High circulating concentration of insulin-like growth factor-I (IGF-I) and low circulating concentration of IGF binding protein-3 (IGFBP-3) have been associated with increased risk for breast, prostate, and colorectal cancers. Building on previous work in the Multiethnic Cohort (MEC) showing significant differences in IGF-I levels across racial/ethnic groups, we investigated which lifestyle and dietary factors are associated with levels of IGF-I and IGFBP-3 in a random sample of 1,000 MEC participants, which included Native Hawaiian, African American, Japanese, Latino, and White men and women. Crude analyses confirmed the existence of differences in protein levels with race/ethnicity, sex, age, and body size. Reproductive, physical activity, smoking, and diet variables had less consistent effects. In multivariate analyses, IGF-I levels were lower and IGFBP-3 were higher in females versus males. IGF-I and IGFBP-3 declined with increasing age in both genders. Women in the highest quartile of body mass index showed depressed IGF-I and IGFBP-3 levels; in men, height was significantly positively associated with both proteins. In women, alcohol was directly associated with IGFBP-3. Both proteins were lowest among female Latinos. IGF-I was highest among female African Americans. In men, IGFBP-3 was lowest among African Americans. Overall, although these factors were statistically significant determinants of IGF-related protein levels, they did not explain much of the variation in these levels. A positive correlation was found between IGF-I levels (ng/mL) and colon cancer incidence rates (per 100,000) within the MEC by race/ethnicity for both sexes but not for either breast or prostate cancer.

The insulin-like growth factor (IGF) system comprises a set of proteins that regulate vital cell processes in myriad tissues, including breast, colon, and prostate. The two growth factors, IGF-I and IGF-II, interact with six known IGF binding proteins (IGFBP), which regulate binding to the two IGF receptors (IGF-IR and IGF-IIR). The binding proteins are in turn regulated by a group of IGFBP proteases and recently identified IGFBP-related proteins (1). The physiology of the IGF system has been reviewed recently (2-4). Biological evidence has shown that IGF signaling plays important roles in several cancer cell lines, such as breast, prostate, and colon (reviewed in refs. 4, 5). The exact mechanisms by which IGF-related proteins play roles in transformation and progression have not been fully elucidated. One hypothesis, which is based on the assumption that circulating IGF-I levels reflect tissue activity, links high bioavailable IGF-I to cancer risk. Because the majority of IGF-I in the circulation is bound to IGFBP-3, several recent epidemiologic studies have targeted high IGF-I and low IGFBP-3 as a potential biomarker of increased cancer risk. IGFBP-3 has also been suggested to play an independent role (reviewed recently in ref. 6). Results from these studies have been mixed, with the strongest evidence for associations between high bioavailable IGF-I and breast, colorectal, and prostate cancers coming from case-control studies nested within the Physicians' and Nurses' Health Studies (7-10). However, several studies have shown no direct association between IGF-I or IGFBP-3 levels and incidence of cancer or have found associations of limited strength (11-14).

Building on previous work on female participants in the Multiethnic Cohort (MEC), which showed that plasma IGF-I levels varied significantly across racial/ethnic groups (15), we did a cross-sectional study on a large, random sample of participants in a population-based cohort study to determine which lifestyle and dietary factors are associated with plasma levels of IGF-I and IGFBP-3 in each sex, whether we could validate an independent racial/ethnic relationship with IGF levels after adjustment for potential confounders, and whether trends in these levels across racial/ethnic groups (African American, Japanese, Native Hawaiian, Latino, and White) lie in parallel with incidence rates of colorectal, breast, and prostate cancers in the underlying cohort.

Study Subjects

Participants included in these analyses were selected from a large population-based cohort study, the Hawaii and Los Angeles MEC. The primary aim of this study was to evaluate the dietary and other environmental contributions to the racial/ethnic variability in cancer risk. The MEC consists of 215,251 volunteers of both sexes, mainly Japanese, Whites, and Native Hawaiians in Hawaii and African Americans and Latinos in Los Angeles. Subjects were recruited between 1993 and 1996 primarily through drivers' license files. All participants were between ages 45 and 75 years at the time of enrollment. Baseline data were collected on cohort participants via a mailed questionnaire that contained five sections: (1) background, including medical history and family cancer history; (2) diet history; (3) medication use; (4) physical activity; and, for women, (5) female reproductive history, including use of hormones. Blood was collected on a subcohort of ∼5,000 randomly selected participants after stratification on sex and race/ethnicity. These participants are being used as controls in nested case-control studies. The draw was completed in the morning, typically at the person's home, after informed consent was obtained. Handling of samples was achieved with attention to minimization of time between draw and processing. Ninety percent of samples were processed within 4 hours of the blood draw, and 98% were processed within 24 hours of draw. Sodium heparin was used as an anticoagulant in the blood collection tubes. The participation rate for providing a blood sample was 66% and did not vary greatly across different racial/ethnic groups. Details of the MEC study have been published previously (16).

