Aims: Our aim was to investigate factors associated with participation in buccal cell DNA collection using a large-scale prospective cohort study. Methods: Of the 183,634 Korea Medical Insurance Corporation (KMIC) prospective cohort study enrollees, 44,773 (36,794 men) were randomly selected. Buccal cell collection kits were mailed and collected from March to September 2004. Epidemiologic characteristics measured at baseline (1990 or 1992) and during follow-up (1998) were compared between respondents and nonrespondents. Results: Among the 13,084 (29.2%) respondents, 78.7% submitted usable samples (DNA concentration ≧3 µg). After adjustments for either or both age and family history of chronic disease, participation in men was positively associated with old age, a family history of chronic disease, low subjective health status, and regular exercise, and negatively associated with current smoking status. In women, only old age was associated with participation. Low body mass index (BMI) (<18.5 kg/m2), blood pressure, total cholesterol, and fasting blood glucose level were negatively associated with participation in men after adjustments for age and family history of chronic disease, but not in women, except for low BMI. Conclusions: In this study, collecting buccal cell DNA by mailed survey has a low success rate (29%), and there appear to be a nonresponse bias and gender differences in the collection process.

Keywords:
Biological sample, Participant recruitment, Primary health care, Survey research
1.
Hopper JL, Bishop DT, Easton DF: Population-based family studies in genetic epidemiology. Lancet 2005;366:1397–1406.
2.
Bauer JE, Rezaishiraz H, Head K, Cowell J, Bepler G, Aiken M, Cummings KM, Hyland A: Obtaining DNA from a geographically dispersed cohort of current and former smokers: use of mail-based mouthwash collection and monetary incentives. Nicotine Tob Res 2004;6:439–446.
3.
Kozlowski LT, Vogler GP, Vandenbergh DJ, Strasser AA, O’Connor RJ, Yost BA: Using a telephone survey to acquire genetic and behavioral data related to cigarette smoking in ‘made-anonymous’ and ‘registry’ samples. Am J Epidemiol 2002;156:68–77.
4.
Cozier YC, Palmer JR, Rosenberg L: Comparison of methods for collection of DNA samples by mail in the black women’s health study. Ann Epidemiol 2004;14:117–122.
5.
Freeman B, Smith N, Curtis C, Huckett L, Mill J, Craig IW: DNA from buccal swabs recruited by mail: evaluation of storage effects on long-term stability and suitability for multiplex polymerase chain reaction genotyping. Behav Genet 2003;33:67–72.
6.
Buckley B, Murphy AW, Byrne M, Glynn L: Selection bias resulting from the requirement for prior consent in observational research: a community cohort of people with ischaemic heart disease. Heart 2007;93:1116–1120.
7.
Al-Shahi R, Vousden C, Warlow C: Bias from requiring explicit consent from all participants in observational research: prospective, population based study. BMJ 2005;331:942.
8.
Matsui K, Kita Y, Ueshima H: Informed consent, participation in, and withdrawal from a population based cohort study involving genetic analysis. J Med Ethics 2005;31:385–392.
9.
Wong ML, Chia KS, Yam WM, Teodoro GR, Lau KW: Willingness to donate blood samples for genetic research: a survey from a community in Singapore. Clin Genet 2004;65:45–51.
10.
Crider KS, Reefhuis J, Woomert A, Honein MA: Racial and ethnic disparity in participation in DNA collection at the Atlanta site of the National Birth Defects Prevention Study. Am J Epidemiol 2006;164:805–812.
11.
Treloar SA, Morley KI, Taylor SD, Hall WD: Why do they do it? A pilot study towards understanding participant motivation and experience in a large genetic epidemiological study of endometriosis. Community Genet 2007;10:61–71.
12.
Suh I, Jee SH, Kim HC, Nam CM, Kim IS, Appel LJ: Low serum cholesterol and haemorrhagic stroke in men: Korea Medical Insurance Corporation Study. Lancet 2001;357:922–925.
13.
Jee SH, Ohrr H, Kim IS: Effects of husbands’ smoking on the incidence of lung cancer in Korean women. Int J Epidemiol 1999;28:824–828.
14.
Jee SH, Suh I, Kim IS, Appel LJ: Smoking and atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease in men with low levels of serum cholesterol: the Korea Medical Insurance Corporation Study. JAMA 1999;282:2149–2155.
15.
Thompson MD, Bowen RA, Wong BY, Antal J, Liu Z, Yu H, Siminovitch K, Kreiger N, Rohan TE, Cole DE: Whole genome amplification of buccal cell DNA: genotyping concordance before and after multiple displacement amplification. Clin Chem Lab Med 2005;43:157–162.
16.
