The Korea Cohort Consortium: The Future of Pooling Cohort Studies

2Citations
Citations of this article
12Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

Abstract

Objectives: We introduced the cohort studies included in the Korea Cohort Consortium (KCC), focusing on large-scale cohort studies established in Korea with a prolonged follow-up period. Moreover, we also provided projections of the follow-up and estimates of the sample size that would be necessary for big-data analyses based on pooling established cohort studies, including population-based genomic studies. Methods: We mainly focused on the characteristics of individual cohort studies from the KCC. We developed “PROFAN”, a Shiny application for projecting the follow-up period to achieve a certain number of cases when pooling established cohort studies. As examples, we projected the follow-up periods for 5000 cases of gastric cancer, 2500 cases of prostate and breast cancer, and 500 cases of non-Hodgkin lymphoma. The sample sizes for sequencing-based analyses based on a 1:1 case-control study were also calculated. Results: The KCC consisted of 8 individual cohort studies, of which 3 were community-based and 5 were health screening-based cohorts. The population-based cohort studies were mainly organized by Korean government agencies and research institutes. The projected follow-up period was at least 10 years to achieve 5000 cases based on a cohort of 0.5 million participants. The mean of the minimum to maximum sample sizes for performing sequencing analyses was 5917-72 102. Conclusions: We propose an approach to establish a large-scale consortium based on the standardization and harmonization of existing cohort studies to obtain adequate statistical power with a sufficient sample size to analyze high-risk groups or rare cancer subtypes.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Lee, S., Ko, K. P., Lee, J. E., Kim, I., Jee, S. H., Shin, A., … Park, S. K. (2022). The Korea Cohort Consortium: The Future of Pooling Cohort Studies. Journal of Preventive Medicine and Public Health, 55(5), 464–474. https://doi.org/10.3961/jpmph.22.299

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free