  Pooling biomarker data across multiple studies allows for examination of a
wider exposure range than generally possible in individual studies, evaluation
of population subgroups and disease subtypes with more statistical power, and
more precise estimation of biomarker-disease associations. However, biomarker
measurements often require calibration to a reference assay prior to pooling
due to assay and laboratory variability across studies. We propose several
methods for calibrating and combining biomarker data from nested case-control
studies when reference assay data are obtained from a subset of controls in
each contributing study. Specifically, we describe a two-stage method and two
aggregated methods, named the internalized and full calibration methods, to
evaluate the main effect of the biomarker exposure on disease risk and whether
that association is modified by a potential covariate. The internalized method
uses the reference laboratory measurement in the analysis when available and
otherwise uses the calibrated measurement. The full calibration method uses
calibrated biomarker measurements for all subjects, even those with reference
laboratory measurements. Our results demonstrate that the full calibration
method is the preferred aggregated approach to minimize bias in point estimates
regardless of the inclusion of an interaction term in the model. We also
observe that the two-stage and full calibration methods provide similar effect
and variance estimates, but that the variance estimates for these two methods
are slightly larger than those from the internalized approach. As an
illustrative example, we apply the methods in a pooling project of nested
case-control studies to evaluate (i) the association between circulating
vitamin D levels and risk of stroke, and (ii) how BMI modifies the association
between circulating vitamin D levels and cardiovascular disease.
