Jakob Linseisen1, Sabine Rohrmann. 1. Unit of Nutritional Epidemiology, Division of Cancer Epidemiology, German Cancer Research Center, Im Neuenheimer Feld 280, 69120, Heidelberg, Germany. j.linseisen@dkfz.de
Abstract
BACKGROUND: For many polyphenolic compounds found in plant-derived food, biological effects possibly relevant for cancer prevention have been shown. Since dietary intake estimates suffer from imprecision, the measurement of these compounds (or metabolites of) in biological specimens collected in epidemiological studies is expected to improve accuracy of exposure estimation. AIM OF THE STUDY: The current use of biomarkers in etiologic studies on polyphenolics and cancer risk is evaluated. In addition, available analytical methods are discussed with respect to the requirements for their integration in epidemiological studies, putting specific emphasis on the epidemiological validation of such markers. METHODS: The scientific literature was screened for epidemiologic studies on the relationship of flavonoid and phenolic acid concentrations in human specimens (i.e. blood, urine) and cancer risk. In addition, original data on intra- and inter-subject variability of several flavonoids and phenolic acids are presented. RESULTS: Although several techniques are used in bioavailability or short-term intervention studies, their integration in epidemiological studies is very limited. An exception are phytoestrogens where validated immunoassays allow the rapid measurement of large sample numbers with small sample volume. For several polyphenols, the data on the epidemiologic validity encourages for their use in epidemiological studies. CONCLUSIONS: There are valid possibilities for additional biomarkers of flavonoid and phenolic acid intake that are best applied in prospective studies with more than one biological sample per subject. Currently, a combination of a single biomarker measurement with long-term dietary intake estimates will probably be the most valuable choice to decrease measurement error in exposure data.
BACKGROUND: For many polyphenolic compounds found in plant-derived food, biological effects possibly relevant for cancer prevention have been shown. Since dietary intake estimates suffer from imprecision, the measurement of these compounds (or metabolites of) in biological specimens collected in epidemiological studies is expected to improve accuracy of exposure estimation. AIM OF THE STUDY: The current use of biomarkers in etiologic studies on polyphenolics and cancer risk is evaluated. In addition, available analytical methods are discussed with respect to the requirements for their integration in epidemiological studies, putting specific emphasis on the epidemiological validation of such markers. METHODS: The scientific literature was screened for epidemiologic studies on the relationship of flavonoid and phenolic acid concentrations in human specimens (i.e. blood, urine) and cancer risk. In addition, original data on intra- and inter-subject variability of several flavonoids and phenolic acids are presented. RESULTS: Although several techniques are used in bioavailability or short-term intervention studies, their integration in epidemiological studies is very limited. An exception are phytoestrogens where validated immunoassays allow the rapid measurement of large sample numbers with small sample volume. For several polyphenols, the data on the epidemiologic validity encourages for their use in epidemiological studies. CONCLUSIONS: There are valid possibilities for additional biomarkers of flavonoid and phenolic acid intake that are best applied in prospective studies with more than one biological sample per subject. Currently, a combination of a single biomarker measurement with long-term dietary intake estimates will probably be the most valuable choice to decrease measurement error in exposure data.
Authors: G J Wang; O Lapcík; R Hampl; M Uehara; N Al-Maharik; K Stumpf; H Mikola; K Wähälä; H Adlercreutz Journal: Steroids Date: 2000-06 Impact factor: 2.668
Authors: Sarah C Thomasset; David P Berry; Giuseppe Garcea; Timothy Marczylo; William P Steward; Andreas J Gescher Journal: Int J Cancer Date: 2007-02-01 Impact factor: 7.396
Authors: Annamari Kilkkinen; Jarmo Virtamo; Erkki Vartiainen; Risto Sankila; Mikko J Virtanen; Herman Adlercreutz; Pirjo Pietinen Journal: Int J Cancer Date: 2004-01-10 Impact factor: 7.396
Authors: A Zeleniuch-Jacquotte; H Adlercreutz; R E Shore; K L Koenig; I Kato; A A Arslan; P Toniolo Journal: Br J Cancer Date: 2004-07-05 Impact factor: 7.640
Authors: Janice E Maras; Sameera A Talegawkar; Ning Qiao; Barbara Lyle; Luigi Ferrucci; Katherine L Tucker Journal: J Food Compost Anal Date: 2011-12-01 Impact factor: 4.556
Authors: Robin Christensen; Berit L Heitmann; Karina Winther Andersen; Ole Haagen Nielsen; Signe Bek Sørensen; Mohamad Jawhara; Anette Bygum; Lone Hvid; Jakob Grauslund; Jimmi Wied; Henning Glerup; Ulrich Fredberg; Jan Alexander Villadsen; Søren Geill Kjær; Jan Fallingborg; Seyed A G R Moghadd; Torben Knudsen; Jacob Brodersen; Jesper Frøjk; Jens Frederik Dahlerup; Anders Bo Bojesen; Grith Lykke Sorensen; Steffen Thiel; Nils J Færgeman; Ivan Brandslund; Tue Bjerg Bennike; Allan Stensballe; Erik Berg Schmidt; Andre Franke; David Ellinghaus; Philip Rosenstiel; Jeroen Raes; Mette Boye; Lars Werner; Charlotte Lindgaard Nielsen; Heidi Lausten Munk; Anders Bathum Nexøe; Torkell Ellingsen; Uffe Holmskov; Jens Kjeldsen; Vibeke Andersen Journal: BMJ Open Date: 2018-02-08 Impact factor: 2.692