2000 .

[9]  J. Danesh,et al.  Fibrin D-Dimer and Coronary Heart Disease: Prospective Study and Meta-Analysis , 2001, Circulation.

[10]  P. Whincup,et al.  Twenty year follow-up of a cohort based in general practices in 24 British towns. , 2000, Journal of public health medicine.

[11]  K. Uekama,et al.  Direct measurement of high-density lipoprotein cholesterol in serum with polyethylene glycol-modified enzymes and sulfated alpha-cyclodextrin. , 1995, Clinical chemistry.

[12]  J. Danesh,et al.  von Willebrand factor and coronary heart disease: prospective study and meta-analysis. , 2002, European heart journal.

[13]  D. Ashby,et al.  Blood lipids in middle-aged British men. , 1983, British heart journal.

[14]  C. Burchfiel,et al.  Association of serum total cholesterol with coronary disease and all-cause mortality: multivariate correction for bias due to measurement error. , 1996, American journal of epidemiology.

[15]  C. Fletcher.  The Natural history of chronic bronchitis and emphysema: An eight-year study of early chronic obstructive lung disease in working men in London , 1976 .

[16]  A. G. Shaper,et al.  Observer bias in blood pressure studies. , 1988, Journal of hypertension.

[17]  N J Wald,et al.  By how much and how quickly does reduction in serum cholesterol concentration lower risk of ischaemic heart disease? , 1994, BMJ.

[18]  D. Cook,et al.  The Dinamap 1846SX automated blood pressure recorder: comparison with the Hawksley random zero sphygmomanometer under field conditions. , 1992, Journal of epidemiology and community health.

[19]  A. Rumley.  Fibrinolytic and Endothelial Markers in Cardiovascular Disease and Diabetes Mellitus , 1996 .

[20]  S J Pocock,et al.  British Regional Heart Study: cardiovascular risk factors in middle-aged men in 24 towns. , 1981, British medical journal.

[21]  R. Collins,et al.  Underestimation of risk associations due to regression dilution in long-term follow-up of prospective studies. , 1999, American journal of epidemiology.

[22]  A. G. Shaper,et al.  Validation of patient recall of doctor-diagnosed heart attack and stroke: a postal questionnaire and record review comparison. , 1998, American journal of epidemiology.

[23]  M. Walker,et al.  Diurnal variations in serum biochemical and haematological measurements. , 1989, Journal of clinical pathology.

[24]  M. Walker,et al.  Biochemical measures in a population-based study: effect of fasting duration and time of day , 2002, Annals of clinical biochemistry.

[25]  R. Collins,et al.  Blood pressure, stroke, and coronary heart disease Part 2, short-term reductions in blood pressure: overview of randomised drug trials in their epidemiological context , 1990, The Lancet.

[26]  Konrad Jamrozik.  Age-specific relevance of usual blood pressure to vascular mortality: a meta-analysis of individual data for one million adults in 61 prospective studies , 2002 .

[27]  R. Collins,et al.  Blood pressure, stroke, and coronary heart disease Part 1, prolonged differences in blood pressure: prospective observational studies corrected for the regression dilution bias , 1990, The Lancet.

[28]  P. Whincup,et al.  Re-assessing the contribution of serum total cholesterol, blood pressure and cigarette smoking to the aetiology of coronary heart disease: impact of regression dilution bias. , 2003, European heart journal.

[29]  R. Prentice.  Covariate measurement errors and parameter estimation in a failure time regression model , 1982 .

[30]  A. Havelaar,et al.  Variability in information from a single venapuncture in healthy volunteers: Analysis of the haemostatic variables fibrinogen, Plasminogen Activator Inhibitor (PAI) activity and histidine-rich glycoprotein (HRG) , 1992 .

[31]  R Peto,et al.  Association of fibrinogen, C-reactive protein, albumin, or leukocyte count with coronary heart disease: meta-analyses of prospective studies. , 1998, JAMA.

[32]  A. Phillips,et al.  How independent are "independent" effects? Relative risk estimation when correlated exposures are measured imprecisely. , 1991, Journal of clinical epidemiology.

[33]  Robert Tibshirani,et al.  An Introduction to the Bootstrap , 1994 .

[34]  P. Whincup,et al.  Serum insulin and incident coronary heart disease in middle-aged British men. , 1996, American journal of epidemiology.

[35]  M. Røder,et al.  Enzyme immunoassay for intact human insulin in serum or plasma. , 1993, Clinical chemistry.

[36]  J. Danesh,et al.  Plasma Homocysteine and Coronary Heart Disease: Systematic Review of Published Epidemiological Studies , 1998, Journal of cardiovascular risk.