Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 212

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 6 of the 6 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Standardization of Steroid Hormone Assays: Why, How, and When?

Stanczyk, Frank Z., Lee, Jennifer S., Santen, Richard J.·2007·Cancer Epidemiology, Biomarkers & Prevention

Abstract

Lack of standardization of high-quality steroid hormone assays is a major deficiency in epidemiologic studies. In postmenopausal women, reported levels of serum 17β-estradiol (E2) are highly variable and median normal values differ by approximately a 6-fold factor. A particular problem is the use of E2 assays for prediction of breast cancer risk and osteoporotic fractures, where assay sensitivity may be the most important factor. Identification of women in the lowest categories of E2 levels will likely provide prognostic information that would not be available in a large group of women in whom E2 levels are undetectable by less sensitive assays. Detailed and costly methods involving extraction and chromatography in conjunction with RIA provide generally acceptable E2 results in postmenopausal serum, whereas less tedious, direct immunoassays suffer from inadequate specificity and sensitivity. Studies comparing the two types of methods generally report higher E2 values with the direct methods as a result of cross-reactivity with other steroids and reduced correlation with biological variables such as body mass index. Similar problems exist with measurements of E2 and estrone in men, and estrone and testosterone in women. Interest in mass spectrometry–based assays is increasing as potential gold standard methods with enhanced sensitivity and specificity; however, these assays require costly instrumentation and highly trained personnel. Taking all of these issues into consideration, we propose establishment of standard pools of premenopausal, postmenopausal, and male serum, and utilization of these for cross-comparison of various methods on an international basis. An oversight group could then establish standards based on these comparisons and set agreed upon confidence limits of various hormones in the pools. These criteria would allow validation of sensitivity, specificity, precision, and accuracy of current steroid hormone assay methodology and provide surrogates until a true gold standard can be developed. (Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 2007;16(9):1713–9)

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1158/1055-9965.epi-06-0765

Cites

6 of 6 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 6 references

Cited by

See all 212

Metadata

Authors
Stanczyk, F. Z., Lee, J. S., & Santen, R. J.
Venue
Cancer Epidemiology, Biomarkers & Prevention
Published
2007-09-01
Volume
16
Issue
9
Pages
1713-1719
ISSN
  • 1055-9965 (ISSN-L)
  • 1538-7755
OpenAlex
W2099763626
Cited by
212
References
6
FWCI
8.90
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Standardization of Steroid Hormone Assays: Why, How, and When? https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1158/1055-9965.epi-06-0765
The paper
Stanczyk, F. Z., Lee, J. S., & Santen, R. J. (2007). Standardization of Steroid Hormone Assays: Why, How, and When? Cancer Epidemiology, Biomarkers & Prevention. https://doi.org/10.1158/1055-9965.epi-06-0765

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.