4.7 Article

A prospective study of serum bile acid concentrations and colorectal cancer risk in post-menopausal women on the island of Guernsey

期刊

BRITISH JOURNAL OF CANCER
卷 86, 期 11, 页码 1741-1744

出版社

NATURE PUBLISHING GROUP
DOI: 10.1038/sj.bjc.6600340

关键词

deoxycholic acid; colorectal cancer; bile acids; reproducibility

类别

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Secondary bile acids produced by the action of the colonic microflora may increase risk of colorectal cancer. Serum bile acid concentrations reflect the faecal bile acid profile and may be of value as biomarkers of risk of colorectal cancer. In a pilot investigation we examined: (i) the reproducibility of measurements of serum bile acids in two blood samples collected several years apart; and (ii) the hypothesis that relatively high levels of secondary bile acids, particularly deoxycholic acid, would be positively associated with an increased risk of colorectal cancer in a prospective study of 3680 women in Guernsey. There was poor reproducibility between repeat measurements of absolute serum concentrations of bile acids, but there was moderately good reproducibility for the ratios of serum concentrations of deoxycholic/cholic acid, lithocholic/chenodeoxycholic and secondary/primary bile acid concentrations (duplicate blood samples were available for 30 women). There were no significant differences in ratios of serum secondary to primary bile acids or in absolute concentrations of bile acids between the 46 women who developed colorectal cancer and their matched controls, although there was a suggestion that an increased risk was associated with a high ratio of deoxycholic/cholic acid (relative risk in top third compared to lower third=3.92 (95% Cl 0.91-17.0, P for trend=0.096). These findings suggest that the ratios of serum bile acid concentrations are sufficiently reproducible for epidemiological studies, but that a larger study than our own is needed to adequately test the hypothesis of their relation to cancer risk. (C) 2002 Cancer Research UK.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据