Garcia-Closas M, Egan KM, Abruzzo J, Newcomb PA, Titus-Ernstoff L, Franklin T, Bender PK, Beck JC, Le Marchand L, Lum A, Alavanja M, Hayes RB, Rutter J, Buetow K, Brinton LA, Rothman N: Collection of genomic DNA from adults in epidemiological studies by buccal cytobrush and mouthwash. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 2001;10:687–696.
17.
Hansen TV, Simonsen MK, Nielsen FC, Hundrup YA: Collection of blood, saliva, and buccal cell samples in a pilot study on the Danish nurse cohort: comparison of the response rate and quality of genomic DNA. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 2007;16:2072–2076.
18.
Bhatti P, Sigurdson AJ, Wang SS, Chen J, Rothman N, Hartge P, Bergen AW, Landi MT: Genetic variation and willingness to participate in epidemiologic research: data from three studies. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 2005;14:2449–2453.
19.
Leiman DA, Lorenzi NM, Wyatt JC, Doney AS, Rosenbloom ST: US and Scottish health professionals’ attitudes toward DNA biobanking. J Am Med Inform Assoc 2008;15:357–362.
20.
Engel LS, Rothman N, Knott C, Lynch CF, Logsden-Sackett N, Tarone RE, Alavanja MC: Factors associated with refusal to provide a buccal cell sample in the agricultural health study. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 2002;11:493–496.
21.
Doody MM, Sigurdson AS, Kampa D, Chimes K, Alexander BH, Ron E, Tarone RE, Linet MS: Randomized trial of financial incentives and delivery methods for improving response to a mailed questionnaire. Am J Epidemiol 2003;157:643–651.
22.
McCarty CA, Nair A, Austin DM, Giampietro PF: Informed consent and subject motivation to participate in a large, population-based genomics study: the Marshfield Clinic Personalized Medicine Research Project. Community Genet 2007;10:2–9.
23.
Bhatti P, Kampa D, Alexander BH, McClure C, Ringer D, Doody MM, Sigurdson AJ: Blood spots as an alternative to whole blood collection and the effect of a small monetary incentive to increase participation in genetic association studies. BMC Med Res Methodol 2009;9:76.
24.
Robertson J, Walkom EJ, McGettigan P: Response rates and representativeness: a lottery incentive improves physician survey return rates. Pharmacoepidemiol Drug Saf 2005;14:571–577.
25.
Coogan PF, Rosenberg L: Impact of a financial incentive on case and control participation in a telephone interview. Am J Epidemiol 2004;160:295–298.
26.
McQuillan GM, Porter KS, Agelli M, Kington R: Consent for genetic research in a general population: the NHANES experience. Genet Med 2003;5:35–42.
27.
Moorman PG, Skinner CS, Evans JP, Newman B, Sorenson JR, Calingaert B, Susswein L, Crankshaw TS, Hoyo C, Schildkraut JM: Racial differences in enrolment in a cancer genetics registry. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 2004;13:1349–1354.
28.
Wang SS, Fridinger F, Sheedy KM, Khoury MJ: Public attitudes regarding the donation and storage of blood specimens for genetic research. Community Genet 2001;4:18–26.
29.
Mezuk B, Eaton WW, Zandi P: Participant characteristics that influence consent for genetic research in a population-based survey: The Baltimore epidemiologic catchment area follow-up. Community Genet 2008;11:171–178.
30.
Aagaard-Tillery K, Sibai B, Spong CY, Momirova V, Wendel G Jr, Wenstrom K, Samuels P, Cotroneo M, Moawad A, Sorokin Y, Miodovnik M, Meis P, O’Sullivan MJ, Conway D, Wapner RJ: Sample bias among women with retained DNA samples for future genetic studies. Obstet Gynecol 2006;108:1115–1120.
31.
Saab YB, Kabbara W, Chbib C, Gard PR: Buccal cell DNA extraction: yield, purity, and cost: a comparison of two methods. Genet Test 2007;11:413–416.
© 2010 S. Karger AG, Basel
2010
Copyright / Drug Dosage / Disclaimer
Copyright: All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be translated into other languages, reproduced or utilized in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, microcopying, or by any information storage and retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publisher.
Drug Dosage: The authors and the publisher have exerted every effort to ensure that drug selection and dosage set forth in this text are in accord with current recommendations and practice at the time of publication. However, in view of ongoing research, changes in government regulations, and the constant flow of information relating to drug therapy and drug reactions, the reader is urged to check the package insert for each drug for any changes in indications and dosage and for added warnings and precautions. This is particularly important when the recommended agent is a new and/or infrequently employed drug.
Disclaimer: The statements, opinions and data contained in this publication are solely those of the individual authors and contributors and not of the publishers and the editor(s). The appearance of advertisements or/and product references in the publication is not a warranty, endorsement, or approval of the products or services advertised or of their effectiveness, quality or safety. The publisher and the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to persons or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content or advertisements.
You do not currently have access to this content.