Incident cancer diagnoses are identified through annual linkage of the cohort with files of the Hawaii Tumor Registry and the Cancer Surveillance Program in Los Angeles (both are Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results registries and include annual death certificate searches within their respective states for possible missed cases). Linkage is also done annually with the California Tumor Registry and the Hawaii and California death certificate files and periodically with the National Death Index.

We measured plasma IGF-I and IGFBP-3 in a random sample of 1,000 MEC blood subcohort participants [100 for each of 10 sex-racial/ethnic groups with equal representation of each 5-year age group at blood draw (>45 years for men and >55 years for women)]. Women who reported that they were taking estrogen replacement therapy at the time of blood draw were excluded. There were 955 subjects who had complete IGF-I and IGFBP-3 measurements, of whom 926 had complete questionnaire data.

IGF-I and IGFBP-3 Measurements in Plasma

Samples were analyzed blind as to race/ethnicity and sex of the participants. To reduce the effect of laboratory variability, each analytic batch included equal numbers of subjects from each sex-racial/ethnic group. IGF-I and IGFBP-3 were measured by ELISAs from Diagnostic System Laboratories (Webster, TX). IGF-I assays included an acid-ethanol precipitation of IGF-I binding proteins to avoid interference of IGFBPs with the IGF-I assay. The average overall intrabatch coefficients of variation were 6.0% and 5.2% for IGF-I and IGFBP-3, respectively. The average overall interbatch coefficients of variation were 13.9% and 10.6% for IGF-I and IGFBP-3, respectively.

Data Analysis

ANOVA and analysis of covariance were used to test for differences in crude and adjusted mean IGF-related protein levels by sex-racial/ethnic group and covariate level. We assumed homogeneity of effects across racial/ethnic groups and did not correct for differences in the sampling proportion used for each group. The hormone measurements were transformed via the natural log to produce the best approximate normal distribution. These values have been transformed back to normal physiologic levels in the tables for the purpose of presentation. Diet intake data were adjusted for total calorie intake by the calculation of nutrient densities. Nutrient densities were calculated by multiplying the daily diet component intake in grams by the inverse of total daily energy intake in calories (17). Means presented are least-squares means (LS means). Multiple linear regressions were done to determine which covariates were associated with IGF-I, IGFBP-3, and IGF-I-IGFBP-3 molar ratio (IGFMR) levels. We used past reports (18-23) and the known biology about the IGF-I pathway (for review, see refs. 24, 25) to guide the selection of variables to be considered in the models. The R2 selection method was used in conjunction with Mallow's Cp to identify important associated variables. Plots of the Cp statistic, as well as examination of incremental changes in the R2, assisted in the final determination of variables for inclusion in the models. Although the sampling proportions were not equal for each racial/ethnic group, we adjusted the models for this variable and therefore expect the results to be generalizable to the entire cohort. All analyses were done in SAS version 9 (SAS Institute, Cary, NC).

Table 1 shows the means and 95% confidence limits (95% CL) for the main characteristics and the crude plasma IGF-related protein levels for the 465 healthy women and 490 healthy men with complete IGF-related protein measurements by racial/ethnic group. Body size characteristics such as height, weight, and body mass index (BMI) differed significantly across racial/ethnic groups. African American and Latino women had higher mean BMI scores (29.3 and 29.1 kg/m2, respectively) than Native Hawaiians (28.7 kg/m2), Whites (26.2 kg/m2), and Japanese (24.0 kg/m2). Comparison of the two extreme groups yielded P < 0.0001. In men, the Native Hawaiians had the highest mean BMI (29.1 kg/m2) followed by the other four racial/ethnic groups in roughly parallel order as seen in women (Native Hawaiians versus Japanese, Pdiff < 0.0001).

Table 1.

