Bone Mineral Density and Subsequent Cancer Risk

NCT ID: NCT00340262

Last Updated: 2020-03-30

Study Results

Results pending

The study team has not published outcome measurements, participant flow, or safety data for this trial yet. Check back later for updates.

Basic Information

Get a concise snapshot of the trial, including recruitment status, study phase, enrollment targets, and key timeline milestones.

Recruitment Status

COMPLETED

Total Enrollment

15595 participants

Study Classification

OBSERVATIONAL

Study Start Date

2000-04-07

Study Completion Date

2020-03-26

Brief Summary

Review the sponsor-provided synopsis that highlights what the study is about and why it is being conducted.

Recent cohort studies demonstrated reduced breast cancer risks among women with a history of fractures or low bone mineral density (BMD). In the Study of Osteoporotic Fractures, each standard deviation increase in distal radius BMD was associated with a 50% increased risk over three years of follow-up, while in the Framingham study, women in the highest quartile of metacarpal bone mass had a 3.5-fold higher risk than women in the lowest quartile. The impact of the severity and timing of bone loss on risk has not yet been investigated, and the extent to which other risk factors (family history, anthropometric factors, physical activity, and exogenous hormones) modify the relationship with BMD is unknown.

To elaborate on these research questions, we are conducting a follow-up study of 22,695 postmenopausal women who volunteered for the Fracture Intervention Trial (FIT), a trial of the bone-enhancing drug alendronate. This large cohort includes extensive baseline information on major breast cancer risk factors, and thus is ideal for evaluating potential interactions with BMD and the effects of BMD on other cancer sites. Endometrial cancer has been reported to occur more frequently among women with a history of fracture, but no previous studies have specifically investigated its relationship to BMD.

We are investigating whether BMD of the proximal femur predicts breast cancer risk; whether breast cancer risk factors among postmenopausal women modify the relationship with BMD; whether BMD predicts endometrial or other cancers; and whether measurable biomarkers offer further etiologic clues about BMD and cancer risk.

We have contacted the surviving members of FIT to ascertain incident cancers. Risk factors and fracture history are being updated through a self-administered questionnaire. To supplement the serum samples collected at baseline, we are using a nested case-control study approach to collect buccal cell specimens, which may be useful for measuring a variety of biomarkers, including endogenous hormones and genetic polymorphisms involved in either bone growth (e.g., vitamin D receptor) or hormone metabolism (e.g., CYP17, COMT). Retrieval of operative and pathology reports is being used to validate self-reported cancers. The social security numbers and contacts names provided by FIT participants when they completed the baseline questionnaire are facilitating comprehensive follow-up and a National Death Index search for those who cannot be located. The baseline data, the established cooperation of this study population, and the collection of additional biospecimens should enable this study to answer important questions about BMD in breast and endometrial cancers.

Detailed Description

Dive into the extended narrative that explains the scientific background, objectives, and procedures in greater depth.

Recent cohort studies demonstrated reduced breast cancer risks among women with a history of fractures or low bone mineral density (BMD). In the Study of Osteoporotic Fractures, each standard deviation increase in distal radius BMD was associated with a 50% increased risk over three years of follow-up, while in the Framingham study, women in the highest quartile of metacarpal bone mass had a 3.5-fold higher risk than women in the lowest quartile. The impact of the severity and timing of bone loss on risk has not been investigated, and the extent to which other risk factors (family history, lifestyle, and exogenous hormones) modify the relationship with BMD is unknown.

To elaborate on these research questions, we conducted a follow-up study of postmenopausal women who volunteered for the Fracture Intervention Trial (FIT), a trial of the bone-enhancing drug alendronate. The BFIT follow-up study includes 15,595 of the 22,695 FIT volunteers. Surviving members of FIT were contacted to ascertain incident cancers and to provide updated risk factor and fracture history through a self-administered questionnaire. To supplement baseline serum samples, we used a nested case-control approach to collect buccal cell specimens for biomarker measurement, including endogenous hormones and genetic polymorphisms involved in either bone growth (e.g., vitamin D receptor) or hormone metabolism (e.g., CYPI7, COMT). Operative and pathology reports were used to validate self-reported cancers. The social security numbers and contact names provided by FIT participants at baseline facilitated comprehensive follow-up and a National Death Index search for those who could not be located.

