REPORT

Hormone Replacement Therapy and Colorectal Adenoma Recurrence Among Women in the Polyp Prevention Trial

Karen Woodson, Elaine Lanza, Joseph A. Tangrea, Paul S. Albert, Martha Slattery, Joan Pinsky, Bette Caan, Electra Paskett, Frank Iber, J. Walter Kikendall, Peter Lance, Moshe Shike, Joel Weissfeld, Arthur Schatzkin,
For the Polyp Prevention Study Group

Affiliations of authors: K. Woodson, E. Lanza, J. A. Tangrea (Cancer Prevention Studies Branch, Division of Clinical Sciences), P. S. Albert (Biometric Research Branch, Division of Cancer Treatment and Diagnosis), A. Schatzkin (Nutritional Epidemiology Branch, Division of Epidemiology and Genetics), National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, MD; M. Slattery, University of Utah, Salt Lake City; J. Pinsky, Westat, Rockville, MD; B. Caan, Kaiser Foundation Research Institute, Oakland, CA; E. Paskett, Wake Forest University School of Medicine, Winston-Salem, NC; F. Iber, Edward Hines, Jr. Hospital, Department of Veterans Affairs Medical Center, Hines, IL; W. Kikendall, Walter Reed Army Medical Center, Washington, DC; P. Lance, School of Medicine and Biomedical Sciences, State University of New York at Buffalo; M. Shike, Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY; J. Weissfeld, University of Pittsburgh, PA.

Correspondence to: Karen Woodson, Ph.D., M.P.H., National Institutes of Health, 6006 Executive Blvd., MSC 7058, Bethesda, MD 20892–7058 (e-mail: woodsonk{at}mail.nih.gov).


    ABSTRACT
 Top
 Notes
 Abstract
 Introduction
 Subjects and Methods
 Results
 Discussion
 Appendix
 References
 
Background: Epidemiologic studies have suggested that estrogen may protect against the development of colorectal cancers and adenomatous polyps. We conducted a prospective study to evaluate the association between hormone replacement therapy (HRT) and adenoma recurrence among perimenopausal and postmenopausal women participating in the Polyp Prevention Trial, a randomized dietary intervention study of individuals with colorectal adenomas. Methods: We used a questionnaire and interviews to collect detailed information, at baseline and at each of four annual study visits, from 620 women regarding hormone use, menopausal status, diet, alcohol consumption, and other risk factors. Adenoma recurrence was ascertained by complete colonoscopy at baseline and after 1 and 4 years. Logistic regression models were used to evaluate the association between hormone use and adenoma recurrence after adjusting for intervention group and for age and body mass index at baseline. All statistical tests were two-sided. Results: Adenomas recurred in 200 women. There was no overall association between adenoma recurrence and either overall hormone use (odds ratio [OR] = 1.01; 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.70 to 1.45), combined estrogen and progestin use (OR = 0.94; 95% CI = 0.57 to 1.56), or unopposed estrogen use (OR = 1.04; 95% CI = 0.68 to 1.59). HRT use was associated with a reduction in risk for recurrence of distal adenomas (OR = 0.56; 95% CI = 0.32 to 1.00) and a statistically nonsignificant increase in risk for recurrence of proximal adenomas (OR = 1.39; 95% CI = 0.85 to 2.26). We observed a statistically significant interaction between the HRT–adenoma recurrence association and age (P = .02). HRT was associated with a 40% reduced risk of adenoma recurrence among women older than 62 years (OR = 0.58; 95% CI = 0.35 to 0.97) but with an increased risk among women younger than 62 years (OR = 1.99; 95% CI = 1.11 to 3.55). Conclusions: HRT was not associated with a reduced risk for overall adenoma recurrence in this trial cohort, although there was a suggestion of an age interaction. The effect of age on the association needs to be confirmed in other adenoma recurrence trials.



    INTRODUCTION
 Top
 Notes
 Abstract
 Introduction
 Subjects and Methods
 Results
 Discussion
 Appendix
 References
 
A hypothesis linking exogenous hormone use and the development of colorectal cancer was formulated after the observations of other investigators (1,2). These data include a higher than expected frequency of colorectal tumors among nuns, who also have elevated breast cancer risk, and descriptive data showing that, while women and men have a similar incidence of colorectal cancer before reaching age 50 years, women have a lower incidence than men after age 50 years. Given both the prevalence of hormone replacement therapy (HRT), with its potential benefits and risks, and the mortality and morbidity associated with colorectal cancer, the third leading cause of cancer death among women in the United States (3), the association between HRT and the risk of colorectal cancer and adenomatous polyps is of considerable public health significance.