Mean (95% CL) for main characteristics and plasma IGF-I, IGFBP-3, and IGFMR levels from 955 MEC participants by sex and racial/ethnic group

Native HawaiianAfrican AmericanJapaneseLatinoWhiteP*
Females       
    No. subjects (% women) 77 (17) 96 (21) 100 (22) 99 (21) 93 (20)  
    Age, y 66.7 (65.1, 68.3) 67.6 (66.2, 69.1) 69.1 (67.7, 70.6) 67.5 (66.1, 69.0) 68.2 (66.8, 69.7) 0.23 
    Height, in. 63.8 (63.3, 64.3) 64.3 (63.8, 64.8) 60.6 (60.2, 61.1) 62.7 (62.2, 63.2) 64.5 (64.0, 65.0) <0.0001 
    Weight, lb. 166 (159, 173) 172 (166, 179) 125 (119, 132) 162 (155, 168) 155 (148, 161) <0.0001 
    BMI, kg/m2 28.7 (27.5, 29.9) 29.3 (28.3, 30.4) 24.0 (23.0, 25.1) 29.1 (28.0, 30.1) 26.2 (25.1, 27.3) <0.0001 
    IGF-I, ng/mL 144 (131, 159) 157 (144, 171) 147 (135, 160) 122 (112, 133) 142 (130, 155) 0.002 
    IGFBP-3, ng/mL 2,854 (2,641, 3,084) 2,571 (2,399, 2,756) 2,871 (2,682, 3,073) 2,218 (2,072, 2,375) 2,641 (2,641, 3,041) <0.0001 
    IGFMR 0.19 (0.17, 0.20) 0.23 (0.21, 0.24) 0.19 (0.18, 0.20) 0.21 (0.19, 0.22) 0.19 (0.17, 0.20) 0.0006 
Males       
    No. subjects (% men) 98 (20) 98 (20) 98 (20) 99 (20) 97 (20)  
    Age, y 64.4 (62.7, 66.2) 65.1 (63.3, 66.9) 65.2 (63.4, 67.0) 65.2 (63.4, 67.0) 65.3 (63.5, 67.1) 0.96 
    Height, in. 68.9 (68.4, 69.4) 70.0 (69.5, 70.5) 66.2 (65.7, 66.8) 68.0 (67.4, 68.5) 69.3 (68.8, 69.8) <0.0001 
    Weight, lb. 197 (190, 203) 195 (189, 202) 156 (150, 163) 178 (172, 185) 188 (181, 194) <0.0001 
    BMI, kg/m2 29.1 (28.2, 30.0) 28.0 (27.1, 28.9) 25.1 (24.2, 26.0) 27.2 (26.3, 28.1) 27.5 (26.6, 28.4) <0.0001 
    IGF-I, ng/mL 190 (174, 207) 175 (160, 191) 177 (162, 193) 167 (153, 182) 180 (165, 197) 0.37 
    IGFBP-3, ng/mL 2,713 (2,531, 2,908) 2,375 (2,216, 2,546) 2,652 (2,474, 2,843) 2,481 (2,316, 2,659) 2,769 (2,582, 2,969) 0.01 
    IGFMR 0.26 (0.24, 0.28) 0.27 (0.26, 0.29) 0.25 (0.23, 0.27) 0.25 (0.23, 0.27) 0.24 (0.23, 0.26) 0.14 
Native HawaiianAfrican AmericanJapaneseLatinoWhiteP*
Females       
    No. subjects (% women) 77 (17) 96 (21) 100 (22) 99 (21) 93 (20)  
    Age, y 66.7 (65.1, 68.3) 67.6 (66.2, 69.1) 69.1 (67.7, 70.6) 67.5 (66.1, 69.0) 68.2 (66.8, 69.7) 0.23 
    Height, in. 63.8 (63.3, 64.3) 64.3 (63.8, 64.8) 60.6 (60.2, 61.1) 62.7 (62.2, 63.2) 64.5 (64.0, 65.0) <0.0001 
    Weight, lb. 166 (159, 173) 172 (166, 179) 125 (119, 132) 162 (155, 168) 155 (148, 161) <0.0001 
    BMI, kg/m2 28.7 (27.5, 29.9) 29.3 (28.3, 30.4) 24.0 (23.0, 25.1) 29.1 (28.0, 30.1) 26.2 (25.1, 27.3) <0.0001 
    IGF-I, ng/mL 144 (131, 159) 157 (144, 171) 147 (135, 160) 122 (112, 133) 142 (130, 155) 0.002 
    IGFBP-3, ng/mL 2,854 (2,641, 3,084) 2,571 (2,399, 2,756) 2,871 (2,682, 3,073) 2,218 (2,072, 2,375) 2,641 (2,641, 3,041) <0.0001 
    IGFMR 0.19 (0.17, 0.20) 0.23 (0.21, 0.24) 0.19 (0.18, 0.20) 0.21 (0.19, 0.22) 0.19 (0.17, 0.20) 0.0006 
Males       
    No. subjects (% men) 98 (20) 98 (20) 98 (20) 99 (20) 97 (20)  
    Age, y 64.4 (62.7, 66.2) 65.1 (63.3, 66.9) 65.2 (63.4, 67.0) 65.2 (63.4, 67.0) 65.3 (63.5, 67.1) 0.96 
    Height, in. 68.9 (68.4, 69.4) 70.0 (69.5, 70.5) 66.2 (65.7, 66.8) 68.0 (67.4, 68.5) 69.3 (68.8, 69.8) <0.0001 
    Weight, lb. 197 (190, 203) 195 (189, 202) 156 (150, 163) 178 (172, 185) 188 (181, 194) <0.0001 
    BMI, kg/m2 29.1 (28.2, 30.0) 28.0 (27.1, 28.9) 25.1 (24.2, 26.0) 27.2 (26.3, 28.1) 27.5 (26.6, 28.4) <0.0001 
    IGF-I, ng/mL 190 (174, 207) 175 (160, 191) 177 (162, 193) 167 (153, 182) 180 (165, 197) 0.37 
    IGFBP-3, ng/mL 2,713 (2,531, 2,908) 2,375 (2,216, 2,546) 2,652 (2,474, 2,843) 2,481 (2,316, 2,659) 2,769 (2,582, 2,969) 0.01 
    IGFMR 0.26 (0.24, 0.28) 0.27 (0.26, 0.29) 0.25 (0.23, 0.27) 0.25 (0.23, 0.27) 0.24 (0.23, 0.26) 0.14 
*

