Table 4.
Age-standardized mean urinary concentrations (picomoles per mg creatinine) of estrogens and estrogen metabolites (EM) and multivariable-adjusted percent difference1across categories of green tea intake in postmenopausal women
|
Categories of green tea intake |
|
||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
<1 per week (n = 62) |
1-6 times per week (n = 32) |
7+ times per week (n = 25) |
|
||
Urinary concentration | Urinary concentration | Percent difference | Urinary concentration | Percent difference | Ptrend | |
Total Estrogens and Metabolites |
27.7 |
26.7 |
−6.2% (-33.7%-32.6%) |
26.5 |
−10.5% (-36.0%-25.1%) |
0.52 |
Parent Estrogens |
5.81 |
3.89 |
−37.0% (-58.0%--5.4%) |
4.01 |
−38.6% (-58.3%--9.6%) |
0.01 |
Estrone |
1.96 |
0.66 |
−41.1% (-60.5%--12.0%) |
0.59 |
−47.0% (-63.9%--22.3%) |
0.001 |
Estradiol |
2.06 |
1.36 |
−41.5% (-65.9%-0.1%) |
1.46 |
−36.0% (-61.8% -7.2%) |
0.09 |
2-Hydroxylation pathway |
6.41 |
4.13 |
−33.6% (-57.2% -3.0%) |
5.92 |
−15.1% (-44.4%-29.6%) |
0.48 |
2-Pathway catechols |
4.90 |
3.53 |
−30.8% (-58.4%-15.1%) |
4.18 |
−20.3% (-51.1%-30.0%) |
0.37 |
2-Hydroxyestrone |
4.12 |
2.42 |
−31.5% (-59.0%-14.6%) |
3.29 |
−24.9% (-54.3%-23.4%) |
0.27 |
2-Hydroxyestradiol |
0.65 |
0.4 |
−15.3% (-58.4%-72.6%) |
0.80 |
6.7% (-45.1%-107.2%) |
0.83 |
2-Pathway methylated catechols |
1.18 |
0.89 |
−26.9% (-50.6%-8.1%) |
1.39 |
9.7% (-24.8%-60.0%) |
0.54 |
2-Methoxyestrone |
0.72 |
0.48 |
−35.8% (-61.3%-6.2%) |
0.68 |
−6.2% (-42.7%-53.4%) |
0.85 |
2-Methoxyestradiol |
0.11 |
0.08 |
−33.2% (-64.8%-27.0%) |
0.12 |
19.3% (-36.7%-124.8%) |
0.60 |
2-Hydroxyestrone-3-methyl ether |
0.2 |
0.25 |
−19.4% (-52.8%-37.7%) |
0.45 |
34.9% (-19.1%-124.8%) |
0.17 |
4-Hydroxylation pathway EM |
1.01 |
0.67 |
−40.1% (-59.2%--11.8%) |
1.04 |
−13.6% (-40.6%-25.7%) |
0.60 |
4-Pathway catechol: 4-Hydroxyestrone |
0.81 |
0.49 |
−39.1%(-61.7%--3.0%) |
0.73 |
−18.0% (-47.6%-28.2%) |
0.43 |
4-Pathway methylated catechols |
0.16 |
0.13 |
−14.1% (-49.0%-44.7%) |
0.25 |
48.8% (-10.4%-146.9%) |
0.11 |
4-Methoxyestrone |
0.12 |
0.09 |
−9.5% (-45.7%-51.0%) |
0.15 |
69.1% (2.0%-180.4%) |
0.05 |
4-Methoxyestradiol |
0.02 |
0.02 |
−29.9% (-70.7%-67.7%) |
0.07 |
87.2% (-19.3%-334.2%) |
0.08 |
16-Hydroxylation pathway |
12.9 |
15.9 |
19.5% (-24.8%-90.1%) |
13.4 |
−1.6% (-37.4%-54.8%) |
0.95 |
16α-Hydroxyestrone |
1.15 |
1.22 |
−6.7% (-42.1%-50.1%) |
1.25 |
−22.1% (-50.6%-22.7%) |
0.27 |
Estriol |
5.41 |
7.24 |
24.3% (-32.4%-128.6%) |
5.85 |
3.5% (-42.8%-87.6%) |
0.91 |
16-Ketoestradiol |
4.28 |
5.09 |
20.5% (-22.1%-86.3%) |
3.86 |
−18.5% (-46.8%-25.0%) |
0.36 |
16-Epiestriol |
0.88 |
0.77 |
−20.6% (-48.9%-23.4%) |
0.91 |
6.4% (-30.5%-63.0%) |
0.75 |
17-Epiestriol |
0.15 |
0.11 |
−8.8% (-53.5%-79.0%) |
0.16 |
1.6% (-46.2%-91.9%) |
0.94 |
Ratios | ||||||
Parent estrogens / estrogen metabolites |
0.27 |
0.17 |
−37.8% (-57.2%--9.5%) |
0.18 |
−32.6% (-53.3%--2.8%) |
0.04 |
2-Hydroxylation pathway / parent estrogens |
1.10 |
1.06 |
8.7% (-29.4%-67.4%) |
1.48 |
12.0% (-26.4%-70.6%) |
0.60 |
4-Hydroxylation pathway / parent estrogens |
0.17 |
0.17 |
6.0% (-37.4%-79.5%) |
0.26 |
32.5% (-21.2%-122.6%) |
0.28 |
16-Hydroxylation pathway / parent estrogens |
2.22 |
4.08 |
95.0% (25.5%-202.9%) |
3.34 |
57.1% (2.6%-140.5%) |
0.05 |
2-Hydroxylation pathway / 16-hydroxylation pathway |
0.50 |
0.26 |
−50.2% (-70.6%--15.5%) |
0.44 |
−19.9% (-51.7%-33.0%) |
0.41 |
4-Hydroxylation pathway / 16-hydroxylation pathway |
0.08 |
0.04 |
−51.4% (-71.0%--18.6%) |
0.08 |
−10.1% (-45.7%-48.8%) |
0.69 |
2-Hydroxylation pathway / 4-hydroxylation pathway |
6.34 |
6.15 |
7.6% (-14.9%-36.0%) |
5.70 |
2.6% (-18.9%-29.9%) |
0.87 |
4-Pathway methylated catechols / 4-pathway catechol |
0.20 |
0.26 |
37.3% (-23.3%-145.7%) |
0.35 |
86.1% (6.6%-225.0%) |
0.03 |
2-Pathway methylated catechols / 2-pathway catechols | 0.24 | 0.29 | 14.4% (-25.4%-75.4%) | 0.32 | 33.6% (-11.2%-100.8%) | 0.16 |
Derived measures of estrogen metabolism and statistically significant estimates are presented in bold font.
1 Robust linear regression models were used to estimate percent difference in EM measures with 95% confidence limits across categories of green tea intake while adjusting for age and study center.
2 Robust linear regression was used to test for trends in log-transformed EM measures across tea categories. Ptrend was modeled using categories coded as 0, 1, and 2.