One potential mechanism by which sex hormones could affect colon cancer risk is through the reduced production of secondary bile acids, which are thought to promote colon carcinogenesis (2). More recently, it has been hypothesized that estrogen may exert a more direct effect on colon cancer risk by inhibiting the growth of colon cancer cells in colonic mucosa (4,5), perhaps via its role in the modulation of vitamin D responsiveness and calcium absorption (69).

Numerous prospective and retrospective epidemiologic studies (1016) have found inverse associations between HRT and risk for colorectal cancers. More recently, a few studies have evaluated associations between HRT and risk of adenomatous polyps, the latter of which are considered to be requisite precursors for most colorectal cancers. The evolution from an aberrant colonic crypt to the formation of a polyp is thought to take about 5 years (17). In three studies (1820), inverse associations were observed between prevalent polyps and both the duration of HRT use and recent HRT use. A sigmoidoscopy-based prospective study of distal polyps found no association between HRT and prevalent polyps overall but did observe an inverse association between HRT and polyps larger than 1 cm (21). Thus, both experimental animal models and human epidemiologic studies suggest that estrogen may protect against the development of colorectal neoplasia and cancer.

Recurrence of adenomas among those screened is an important public health concern considering that, among the individuals screened, 40% will present with an adenoma, and these individuals are at higher risk for the development of subsequent adenomas and, possibly, colorectal cancer. We evaluated the association between HRT and colorectal adenoma recurrence among women participating in the Polyp Prevention Trial (PPT). To our knowledge, this is the first prospective study to evaluate this relationship using subjects enrolled in a well-designed intervention trial with detailed ascertainment of both adenomas (by complete colonoscopy) and hormone use (obtained yearly for 5 years by study interviewer).


    SUBJECTS AND METHODS
 Top
 Notes
 Abstract
 Introduction
 Subjects and Methods
 Results
 Discussion
 Appendix
 References
 
Sample Population

The subjects of this study were the female participants of the PPT, a randomized, intervention trial designed to test whether a low-fat, high-fiber diet rich in fruit and vegetables inhibits the recurrence of colorectal adenomas. The PPT was a collaboration between eight study centers (listed in the "Appendix" section) and was approved by the institutional review boards of the National Cancer Institute and each of the participating centers. All study participants provided written informed consent. The overall design, rationale, dietary intervention and endpoint procedures, and trial results were reported previously (2224). Briefly, women who were at least 35 years old and who had one or more histologically confirmed colorectal adenomas identified by complete colonoscopy within the 6 months before randomization in the PPT were recruited to our study. Eligibility criteria for the PPT were no history of either colorectal cancer, surgical resection of adenomas, inflammatory bowel syndrome, or the polyposis syndrome. At the baseline visit (T0) and each of four subsequent annual visits (T1 through T4), each participant provided a venous blood specimen and answered an interviewer-administered questionnaire that assessed a variety of demographic, clinical, and behavioral characteristics, including drug/vitamin supplement use and menopausal status.

For the determination of menopausal status, women were asked if they had had a menstrual period in the last 6 months and, if they had not, the age they were when they had their last menstrual period. All participants who reported not having a menstrual period within 6 months of study entry were considered to be menopausal at baseline (n = 536). Women who reported both having menstrual periods at study entry and not having menstrual periods at a later study date were considered to be perimenopausal at baseline and were included in our analyses (n = 26). Women who did not report menopausal status (i.e., women who did not answer the question regarding their last menstrual period at any study visit) and who were older than 45 years at baseline were considered to be either perimenopausal or postmenopausal and were included in our study (n = 58). Women who did not report menopausal status and were 45 years old or younger at baseline were excluded from our study (n = 57). The final analytic set included 620 women whose ages ranged from 36 to 86 years.

Assessment of Adenomas

Eligible participants received a full colonoscopy (i.e., one that reached the cecum) at baseline (T0), at the first annual visit (T1), and at the end of the trial intervention period (either at the T4 visit or at an unscheduled colonoscopy visit after the T1 visit). The colonoscopy at the T1 visit served to detect and remove any lesions missed by the baseline colonoscopy. The study endpoint was the recurrence of colorectal adenoma, which was defined as pathologically confirmed adenoma(s) discovered during any endoscopic procedure between the T1 colonoscopy and either the end of the trial colonoscopy (T4) or, for subjects who missed the 1-year colonoscopy, any endoscopic procedure performed at least 2 years after randomization. Of the 677 women who completed the PPT, 60 (9%) did not undergo the T1 colonoscopy. The use of HRT did not differ between those women who did undergo the T1 colonoscopy and those who did not. Two pathologists reviewed samples of all adenomas removed during colonoscopy to determine the histologic features and degree of atypia of the lesions. Information about the size, number, and anatomic location of all adenomatous polyps within the large bowel was obtained from the endoscopists' reports.