P for testing homogeneity of means across race/ethnicity derived from ANOVA and analysis of covariance models.

In a crude analysis, race/ethnicity, sex, age, and body size were significantly associated with plasma IGF-I levels. To begin, men had higher LS mean plasma IGF-I than women. The mean IGF-I (adjusted for race/ethnicity) for males was 177.6 ng/mL and the mean plasma IGF-I for females was 142.3 ng/mL (Pdiff < 0.0001). Adjustment for BMI did not significantly attenuate this result. The difference in IGFBP-3 across gender was in the opposite direction (women had higher LS mean IGFBP-3 than men), but this difference was not statistically significant. The race/ethnicity–adjusted and BMI-adjusted mean IGFBP-3 was 2,595 ng/mL for males and 2,671 for females (Pdiff = 0.22; data not shown). Race/ethnicity was a statistically significant predictor of IGF-I in women and IGFBP-3 in both sexes. The age-adjusted LS mean IGF-I levels (ng/mL) by race/ethnicity for females were 154.4 for African Americans, 148.5 for Japanese, 144.8 for Native Hawaiians, 143.8 for Whites, and 122.8 for Latinos (Pdiff African Americans to Latinos < 0.0001) and for males were 190.1 for Native Hawaiians, 180.4 for Whites, 180.0 for Japanese, 176.5 for African Americans, and 169.3 for Latinos (Pdiff Native Hawaiians to Latinos = 0.08 and Pdiff men to women < 0.0001; Table 2). In a race/ethnicity–adjusted model, both IGF-I and IGFBP-3 declined significantly with increasing age (IGF-I, Plinear trend men = 0.001 and Plinear trend women = 0.001; IGFBP-3, Plinear trend men < 0.0001 and Plinear trend women < 0.0001). Table 2 illustrates this finding and shows further that the decline in IGFBP-3 was somewhat stronger than the decline in IGF-I, contributing to a very slight but nonsignificant increase in IGFMR. No statistically significant interactions were found among race/ethnicity, age, BMI, and weight on their effects on IGF-I or IGFBP-3 in sex-stratified models. However, with both sexes combined, suggestions of interactions between race/ethnicity and BMI, race and age, and sex and age were evident and merit further investigation.

Table 2.

