Short Communication
The Optimal Timing of Blood Collection during the Menstrual Cycle for
the Assessment of Endogenous Sex Hormones: Can Interindividual
Differences in Levels over the Whole Cycle Be Assessed on
a Single Day?
1
Naseer Ahmad, Tessa M. Pollard, and Nigel Unwin
2
Departments of Diabetes [N. U.] and Epidemiology and Public Health [N. A.,
N. U.], University of Newcastle, Newcastle NE2 4HH, United Kingdom, and
Department of Anthropology, University of Durham, Durham, United
Kingdom [T. M. P.]
Abstract
The objective of this study was to identify the optimal
timing of sampling during the menstrual cycle for
assessment of interindividual variation in exposure
to endogenous sex hormones, including estradiol,
progesterone, and the free androgen index. Twenty-four
healthy premenopausal women with regular periods were
recruited, and alternate day venous blood samples were
taken in the morning throughout one menstrual cycle.
Spearman rank correlation coefficients were calculated
for the estimates of average hormone levels (based on
area under the curve) over one menstrual cycle against
values on single days within that cycle. Days within the
menstrual cycle were identified that provided the best
assessment of interindividual differences. The most
consistent correlation for estradiol was seen between days
9 and 11 (e.g., r 0.53 and P 0.01, day 10), the most
consistent correlation for progesterone was seen between
days 17 and 21 (e.g., r 0.80 and P < 0.001, day 20),
and the most consistent correlation for free androgen
index was seen between days 12 and 15 (e.g., r 0.90
and P < 0.001, day 15). Post hoc analysis of estradiol and
progesterone levels on days counted back from the start
of the next menstrual cycle identified marginally stronger
associations. On repeat hormone measurements (not
done for progesterone) on days 10 and 15, two to five
menstrual cycles later, correlation coefficients with the
original hormone levels remained reasonable (>0.55) for
most. In conclusion, a reasonable characterization of
interindividual differences in premenopausal estradiol,
androgen, and progesterone levels may be achieved with
single blood samples taken on specific days. This provides
a useful approach for future epidemiological studies.
Introduction
Endogenous sex hormones have been related to the risk of
several diseases in women, including breast and ovarian cancer
(1, 2), osteoporosis (3), and cardiovascular disease (4, 5). Most
evidence for the effects of these hormones comes from com-
paring risk in women before and after the menopause [e.g.,
Rannevik et al. (6)], from our increasing understanding of the
effects of postmenopausal hormone replacement therapy [e.g.,
Anonymous (7)], or from comparing risk according to endog-
enous postmenopausal hormone levels [e.g., Hankinson et al.
(8)]. However, there is good evidence that variation between
populations in premenopausal endogenous sex hormone levels
correlates with variation in reproductive cancers in women (9)
and also that within modern industrial populations, overall
exposure to estrogen over the reproductive years is an important
risk factor for the same cancers (8) and affects the degree of
protection against cardiovascular disease (10).
It is important, therefore, that we understand the variation in
premenopausal sex hormone levels between and within popula-
tions and its causes. Unfortunately, such comparisons are plagued
by methodological difficulties associated with changes in sex
hormones levels during the menstrual cycle (2). Thus, some re-
searchers have chosen the labor-intensive course of collection of
multiple samples of either serum or saliva through at least one
menstrual cycle (11–13). Gann et al. (14) suggest that small and
intensive studies may find repeated salivary samples, which are
expensive, most useful, but that timed one-off serum samples are
potentially more useful for larger studies. However, some studies
have failed to address the timing of samples (15), whereas others
have sampled at one stage of the menstrual cycle, with [e.g.,
Bernstein et al. (16)] or without [Kamath et al. (17)] attempts to
justify their sampling strategy.
Michaud et al. (18) recognized the importance of evaluating
whether a single plasma hormone measurement can be used to
estimate stable differences between individuals, given that most
epidemiological studies can only collect one sample per partici-
pant. They compared the reproducibility of plasma estrogen and
progesterone levels over 1 year, with estrogens assessed either
during the follicular phase (on the 3
rd
,4
th
, or 5
th
day of the
menstrual cycle) or in the luteal phase (7–9 days before the
anticipated start of the next cycle), and progesterone assessed only
in the luteal phase. They found that reproducibility was good,
except for estradiol in the luteal phase, although after the exclusion
of women who were anovulatory (identified by low progesterone
levels) and those whose samples were collected 4 days or 10
days before their next menses, reproducibility in luteal phase
samples was also moderately good. However, to our knowledge,
no study has investigated in greater depth than this the extent to
which interindividual differences can be reliably characterized
using measurements on any one day during the menstrual cycle.
Received 2/23/01; revised 10/12/01; accepted 11/5/01.
The costs of publication of this article were defrayed in part by the payment of
page charges. This article must therefore be hereby marked advertisement in
accordance with 18 U.S.C. Section 1734 solely to indicate this fact.
1
Supported by The Northern Regional Health Authority.
2
To whom requests for reprints should be addressed, at Department of Diabetes,
University of Newcastle, Medical School, Newcastle NE2 4HH, United Kingdom.
Phone: 44-191-222-5407; Fax: 44-191-261-1763; E-mail: n.c.unwin@ncl.ac.uk.
147 Vol. 11, 147–151, January 2002 Cancer Epidemiology, Biomarkers & Prevention
on January 21, 2022. © 2002 American Association for Cancer Research. cebp.aacrjournals.org Downloaded from on January 21, 2022. © 2002 American Association for Cancer Research. cebp.aacrjournals.org Downloaded from on January 21, 2022. © 2002 American Association for Cancer Research. cebp.aacrjournals.org Downloaded from