Assessment of Menopausal Hormone Use

At the baseline and subsequent yearly visits, interviewers administered a detailed questionnaire to each participant that included questions about their use of prescription and nonprescription drugs. Participants were asked if they were currently taking any medication on a regular basis (defined as one or more times per month). At each annual visit, participants were also asked to bring all prescription and nonprescription medications that they were currently taking. Interviewers verified the name of each medication and determined the dosage and frequency of use. All drugs were categorized by use of the Pharmacologic-Therapeutic Classification Code of the American Hospital Formulary Service (25). Menopausal HRT included both unopposed estrogens (e.g., premarin) and estrogen/progestin combinations.

Statistical Analyses

Our analysis was limited to perimenopausal and postmenopausal women and to women with unknown menopausal status who were older than 45 years at baseline for whom we had complete information on HRT use, gathered during the baseline or the first annual visit, before ascertainment of adenoma recurrence status. We used the detailed information on hormone use obtained yearly to establish prospective overall hormone use, dose, and duration of use. Prospective overall use was defined by whether a participant was a current user or nonuser of hormones at T0 and/or at T1. Hormone dose was evaluated as a continuous variable and was categorically based on the median split of reported daily doses among the hormone users (0.62 mg for estrogen and 2.5 mg for progesterone). Continuous use was evaluated as a dichotomous variable and defined as those participants who reported using HRT at every study visit (T0 through T4). We used logistic regression models to estimate the association (odds ratios [ORs] and 95% confidence intervals [CIs]) between HRT and adenoma recurrence. Potential confounders were evaluated by assessing their associations with HRT and adenoma recurrence. HRT was not associated with other indicators of healthy behaviors, such as physical activity and vitamin and aspirin use. Final models were adjusted for age and body mass index (BMI) at T0 and intervention assignment. Associations between HRT and adenoma multiplicity were evaluated by logistic regression analysis, with the outcome variable being women with more than one adenoma, using women with a single adenoma or no adenoma as the reference group. Associations between HRT and advanced adenomas were evaluated by use of logistic regression analysis, with the outcome variable being women with advanced adenomas (defined as adenomas with either villous histologic subtype, dysplasia, or >=1 cm in size), using women with nonadvanced adenomas or no adenoma as the reference group. Logistic regression analysis was used to estimate the OR of adenoma recurrence for each anatomic subsite within the bowel (i.e., proximal, distal, or a combination of distal and proximal) relative to the no adenoma reference group (women with recurrent adenomas at locations other than the subsite being evaluated were not included in this analysis). Effect modification by age was determined by including age as a continuous variable, by dichotomizing age at the median, and by using quartiles of age in an interaction term with HRT use in the regression model and evaluating the significance of the cross-product term. All three of these models yielded statistically significant interaction terms between age and HRT use. All statistical tests were two-sided and P values were considered to be statistically significant if less than .05.


    RESULTS
 Top
 Notes
 Abstract
 Introduction
 Subjects and Methods
 Results
 Discussion
 Appendix
 References
 
The general characteristics of the 620 women according to colorectal adenoma recurrence status are described in Table 1Go. Thirty-two percent of the women had one or more recurrent adenomas by the end of the study period. Except for age and years since menopause, there were essentially no differences in study characteristics between the women who had a recurrence of adenoma and those that did not.


View this table:
[in this window]
[in a new window]
 
Table 1. Selected baseline characteristics according to recurrence status of perimenopausal and postmenopausal women enrolled in the Polyp Prevention Trial*
 
Forty percent of the women in our study used estrogen or hormone replacement drugs at the time of their T0 or T1 visits; 60% used unopposed estrogen and 40% used estrogen–progestin combination therapy. Because the proposed mechanisms for the role of estrogen in colon carcinogenesis involve cell growth and proliferation and earlier studies have demonstrated that the duration of HRT use is associated with colon cancer risk, we also evaluated hormone use over the duration of the study. Among the women in our study, 28% reported current HRT use at each annual visit. Of those women who used HRT at T0 or T1, approximately 70% took hormones throughout the course of the study. The median length of follow-up time did not differ by HRT use (2.98 and 3.06 years for HRT users and nonusers, respectively).

Associations between HRT use and adenoma recurrence are presented in Table 2Go. All ORs were adjusted for age, BMI, and intervention assignment. There was no association between HRT use and adenoma recurrence for women who were current users of HRT at T0 or T1 (OR = 1.01; 95% CI = 0.70 to 1.45) or for women who were continuous HRT users from T0 through T4 (OR = 0.85; 95% CI = 0.57 to 1.27). We also assessed the risk of adenoma recurrence associated with either unopposed estrogen use or combined estrogen–progestin therapy and found that neither was related to overall adenoma recurrence status.