Age-adjusted and race/ethnicity–adjusted LS mean levels for IGF-I, IGFBP-3, and IGFMR by sex, race/ethnicity, age, height, BMI, parity, and lifestyle variables

Females
Males
VariableIGF-IIGFBP-3IGFMRVariableIGF-IIGFBP-3IGFMR
Race/ethnicity  Native Hawaiian 144.8 2,847 0.19  Native Hawaiian 190.1 2,709 0.26 
  African American 154.4 2,586 0.22  African American 176.5 2,379 0.28 
  Japanese 148.5 2,934 0.19  Japanese 180.0 2,678 0.25 
  Latino 122.8 2,234 0.20  Latino 169.3 2,520 0.25 
  White 143.8 2,836 0.19  White 180.4 2,794 0.24 
  P* 0.003 <0.0001 0.57  P* 0.48 0.011 0.10 
Age, y Q1 <61 150.4 2,956 0.19 Q1 <57 189.1 2,851 0.25 
 Q2 61–67 156.2 2,858 0.20 Q2 57–64 197.7 2,772 0.27 
 Q3 68–72 132.9 2,461 0.20 Q3 65–71 166.7 2,538 0.24 
 Q4 73+ 131.9 2,461 0.20 Q4 72+ 165.3 2,319 0.27 
  P 0.001 <0.0001 0.24  P 0.001 <0.0001 0.23 
Height, in. Q1 <61 136.0 2592 0.20 Q1 <66 159.3 2340 0.25 
 Q2 61–62 144.2 2747 0.20 Q2 66–67 171.3 2550 0.25 
 Q3 63–64 147.6 2693 0.20 Q3 68–69 176.2 2770 0.24 
 Q4 65+ 141.8 2663 0.20 Q4 70+ 195.8 2668 0.27 
  P 0.72 0.93 0.73  P 0.006 0.02 0.24 
BMI, kg/m2 Q1 <23 149.6 2,579 0.22 Q1 <24 192.7 2,711 0.26 
 Q2 23–25 155.1 2,928 0.20 Q2 24–26 180.9 2,613 0.26 
 Q3 26–29 144.2 2,792 0.19 Q3 27–28 177.9 2,639 0.25 
 Q4 30+ 126.8 2,477 0.19 Q4 29+ 168.9 2,524 0.25 
  P 0.03 0.31 0.06  P 0.10 0.36 0.27 
Parity  0–2 Children 146.2 2,731 0.20      
  3–4 Children 142.7 2,671 0.20      
  5+ Children 137.3 2,595 0.20      
  P* 0.53 0.57 0.95      
Physical activity, h/wk vigorous work  145.2 2,702 0.20  180.2 2,587 0.26 
  >0 134.7 2,596 0.19  >0 178.3 2,632 0.25 
  P* 0.13 0.33 0.49  P* 0.81 0.61 0.44 
Smoking  Never 144.3 2,635 0.20  Never 179.0 2,628 0.25 
  Past 135.5 2,689 0.19  Past 186.0 2,606 0.27 
  Current 151.1 2,799 0.20  Current 155.8 2,563 0.23 
  P* 0.20 0.40 0.18  P* 0.01 0.88 0.005 
Energy intake, kcal/d Q1 <1,333 136.2 2,578 0.20 Q1 <1,591 174.2 2,638 0.25 
 Q2 1,333–1,812 142.9 2,784 0.19 Q2 1,591–2,257 177.7 2,481 0.27 
 Q3 1,813–2,441 142.6 2,685 0.20 Q3 2,258–2,894 175.2 2,602 0.25 
 Q4 2,442+ 148.2 2,655 0.21 Q4 2895+ 189.7 2,729 0.26 
  P 0.22 0.92 0.17  P 0.09 0.11 0.62 
Alcohol intake density, g/1,000 kcal/d Q1 <0.00015 139.2 2,495 0.21 Q1 <0.0002 188.1 2,609 0.27 
 Q2 0.00015–0.00032 139.7 2,545 0.20 Q2 0.00021–0.0763 177.6 2,495 0.26 
 Q3 0.00033–0.0684 138.4 2,740 0.19 Q3 0.07631–0.5555 176.9 2,559 0.26 
 Q4 0.0685+ 152.2 2,907 0.20 Q4 0.5556+ 169.7 2,703 0.23 
  P0.34 0.0030.24  P0.36 0.33 0.02 
Total fat intake density, g/1,000 kcal/d Q1 <23 144.0 2,633 0.20 Q1 <29 185.4 2,876 0.24 