This large cohort includes extensive baseline information on major breast cancer risk factors, and thus is ideal for evaluating potential interactions with BMD and the effects of BMD on other cancer sites. Endometrial cancer has been reported to occur more frequently among women with a history of fracture, but no previous studies have investigated its relationship to BMD. We are investigating whether proximal femur BMD predicts breast cancer risk; whether breast cancer risk factors among postmenopausal women modify the relationship with BMD; whether BMD predicts cancer risk; and whether biomarkers offer etiologic clues about BMD and cancer risk. Currently, we are examining: 1) the relationship of serum adipocytokines to endometrial cancer risk, and 2) the relationships of serum estrogens and metabolites to postmenopausal breast cancer risk. The baseline and follow-up data and the collection of additional biospecimens should enable us to answer important questions about BMD and other cancers.

Conditions

See the medical conditions and disease areas that this research is targeting or investigating.

Endometrial Cancer Breast Cancer

Study Design

Understand how the trial is structured, including allocation methods, masking strategies, primary purpose, and other design elements.

Observational Model Type

COHORT

Study Time Perspective

PROSPECTIVE

Study Groups

Review each arm or cohort in the study, along with the interventions and objectives associated with them.

FIT Participants

No interventions assigned to this group

Eligibility Criteria

Check the participation requirements, including inclusion and exclusion rules, age limits, and whether healthy volunteers are accepted.

Inclusion Criteria

Women previously enrolled in FIT and provided informed consent.
Minimum Eligible Age

55 Years

Maximum Eligible Age

80 Years

Eligible Sex

FEMALE

Accepts Healthy Volunteers

No

Sponsors

Meet the organizations funding or collaborating on the study and learn about their roles.

National Cancer Institute (NCI)

NIH

Sponsor Role lead

Responsible Party

Identify the individual or organization who holds primary responsibility for the study information submitted to regulators.

Responsibility Role SPONSOR

Principal Investigators

Learn about the lead researchers overseeing the trial and their institutional affiliations.

Britton L Trabert, Ph.D.

Role: PRINCIPAL_INVESTIGATOR

National Cancer Institute (NCI)

Locations

Explore where the study is taking place and check the recruitment status at each participating site.

National Cancer Institute (NCI), 9000 Rockville Pike

Bethesda, Maryland, United States

Site Status

Countries

Review the countries where the study has at least one active or historical site.

United States

References

Explore related publications, articles, or registry entries linked to this study.

Kuller LH, Cauley JA, Lucas L, Cummings S, Browner WS. Sex steroid hormones, bone mineral density, and risk of breast cancer. Environ Health Perspect. 1997 Apr;105 Suppl 3(Suppl 3):593-9. doi: 10.1289/ehp.97105s3593.

Reference Type BACKGROUND
PMID: 9168001 (View on PubMed)

Newcomb PA, Trentham-Dietz A, Egan KM, Titus-Ernstoff L, Baron JA, Storer BE, Willett WC, Stampfer MJ. Fracture history and risk of breast and endometrial cancer. Am J Epidemiol. 2001 Jun 1;153(11):1071-8. doi: 10.1093/aje/153.11.1071.

Reference Type BACKGROUND
PMID: 11390325 (View on PubMed)

Other Identifiers

Review additional registry numbers or institutional identifiers associated with this trial.

OH00-C-N019

Identifier Type: -

Identifier Source: secondary_id

999900019

Identifier Type: -

Identifier Source: org_study_id

More Related Trials

Additional clinical trials that may be relevant based on similarity analysis.

Biomechanics of Metastatic Defects in Bone
NCT02109952 ACTIVE_NOT_RECRUITING