View this table:
[in this window]
[in a new window]
 
Table 2. Association between HRT and adenoma recurrence in perimenopausal and postmenopausal women enrolled in the Polyp Prevention Trial*
 
A large proportion (38%) of our study participants underwent menopause as a consequence of surgery. We, therefore, assessed whether the reason for menopause had an effect on the HRT association and found no difference in the risk associations between women who underwent natural menopause versus those who became menopausal as a consequence of surgery (data not shown). In other subgroup analyses, we observed associations of similar magnitude between HRT use and adenoma recurrence when we restricted our analyses to only those women known to be postmenopausal at T0 (n = 536) or to women who had colonoscopies at both T1 and T4 (n = 569).

In another subgroup analysis, we evaluated the association between HRT use and anatomic location of the recurrent adenomas (Table 3Go). We observed that HRT use was associated with a reduction in risk for recurrence of distal adenomas (OR = 0.56; 95% CI = 0.32 to 1.00). However, we observed a statistically nonsignificant association between HRT use and an increase in risk for recurrence of proximal adenomas (OR = 1.39; 95% CI = 0.85 to 2.26). We also evaluated the association between HRT and several characteristics of recurrent adenomas. We observed no relationship between HRT use and either adenoma multiplicity (OR = 0.91; 95% CI = 0.52 to 1.61) or the recurrence of advanced adenomas (OR = 0.67; 95% CI = 0.29 to 1.53). However, inferences from this latter analysis were limited because of the small number of recurrent advanced adenomas (n = 35) among women in the trial.


View this table:
[in this window]
[in a new window]
 
Table 3. Association between HRT and anatomic location of recurrent adenoma in perimenopausal and postmenopausal women enrolled in the Polyp Prevention Trial*
 
Because previous studies have demonstrated age modification of the association between HRT and colon cancers (1416), we evaluated whether age modified the HRT–adenoma recurrence association for the women in our study. We observed a statistically significant interaction with age (P = .02) (Table 4Go). Women who used hormones and were older than 62 years, the median age of our study sample, had an approximately 40% reduced risk for adenoma recurrence (OR = 0.58; 95% CI = 0.35 to 0.97), whereas women 62 years old and younger had a nearly 100% increased risk for adenoma recurrence (OR = 1.99; 95% CI = 1.11 to 3.55). Hormone use varied with age, in that use was statistically significantly lower among older women (e.g., 58% of women from 55 to 62 years were current users of hormones compared with 19% of women over the age of 69 years; Table 4Go). The association between HRT and adenoma recurrence was not modified by a number of other covariates, including age at menopause, BMI, parity, family history of colorectal cancer, educational level, calcium supplementation, and nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug use.


View this table:
[in this window]
[in a new window]
 
Table 4. Effect modification by age of the relationship between HRT and adenoma recurrence in perimenopausal and postmenopausal women enrolled in the Polyp Prevention Trial*
 

    DISCUSSION
 Top
 Notes
 Abstract
 Introduction
 Subjects and Methods
 Results
 Discussion
 Appendix
 References
 
We evaluated the effect of HRT on adenoma recurrence among women who presented with one or more adenomatous polyps at the baseline screening colonoscopy. We found no association between current hormone use, either as unopposed estrogen or estrogen–progestin combination therapy, and adenoma recurrence overall. HRT use was, however, associated with a 40% reduction in risk for recurrence of distal polyps. Because age has been shown to modify the association between HRT use and colon cancer (1416), we evaluated age modification of the association between HRT use and adenoma recurrence. We found an interaction between HRT use and age, with a decreased risk for adenoma recurrence among older women (>62 years) and an increased risk among younger women (<=62 years).

Prospective and retrospective epidemiologic studies (1021) have consistently demonstrated a protective role for menopausal hormone use in the development of both colon cancers and adenomatous polyps. A recent meta-analysis of colorectal cancer occurrence (26) found an overall reduction of 20% in colon cancer risk and a 19% reduction in rectal cancer risk for ever versus never users of HRT across studies. Many of the studies analyzed in the meta-analysis produced similar observations. Specifically, much of the risk reduction observed was restricted to current hormone users, who had a 34% risk reduction, and in every study there was greater protection against colon cancer associated with current hormone use than with ever use. Most of the studies in the meta-analysis also found that the risk protection was attenuated several years after hormone use was discontinued and that longer duration of hormone use offered no greater risk reduction than recent use. Two studies (11,13), however, found no differences in risk for unopposed estrogen use and combined estrogen–progestin use. In summary, there is consistency among observational studies for an inverse association between HRT use and the development of adenomas and colorectal cancer. Observational studies of polyp risk, such as those included in the meta-analyses, are usually prevalence studies or cohort studies, in which the endpoint is the presence of polyps among the entire population. Because our study evaluated associations with adenoma recurrence among a subset of individuals who were screened by endoscopy and diagnosed with at least one adenomatous polyp, the generalizability of our findings to the overall population is limited.