 Q2 23–27 139.8 2,653 0.20 Q2 29–34 183.1 2,601 0.26 
 Q3 28–38 142.5 2,721 0.20 Q3 35–39 178.4 2,461 0.27 
 Q4 39+ 143.3 2,622 0.20 Q4 40+ 170.3 2,528 0.25 
  P 0.73 0.80 0.61  P 0.15 0.001 0.18 
Saturated fat intake density, g/1,000 kcal/d Q1 <7 138.8 2,764 0.19 Q1 <8 184.2 2,877 0.24 
 Q2 7–9 146.4 2,654 0.21 Q2 8–9 181.1 2,589 0.26 
 Q3 10–11 143.7 2,748 0.19 Q3 10–11 176.9 2,560 0.26 
 Q4 12+ 138.7 2,572 0.20 Q4 12+ 175.3 2,480 0.26 
  P 0.53 0.16 0.75  P 0.23 0.01 0.25 
Fat from meat intake density, g/1,000 kcal/d Q1 <2.68 146.8 2,818 0.19 Q1 <3.58 183.9 2,734 0.25 
 Q2 2.68–4.59 140.5 2,645 0.20 Q2 2.58–5.88 188.0 2,611 0.27 
 Q3 4.60–6.92 141.1 2,601 0.20 Q3 5.89–8.12 178.6 2,626 0.25 
 Q4 6.93+ 141.6 2,643 0.20 Q4 8.13+ 167.1 2,485 0.25 
  P 0.43 0.06 0.37  P 0.001 0.003 0.28 
Total protein intake density, g/1,000 kcal/d Q1 <33 140.4 2,707 0.19 Q1 <33 169.9 2,692 0.23 
 Q2 33–36 145.4 2,687 0.20 Q2 33–36 202.7 2,759 0.27 
 Q3 37–40 146.0 2,661 0.20 Q3 37–40 175.6 2,557 0.26 
 Q4 41+ 139.3 2,651 0.20 Q4 41+ 173.2 2,473 0.26 
  P 0.69 0.98 0.57  P 0.60 0.05 0.23 
Total dairy intake density, g/1,000 kcal/d Q1 <51 138.9 2,664 0.19 Q1 <35 168.5 2,587 0.24 
 Q2 51–98 141.9 2,634 0.20 Q2 35–73 181.1 2,612 0.26 
 Q3 99–156 139.9 2,612 0.20 Q3 73–142 184.3 2,568 0.27 
 Q4 157+ 149.4 2,792 0.20 Q4 143+ 183.3 2,684 0.25 
  P 0.48 0.27 0.86  P 0.41 0.24 0.91 
Total milk intake density, g/1,000 kcal/d Q1 <19 138.0 2,623 0.20 Q1 <16 163.5 2,622 0.23 
 Q2 19–63 137.1 2,547 0.20 Q2 16–44 185.2 2,478 0.28 
 Q3 64–119 141.0 2,671 0.20 Q3 45–103 187.3 2,671 0.26 
 Q4 120+ 154.3 2,868 0.20 Q4 104+ 182.0 2,685 0.25 
  P 0.27 0.09 0.84  P 0.66 0.16 0.42 
Total low-fat milk intake density, g/1,000 kcal/d L1 140.4 2,674 0.19 L1 178.5 2,693 0.25 
 L2 1–15.5 137.7 2,684 0.19 L2 1–9.92 185.3 2,613 0.26 
 L3 15.54–48.74 143.4 2,610 0.20 L3 9.93–35.19 186.9 2,463 0.28 
 L4 48.75–98.12 146.5 2,621 0.21 L4 35.20–83.04 166.6 2,394 0.26 
 L5 98.13+ 151.9 2,793 0.20 L5 83.05+ 180.2 2,649 0.25 
  P 0.20 0.74 0.18  P 0.82 0.11 0.22 
Vitamin D intake density from food sources, g/1,000 kcal/d Q1 <38 139.0 2,636 0.20 Q1 <33 173.6 2,658 0.24 
 Q2 38–64 141.6 2,690 0.19 Q2 33–58 173.0 2,590 0.25 
 Q3 65–89 141.7 2,610 0.20 Q3 59–85 183.3 2,505 0.27 
 Q4 90+ 147.4 2,760 0.20 Q4 86+ 187.5 2,701 0.26 
  P 0.14 0.12 0.73  P 0.32 0.67 0.43 
Calcium intake density from food sources, g/1,000 kcal/d Q1 <308 139.7 2,642 0.20 Q1 <262 165.4 2,611 0.24 
 Q2 308–389 137.8 2,654 0.19 Q2 262–333 183.1 2,568 0.27 
 Q3 390–483 147.8 2,696 0.20 Q3 334–429 185.3 2,617 0.26 
