4.0 Article

The Queensland study of melanoma: Environmental and genetic associations (Q-MEGA); Study design, baseline characteristics, and repeatability of phenotype and sun exposure measures

Journal

TWIN RESEARCH AND HUMAN GENETICS
Volume 11, Issue 2, Pages 183-196

Publisher

AUSTRALIAN ACAD PRESS
DOI: 10.1375/twin.11.2.183

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. NCI NIH HHS [CA88363, R01 CA088363] Funding Source: Medline

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Cutaneous malignant melanoma (CMM) is a major health issue in Queensland, Australia, which has the world's highest incidence. Recent molecular and epidemiologic studies suggest that CMM arises through multiple etiological pathways involving gene-environment interactions. Understanding the potential mechanisms leading to CMM requires larger studies than those previously conducted. This article describes the design and baseline characteristics of Q-MEGA, the Queensland Study of Melanoma: Environmental and Genetic Associations, which followed up 4 population-based samples of CMM patients in Queensland, including children, adolescents, men aged over 50, and a large sample of adult cases and their families, including twins. Q-MEGA aims to investigate the roles of genetic and environmental factors, and their interaction, in the etiology of melanoma. Three thousand, four hundred and seventy-one participants took part in the follow-up study and were administered a computer-assisted telephone interview in 2002-2005. Updated data on environmental and phenotypic risk factors, and 2777 blood samples were collected from interviewed participants as well as a subset of relatives. This study provides a large and well-described population-based sample of CMM cases with follow-up data. Characteristics of the cases and repeatability of sun exposure and phenotype measures between the baseline and the follow-up surveys, from 6 to 17 years later, are also described.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.0
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available