Neither the specific biologic effect of estrogen on colonic mucosa nor the point in colon carcinogenesis at which estrogen most likely plays a role is known. Administration of estrogen to cell lines inhibits cell growth and proliferation (27) and, in rodents, estrogen suppresses chemically induced tumor formation (6,7). Exogenous estrogens are believed to decrease secondary bile acid production and can alter intestinal microflora and, therefore, could protect against colorectal cancer. The demonstration that estrogen receptors and the products of other estrogen-related genes are expressed in the gastrointestinal tract suggests that estrogen may have a direct role in inhibiting cancer cell growth (4,2830). Estrogen has been proposed to inhibit cell proliferation in colonic mucosa and to stimulate intestinal calcium absorption, perhaps via its effect on vitamin D (68). In rats, administration of estrogen increased the level of the vitamin D receptor gene transcript level, protein level, and endogenous calcitriol bioactivity in colonic mucosa (6).

We cannot entirely exclude chance as an explanation for our findings of an interaction between HRT and age in the risk of adenoma recurrence. In addition, we know of no published data that provide a biologic rationale for our observation of increased risk of polyp recurrence among younger women using HRT. However, the risk reduction that we observed among the older women in our study is supported by three previous studies of colorectal cancer (11,12,16). There are several potential explanations for this finding. First, older age may be a proxy for duration of hormone use. Second, exogenous estrogens may reverse age-related decreases in estrogen receptor expression observed in the colonic mucosa (31). Third, estrogen may reverse age-related decreases in calcium absorption in the gut (32,33) via the vitamin D–endocrine system (69). In this regard, epidemiologic studies in humans (3436) have demonstrated that calcium protects against the recurrence of polyps.

To our knowledge, our study is the first to evaluate the association between menopausal hormone use and recurrent adenomatous polyp formation in the distal versus proximal colon. The data in the literature regarding associations between HRT and anatomic location of polyps or cancer are somewhat inconsistent. In a prospective study of colorectal cancers, Troisi et al. (13) found that HRT use was associated with a more pronounced risk reduction for distal colon and rectal tumors than proximal tumors. In the four case–control studies, in which the association between HRT use and anatomic location of colorectal cancer has been explored, two (10,15) found that HRT use was associated with a greater reduction in the number of proximal cancers, and two (11,14) found no differences in anatomic location-specific associations. In a large sigmoidoscopy-based prospective study, although Grodstein et al. (21) found no overall association between current hormone use and distal adenomas, they did observe a decreased risk for large (>1 cm) adenomas. In a sigmoidoscopy-based study of prevalent polyps, Peipins et al. (19) found that a statistically significantly reduced risk for distal adenomas was associated with ever use of hormones. In a colonoscopy-based study, Potter et al. (20) found that 5 or more years of hormone use was inversely associated with prevalent polyps, but no anatomic subsite data were reported.

Although we cannot exclude the possibility that the difference in adenoma recurrence risk by anatomic site that we observed could be due to chance, it is worth mentioning that there is controversy in this field about possible differences in the etiology of large bowel cancer by anatomic location. Carcinogenesis in the proximal and distal bowel may occur by different molecular mechanisms. In addition, some cancers appear to be influenced by sex-related factors. For example, mutations in the tumor suppressor gene p53 are found predominantly in tumors of the distal bowel, with no differences by sex, whereas mutations in k-ras, microsatellite instability, and DNA hypermethylation of specific genes were found at a higher prevalence in tumors of the proximal versus distal bowel among women but not among men (3742). One could speculate that differences in etiologies by anatomic subsite might be due to differences in the hormonal milieu in the distal versus proximal bowel.

The strengths of our study lie in its prospective design as well as in its extensive ascertainment of both hormone exposure and adenoma recurrence status. At baseline and at T1, all participants were examined thoroughly by complete colonoscopy, and all adenomas were removed. All participants received another colonoscopy after 4 years at the end of the trial (hypothetically, enough time for adenoma recurrence), allowing for complete ascertainment of adenoma recurrence status. Study interviewers recorded information regarding menopausal hormone use when participants brought all prescribed and nonprescribed drugs that they were taking to the clinic during their yearly visits.

This study is limited in that we collected information pertaining to current, but not past, hormone use. Although we evaluated the association between current use and adenoma recurrence within a 4-year period, it is possible that hormone use before enrollment in our study may have influenced adenoma formation. Among the participants of our study, hormone use varied with age, with fewer of the older women reporting current HRT use compared with the younger women. It is possible that the women who did not respond to hormone therapy, or those who had more therapy-related side effects, had discontinued their use of HRT, which might result in greater misclassification of hormone use among older women. Another study limitation is the generalizability of our findings, given that the study population consisted of women who already had adenoma(s). These women are "predisposed" to develop subsequent adenomas, and the putative effect of hormones in our study population may differ compared with that of the general population.