 Q4 484+ 144.9 2,707 0.20 Q4 430+ 184.1 2,653 0.26 
  P 0.43 0.34 0.93  P 0.38 0.66 0.52 
Females
Males
VariableIGF-IIGFBP-3IGFMRVariableIGF-IIGFBP-3IGFMR
Race/ethnicity  Native Hawaiian 144.8 2,847 0.19  Native Hawaiian 190.1 2,709 0.26 
  African American 154.4 2,586 0.22  African American 176.5 2,379 0.28 
  Japanese 148.5 2,934 0.19  Japanese 180.0 2,678 0.25 
  Latino 122.8 2,234 0.20  Latino 169.3 2,520 0.25 
  White 143.8 2,836 0.19  White 180.4 2,794 0.24 
  P* 0.003 <0.0001 0.57  P* 0.48 0.011 0.10 
Age, y Q1 <61 150.4 2,956 0.19 Q1 <57 189.1 2,851 0.25 
 Q2 61–67 156.2 2,858 0.20 Q2 57–64 197.7 2,772 0.27 
 Q3 68–72 132.9 2,461 0.20 Q3 65–71 166.7 2,538 0.24 
 Q4 73+ 131.9 2,461 0.20 Q4 72+ 165.3 2,319 0.27 
  P 0.001 <0.0001 0.24  P 0.001 <0.0001 0.23 
Height, in. Q1 <61 136.0 2592 0.20 Q1 <66 159.3 2340 0.25 
 Q2 61–62 144.2 2747 0.20 Q2 66–67 171.3 2550 0.25 
 Q3 63–64 147.6 2693 0.20 Q3 68–69 176.2 2770 0.24 
 Q4 65+ 141.8 2663 0.20 Q4 70+ 195.8 2668 0.27 
  P 0.72 0.93 0.73  P 0.006 0.02 0.24 
BMI, kg/m2 Q1 <23 149.6 2,579 0.22 Q1 <24 192.7 2,711 0.26 
 Q2 23–25 155.1 2,928 0.20 Q2 24–26 180.9 2,613 0.26 
 Q3 26–29 144.2 2,792 0.19 Q3 27–28 177.9 2,639 0.25 
 Q4 30+ 126.8 2,477 0.19 Q4 29+ 168.9 2,524 0.25 
  P 0.03 0.31 0.06  P 0.10 0.36 0.27 
Parity  0–2 Children 146.2 2,731 0.20      
  3–4 Children 142.7 2,671 0.20      
  5+ Children 137.3 2,595 0.20      
  P* 0.53 0.57 0.95      
Physical activity, h/wk vigorous work  145.2 2,702 0.20  180.2 2,587 0.26 
  >0 134.7 2,596 0.19  >0 178.3 2,632 0.25 
  P* 0.13 0.33 0.49  P* 0.81 0.61 0.44 
Smoking  Never 144.3 2,635 0.20  Never 179.0 2,628 0.25 
  Past 135.5 2,689 0.19  Past 186.0 2,606 0.27 
  Current 151.1 2,799 0.20  Current 155.8 2,563 0.23 
  P* 0.20 0.40 0.18  P* 0.01 0.88 0.005 
Energy intake, kcal/d Q1 <1,333 136.2 2,578 0.20 Q1 <1,591 174.2 2,638 0.25 
 Q2 1,333–1,812 142.9 2,784 0.19 Q2 1,591–2,257 177.7 2,481 0.27 
 Q3 1,813–2,441 142.6 2,685 0.20 Q3 2,258–2,894 175.2 2,602 0.25 
 Q4 2,442+ 148.2 2,655 0.21 Q4 2895+ 189.7 2,729 0.26 
  P 0.22 0.92 0.17  P 0.09 0.11 0.62 
Alcohol intake density, g/1,000 kcal/d Q1 <0.00015 139.2 2,495 0.21 Q1 <0.0002 188.1 2,609 0.27 
 Q2 0.00015–0.00032 139.7 2,545 0.20 Q2 0.00021–0.0763 177.6 2,495 0.26 
 Q3 0.00033–0.0684 138.4 2,740 0.19 Q3 0.07631–0.5555 176.9 2,559 0.26 
 Q4 0.0685+ 152.2 2,907 0.20 Q4 0.5556+ 169.7 2,703 0.23 
  P0.34 0.0030.24  P0.36 0.33 0.02 
Total fat intake density, g/1,000 kcal/d Q1 <23 144.0 2,633 0.20 Q1 <29 185.4 2,876 0.24 
 Q2 23–27 139.8 2,653 0.20 Q2 29–34 183.1 2,601 0.26 
