Qi Sun1,2, Kimberly A Bertrand3, Adrian A Franke4, Bernard Rosner5,6, Gary C Curhan5,7, Walter C Willett5,2,7. 1. Channing Division of Network Medicine, Department of Medicine, Brigham and Women's Hospital and Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA; qisun@hsph.harvard.edu. 2. Departments of Nutrition. 3. Slone Epidemiology Center, Boston University, Boston, MA; and. 4. University of Hawaii Cancer Center, University of Hawaii at Manoa, Honolulu, HI. 5. Channing Division of Network Medicine, Department of Medicine, Brigham and Women's Hospital and Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA. 6. Biostatistics, and. 7. Epidemiology, Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health, Boston, MA.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Limited knowledge regarding the reproducibility of biomarkers in 24-h urine samples has hindered the collection and use of the samples in epidemiologic studies. OBJECTIVE: We aimed to evaluate the reproducibility of various markers in repeat 24-h urine samples. DESIGN: We calculated intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs) of biomarkers measured in 24-h urine samples that were collected in 3168 participants in the NHS (Nurses' Health Study), NHSII (Nurses' Health Study II), and Health Professionals Follow-Up Study. RESULTS: In 742 women with 4 samples each collected over the course of 1 y, ICCs for sodium were 0.32 in the NHS and 0.34 in the NHSII. In 2439 men and women with 2 samples each collected over 1 wk to ≥1 mo, the ICCs ranged from 0.33 to 0.68 for sodium at various intervals between collections. The urinary excretion of potassium, calcium, magnesium, phosphate, sulfate, and other urinary markers showed generally higher reproducibility (ICCs >0.4). In 47 women with two 24-h urine samples, ICCs ranged from 0.15 (catechin) to 0.75 (enterolactone) for polyphenol metabolites. For phthalates, ICCs were generally ≤0.26 except for monobenzyl phthalate (ICC: 0.55), whereas the ICC was 0.39 for bisphenol A (BPA). We further estimated that, for the large majority of the biomarkers, the mean of three 24-h urine samples could provide a correlation of ≥0.8 with true long-term urinary excretion. CONCLUSIONS: These data suggest that the urinary excretion of various biomarkers, such as minerals, electrolytes, most polyphenols, and BPA, is reasonably reproducible in 24-h urine samples that are collected within a few days or ≤1 y. Our findings show that three 24-h samples are sufficient for the measurement of long-term exposure status in epidemiologic studies.
BACKGROUND: Limited knowledge regarding the reproducibility of biomarkers in 24-h urine samples has hindered the collection and use of the samples in epidemiologic studies. OBJECTIVE: We aimed to evaluate the reproducibility of various markers in repeat 24-h urine samples. DESIGN: We calculated intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs) of biomarkers measured in 24-h urine samples that were collected in 3168 participants in the NHS (Nurses' Health Study), NHSII (Nurses' Health Study II), and Health Professionals Follow-Up Study. RESULTS: In 742 women with 4 samples each collected over the course of 1 y, ICCs for sodium were 0.32 in the NHS and 0.34 in the NHSII. In 2439 men and women with 2 samples each collected over 1 wk to ≥1 mo, the ICCs ranged from 0.33 to 0.68 for sodium at various intervals between collections. The urinary excretion of potassium, calcium, magnesium, phosphate, sulfate, and other urinary markers showed generally higher reproducibility (ICCs >0.4). In 47 women with two 24-h urine samples, ICCs ranged from 0.15 (catechin) to 0.75 (enterolactone) for polyphenol metabolites. For phthalates, ICCs were generally ≤0.26 except for monobenzyl phthalate (ICC: 0.55), whereas the ICC was 0.39 for bisphenol A (BPA). We further estimated that, for the large majority of the biomarkers, the mean of three 24-h urine samples could provide a correlation of ≥0.8 with true long-term urinary excretion. CONCLUSIONS: These data suggest that the urinary excretion of various biomarkers, such as minerals, electrolytes, most polyphenols, and BPA, is reasonably reproducible in 24-h urine samples that are collected within a few days or ≤1 y. Our findings show that three 24-h samples are sufficient for the measurement of long-term exposure status in epidemiologic studies.