In conclusion, we did not find a protective relationship between HRT and adenoma recurrence overall; however, HRT use was associated with a reduced risk of polyp recurrence among older women and the suggestion of an increased risk for recurrence among younger women. Given the high prevalence of HRT use in the United States and the morbidity and mortality associated with colon cancer, further prospective studies in screened populations are necessary to fully evaluate the public health implications of our findings.


    APPENDIX
 Top
 Notes
 Abstract
 Introduction
 Subjects and Methods
 Results
 Discussion
 Appendix
 References
 
The members of the Polyp Prevention Study Group participated in the conduct of the Polyp Prevention Trial. However, the data presented in this report and the conclusions drawn from them are solely the responsibility of the coauthors. The members of the Polyp Prevention Study Group and their affiliations are as follows: Schatzkin A, Lanza E, Corle D, Freedman LS, Clifford C, and Tangrea JA (National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, MD); Cooper MR, Paskett E, Quandt S, DeGraffinreid C, Bradham K, Kent L, Self M, Boyles D, West D, Martin L, Taylor N, Dickenson E, Kuhn P, Harmon J, Richardson I, Lee H, and Marceau E (Bowman Gray School of Medicine, Wake Forest University, Winston-Salem, NC); Lance MP, Marshall JR (currently at the University of Arizona, Tucson), Hayes D, Phillips J, Petrelli N, Shelton S, Randall E, Blake A, Wodarski L, Deinzer M, and Melton R (University of New York at Buffalo); Iber FL, Murphy P, Bote EC, Brandt-Whittington L, Haroon N, Kazi N, Moore MA, Orloff SB, Ottosen WJ, Patel M, Rothschild RL, Ryan M, Sullivan JM, and Verma A (Edwards Hines, Jr. Hospital, Department of Veterans Affairs Medical Center, Hines, IL); Caan B, Selby JV, Friedman G, Lawson M, Taff G, Snow D, Belfay M, Schoenberger M, Sampel K, Giboney T, and Randel M (Kaiser Foundation Research Institute, Oakland, CA); Shike M, Winawer S, Bloch A, Mayer J, Morse R, Latkany L, D'Amato D, Schaffer A, and Cohen L (Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY); Weissfeld J, Schoen R, Schade RR, Kuller L, Gahagan B, Caggiula A, Lucas C, Coyne T, Pappert S, Robinson R, Landis V, Misko S, and Search L (University of Pittsburgh, PA); Burt RW, Slattery M, Viscofsky N, Benson J, Neilson J, McDivitt R, Briley M, Heinrich K, and Samowitz W (University of Utah, Salt Lake City); Kikendall JW, Mateski DJ, Wong R, Stoute E, Jones-Miskovsky V, Greaser A, Hancock S, and Chandler S (Walter Reed Army Medical Center, Washington, DC); Cahill J, Hasson M, Daston C, Brewer B, Zimmerman T, Sharbaugh C, O'Brien B, Cranston L, Odaka N, Umbel K, Pinsky J, Price H, and Slonim A (Westat, Rockville, MD); central pathologists—Lewin K (University of California, Los Angeles) and Appelman H (University of Michigan, Ann Arbor); Laboratories—Bachorik PS and Lovejoy K (The Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, MD) and Sowell A (Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, GA); and Data and Safety Monitoring Committee—Greenberg ER (chair) (Dartmouth University, Hanover, NH), Feldman E (Augusta, GA), Garza C (Cornell University, Ithaca, NY), Summers R (University of Iowa, Iowa City), Weiand S (through June 1995) (University of Minnesota, Minneapolis), and DeMets D (beginning July 1995) (University of Wisconsin, Madison).


    NOTES
 
See Appendix for members of the Polyp Prevention Study Group and their affiliations.

Editor's note: F. Iber is a member of the speaker's bureau for Schering-Plough Pharmaceutical Co., Kenilworth, NJ.


    REFERENCES
 Top
 Notes
 Abstract
 Introduction
 Subjects and Methods
 Results
 Discussion
 Appendix
 References
 

1 Potter JD, Slattery ML, Bostick RM, Gapstur SM. Colon cancer: a review of the epidemiology. Epidemiol Rev 1993;15:499–545.[Medline]

2 McMichael AJ, Potter JD. Reproduction, endogenous and exogenous sex hormones, and colon cancer: a review and hypothesis. J Natl Cancer Inst 1980;65:1201–7.[Medline]

3 Ries LA, Wingo PA, Miller DS, Howe HL, Weir HK, Rosenberg HM, et al. The annual report to the nation on the status of cancer, 1973–1997, with a special section on colorectal cancer. Cancer 2000;88:2398–424.[Medline]

4 Foley EF, Jazaeri AA, Shupnik MA, Jazaeri O, Rice LW. Selective loss of estrogen receptor beta in malignant human colon. Cancer Res 2000;60:245–8.[Abstract/Free Full Text]

5 Singh S, Paraskeva C, Gallimore PH, Sheppard MC, Langman MJ. Differential growth response to oestrogen of premalignant and malignant colonic cell lines. Anticancer Res 1994;14:1037–41.[Medline]

6 Schwartz B, Smirnoff P, Shany S, Liel Y. Estrogen controls expression and bioresponse of 1,25-dihydroxyvitamin D receptors in the rat colon. Mol Cell Biochem 2000;203:87–93.[Medline]

7 Smirnoff P, Liel Y, Gnainsky J, Shany S, Schwartz B. The protective effect of estrogen against chemically induced murine colon carcinogenesis is associated with decreased CpG island methylation and increased mRNA and protein expression of the colonic vitamin D receptor. Oncol Res 1999;11:255–64.[Medline]

8 Colin EM, Van Den Bemd GJ, Van Aken M, Christakos S, Jonge HR, Deluca HF, et al. Evidence for involvement of 17 beta-estradiol in intestinal calcium absorption independent of 1,25-dihydroxyvitamin D3 level in the rat. J Bone Miner Res 1999;14:57–64.[Medline]

9 Chen C, Noland KA, Kalu DN. Modulation of intestinal vitamin D receptor by ovariectomy, estrogen and growth hormone. Mech Ageing Dev 1997;99:109–22.[Medline]

10 Gerhardsson de Verdier M, London S. Reproductive factors, exogenous female hormones, and colorectal cancer by subsite. Cancer Causes Control 1992;3:355–60.[Medline]

11 Newcomb PA, Storer BE. Postmenopausal hormone use and risk of large-bowel cancer. J Natl Cancer Inst 1995;87:1067–71.[Abstract]

12 Fernandez E, La Vecchia C, Braga C, Talamini R, Negri E, Parazzini F, et al. Hormone replacement therapy and risk of colon and rectal cancer. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 1998;7:329–33.[Abstract]

13 Troisi R, Schairer C, Chow WH, Schatzkin A, Brinton LA, Fraumeni JF Jr. A prospective study of menopausal hormones and risk of colorectal cancer (United States). Cancer Causes Control 1997;8:130–8.[Medline]

14 Kampman E, Potter JD, Slattery ML, Caan BJ, Edwards S. Hormone replacement therapy, reproductive history, and colon cancer: a multicenter, case–control study in the United States. Cancer Causes Control 1997;8:146–58.[Medline]

15 Jacobs EJ, White E, Weiss NS. Exogenous hormones, reproductive history, and colon cancer (Seattle, Washington, USA). Cancer Causes Control 1994;5:359–66.[Medline]

16 Prihartono N, Palmer JR, Louik C, Shapiro S, Rosenberg L. A case–control study of use of postmenopausal female hormone supplements in relation to the risk of large bowel cancer. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 2000;9:443–7.[Abstract/Free Full Text]

17 Muto T, Bussey HJ, Morson BC. The evolution of cancer of the colon and rectum. Cancer 1975;36:2251–70.[Medline]

18 Chen MJ, Longnecker MP, Morgenstern H, Lee ER, Frankl HD, Haile RW. Recent use of hormone replacement therapy and the prevalence of colorectal adenomas. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 1998;7:227–30.[Abstract]

19 Peipins LA, Newman B, Sandler RS. Reproductive history, use of exogenous hormones, and risk of colorectal adenomas. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 1997;6:671–5.[Abstract]

20 Potter JD, Bostick RM, Grandits GA, Fosdick L, Elmer P, Wood J, et al. Hormone replacement therapy is associated with lower risk of adenomatous polyps of the large bowel: the Minnesota Cancer Prevention Research Unit Case–Control Study. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 1996;5:779–84.[Abstract]

21 Grodstein F, Martinez ME, Platz EA, Giovannucci E, Colditz GA, Kautzky M, et al. Postmenopausal hormone use and risk for colorectal cancer and adenoma. Ann Intern Med 1998;128:705–12.[Abstract/Free Full Text]

22 Schatzkin A, Lanza E, Corle D, Lance P, Iber F, Caan B, et al. Lack of effect of a low-fat, high-fiber diet on the recurrence of colorectal adenomas. Polyp Prevention Trial Study Group. N Engl J Med 2000;342:1149–55.[Abstract/Free Full Text]

23 Schatzkin A, Lanza E, Freedman LS, Tangrea J, Cooper MR, Marshall JR, et al. The polyp prevention trial I: rationale, design, recruitment, and baseline participant characteristics. Polyp Prevention Trial Study Group. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 1996;5:375–83.[Abstract]

24 Lanza E, Schatzkin A, Ballard-Barbash R, Corle D, Clifford C, Paskett E, et al. The Polyp Prevention Trial II: dietary intervention program and participant baseline dietary characteristics. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 1996;5:385–92.[Abstract]

25 McEvoy G, editor. American Hospital Formulatory Service Drug Information 2000. Bethesda (MD): American Society of Health System Pharmacists; 2000.