Authors: Chia-Yih Wang; Mary E Cogswell; Catherine M Loria; Te-Ching Chen; Christine M Pfeiffer; Christine A Swanson; Kathleen L Caldwell; Cria G Perrine; Alicia L Carriquiry; Kiang Liu; Christopher T Sempos; Cathleen D Gillespie; Vicki L Burt Journal: J Nutr Date: 2013-06-12 Impact factor: 4.798
Authors: Katherine T Mills; Jing Chen; Wei Yang; Lawrence J Appel; John W Kusek; Arnold Alper; Patrice Delafontaine; Martin G Keane; Emile Mohler; Akinlolu Ojo; Mahboob Rahman; Ana C Ricardo; Elsayed Z Soliman; Susan Steigerwalt; Raymond Townsend; Jiang He Journal: JAMA Date: 2016 May 24-31 Impact factor: 56.272
Authors: Andrew Mente; Martin O'Donnell; Sumathy Rangarajan; Gilles Dagenais; Scott Lear; Matthew McQueen; Rafael Diaz; Alvaro Avezum; Patricio Lopez-Jaramillo; Fernando Lanas; Wei Li; Yin Lu; Sun Yi; Lei Rensheng; Romaina Iqbal; Prem Mony; Rita Yusuf; Khalid Yusoff; Andrzej Szuba; Aytekin Oguz; Annika Rosengren; Ahmad Bahonar; Afzalhussein Yusufali; Aletta Elisabeth Schutte; Jephat Chifamba; Johannes F E Mann; Sonia S Anand; Koon Teo; S Yusuf Journal: Lancet Date: 2016-05-20 Impact factor: 79.321
Authors: Qi Sun; Marilyn C Cornelis; Mary K Townsend; Deirdre K Tobias; A Heather Eliassen; Adrian A Franke; Russ Hauser; Frank B Hu Journal: Environ Health Perspect Date: 2014-03-14 Impact factor: 9.031
Authors: Qi Sun; Nicole M Wedick; An Pan; Mary K Townsend; Aedin Cassidy; Adrian A Franke; Eric B Rimm; Frank B Hu; Rob M van Dam Journal: Diabetes Care Date: 2014-02-18 Impact factor: 19.112
Authors: Feng J He; Norm R C Campbell; Yuan Ma; Graham A MacGregor; Mary E Cogswell; Nancy R Cook Journal: Int J Epidemiol Date: 2018-12-01 Impact factor: 7.196
Authors: Mary E Cogswell; Catherine M Loria; Ana L Terry; Lixia Zhao; Chia-Yih Wang; Te-Ching Chen; Jacqueline D Wright; Christine M Pfeiffer; Robert Merritt; Claudia S Moy; Lawrence J Appel Journal: JAMA Date: 2018-03-27 Impact factor: 56.272
Authors: Katherine J Overwyk; Zerleen S Quader; Joyce Maalouf; Marlana Bates; Jacqui Webster; Mary G George; Robert K Merritt; Mary E Cogswell Journal: Adv Nutr Date: 2020-09-01 Impact factor: 8.701
Authors: Lori B Moore; Sarah V Liu; Tanya M Halliday; Andrew P Neilson; Valisa E Hedrick; Brenda M Davy Journal: J Nutr Date: 2017-09-20 Impact factor: 4.798
Authors: Le Ma; Gang Liu; Ming Ding; Geng Zong; Frank B Hu; Walter C Willett; Eric B Rimm; JoAnn E Manson; Qi Sun Journal: Circulation Date: 2020-03-23 Impact factor: 29.690
Authors: Sandra L Jackson; Mary E Cogswell; Lixia Zhao; Ana L Terry; Chia-Yih Wang; Jacqueline Wright; Sallyann M Coleman King; Barbara Bowman; Te-Ching Chen; Robert Merritt; Catherine M Loria Journal: Circulation Date: 2017-10-11 Impact factor: 29.690