26 Grodstein F, Newcomb PA, Stampfer MJ. Postmenopausal hormone therapy and the risk of colorectal cancer: a review and meta-analysis. Am J Med 1999;106:574–82.[Medline]

27 Lointier P, Wildrick DM, Boman BM. The effects of steroid hormones on a human colon cancer cell line in vitro. Anticancer Res 1992;12:1327–30.[Medline]

28 Oshima CT, Wonraht DR, Catarino RM, Mattos D, Forones NM. Estrogen and progesterone receptors in gastric and colorectal cancer. Hepatogastroenterology 1999;46:3155–8.[Medline]

29 Hendrickse CW, Jones CE, Donovan IA, Neoptolemos JP, Baker PR. Oestrogen and progesterone receptors in colorectal cancer and human colonic cancer cell lines. Br J Surg 1993;80:636–40.[Medline]

30 Singh S, Poulsom R, Hanby AM, Rogers LA, Wright NA, Sheppard MC, et al. Expression of oestrogen receptor and oestrogen-inducible genes pS2 and ERD5 in large bowel mucosa and cancer. J Pathol 1998;184:153–60.[Medline]

31 Issa JP, Ottaviano YL, Celano P, Hamilton SR, Davidson NE, Baylin SB. Methylation of the oestrogen receptor CpG island links ageing and neoplasia in human colon. Nat Genet 1994;7:536–40.[Medline]

32 Avioli LV, McDonald JE, Lee SW. The influence of age on the intestinal absorption of 47-Ca absorption in post-menopausal osteoporosis. J Clin Invest 1965;44:1960–7.[Medline]

33 Bullamore JR, Wilkinson R, Gallagher JC, Nordin BE, Marshall DH. Effect of age on calcium absorption. Lancet 1970;2:535–7.[Medline]

34 Baron JA, Beach M, Mandel JS, van Stolk RU, Haile RW, Sandler RS, et al. Calcium supplements for the prevention of colorectal adenomas. Calcium Polyp Prevention Study Group. N Engl J Med 1999;340:101–7.[Abstract/Free Full Text]

35 Hyman J, Baron JA, Dain BJ, Sandler RS, Haile RW, Mandel JS, et al. Dietary and supplemental calcium and the recurrence of colorectal adenomas. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 1998;7:291–5.[Abstract]

36 Whelan RL, Horvath KD, Gleason NR, Forde KA, Treat MD, Teitelbaum SL, et al. Vitamin and calcium supplement use is associated with decreased adenoma recurrence in patients with a previous history of neoplasia. Dis Colon Rectum 1999;42:212–7.[Medline]

37 Chao A, Gilliland F, Willman C, Joste N, Chen IM, Stone N, et al. Patient and tumor characteristics of colon cancers with microsatellite instability: a population-based study. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 2000;9:539–44.[Abstract/Free Full Text]

38 Slattery ML, Curtin K, Anderson K, Ma KN, Ballard L, Edwards S, et al. Associations between cigarette smoking, lifestyle factors, and microsatellite instability in colon tumors. J Natl Cancer Inst 2000;92:1831–6.[Abstract/Free Full Text]

39 Breivik J, Lothe RA, Meling GI, Rognum TO, Borresen-Dale AL, Gaudernack G. Different genetic pathways to proximal and distal colorectal cancer influenced by sex-related factors. Int J Cancer 1997;74:664–9.[Medline]

40 Slattery ML, Potter JD, Curtin K, Edwards S, Ma KN, Anderson K, et al. Estrogens reduce and withdrawal of estrogens increase microsatellite instability-positive colon cancer. Cancer Res 2001;61:126–30.[Abstract/Free Full Text]

41 Wiencke JK, Zheng S, Lafuente A, Lafuente MJ, Grudzen C, Wrensch MR, et al. Aberrant methylation of p16INK4a in anatomic and gender-specific subtypes of sporadic colorectal cancer. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 1999;8:501–6.[Abstract/Free Full Text]

42 Malkhosyan SR, Yamamoto H, Piao Z, Perucho M. Late onset and high incidence of colon cancer of the mutator phenotype with hypermethylated hMLH1 gene in women [letter]. Gastroenterology 2000;119:598.[Medline]

Manuscript received February 26, 2001; revised September 14, 2001; accepted September 28, 2001.


This article has been cited by other articles in HighWire Press-hosted journals:


             
Copyright © 2001 Oxford University Press (unless otherwise stated)
Oxford University Press Privacy Policy and Legal Statement