 Q3 28–38 142.5 2,721 0.20 Q3 35–39 178.4 2,461 0.27 
 Q4 39+ 143.3 2,622 0.20 Q4 40+ 170.3 2,528 0.25 
  P 0.73 0.80 0.61  P 0.15 0.001 0.18 
Saturated fat intake density, g/1,000 kcal/d Q1 <7 138.8 2,764 0.19 Q1 <8 184.2 2,877 0.24 
 Q2 7–9 146.4 2,654 0.21 Q2 8–9 181.1 2,589 0.26 
 Q3 10–11 143.7 2,748 0.19 Q3 10–11 176.9 2,560 0.26 
 Q4 12+ 138.7 2,572 0.20 Q4 12+ 175.3 2,480 0.26 
  P 0.53 0.16 0.75  P 0.23 0.01 0.25 
Fat from meat intake density, g/1,000 kcal/d Q1 <2.68 146.8 2,818 0.19 Q1 <3.58 183.9 2,734 0.25 
 Q2 2.68–4.59 140.5 2,645 0.20 Q2 2.58–5.88 188.0 2,611 0.27 
 Q3 4.60–6.92 141.1 2,601 0.20 Q3 5.89–8.12 178.6 2,626 0.25 
 Q4 6.93+ 141.6 2,643 0.20 Q4 8.13+ 167.1 2,485 0.25 
  P 0.43 0.06 0.37  P 0.001 0.003 0.28 
Total protein intake density, g/1,000 kcal/d Q1 <33 140.4 2,707 0.19 Q1 <33 169.9 2,692 0.23 
 Q2 33–36 145.4 2,687 0.20 Q2 33–36 202.7 2,759 0.27 
 Q3 37–40 146.0 2,661 0.20 Q3 37–40 175.6 2,557 0.26 
 Q4 41+ 139.3 2,651 0.20 Q4 41+ 173.2 2,473 0.26 
  P 0.69 0.98 0.57  P 0.60 0.05 0.23 
Total dairy intake density, g/1,000 kcal/d Q1 <51 138.9 2,664 0.19 Q1 <35 168.5 2,587 0.24 
 Q2 51–98 141.9 2,634 0.20 Q2 35–73 181.1 2,612 0.26 
 Q3 99–156 139.9 2,612 0.20 Q3 73–142 184.3 2,568 0.27 
 Q4 157+ 149.4 2,792 0.20 Q4 143+ 183.3 2,684 0.25 
  P 0.48 0.27 0.86  P 0.41 0.24 0.91 
Total milk intake density, g/1,000 kcal/d Q1 <19 138.0 2,623 0.20 Q1 <16 163.5 2,622 0.23 
 Q2 19–63 137.1 2,547 0.20 Q2 16–44 185.2 2,478 0.28 
 Q3 64–119 141.0 2,671 0.20 Q3 45–103 187.3 2,671 0.26 
 Q4 120+ 154.3 2,868 0.20 Q4 104+ 182.0 2,685 0.25 
  P 0.27 0.09 0.84  P 0.66 0.16 0.42 
Total low-fat milk intake density, g/1,000 kcal/d L1 140.4 2,674 0.19 L1 178.5 2,693 0.25 
 L2 1–15.5 137.7 2,684 0.19 L2 1–9.92 185.3 2,613 0.26 
 L3 15.54–48.74 143.4 2,610 0.20 L3 9.93–35.19 186.9 2,463 0.28 
 L4 48.75–98.12 146.5 2,621 0.21 L4 35.20–83.04 166.6 2,394 0.26 
 L5 98.13+ 151.9 2,793 0.20 L5 83.05+ 180.2 2,649 0.25 
  P 0.20 0.74 0.18  P 0.82 0.11 0.22 
Vitamin D intake density from food sources, g/1,000 kcal/d Q1 <38 139.0 2,636 0.20 Q1 <33 173.6 2,658 0.24 
 Q2 38–64 141.6 2,690 0.19 Q2 33–58 173.0 2,590 0.25 
 Q3 65–89 141.7 2,610 0.20 Q3 59–85 183.3 2,505 0.27 
 Q4 90+ 147.4 2,760 0.20 Q4 86+ 187.5 2,701 0.26 
  P 0.14 0.12 0.73  P 0.32 0.67 0.43 
Calcium intake density from food sources, g/1,000 kcal/d Q1 <308 139.7 2,642 0.20 Q1 <262 165.4 2,611 0.24 
 Q2 308–389 137.8 2,654 0.19 Q2 262–333 183.1 2,568 0.27 
 Q3 390–483 147.8 2,696 0.20 Q3 334–429 185.3 2,617 0.26 
 Q4 484+ 144.9 2,707 0.20 Q4 430+ 184.1 2,653 0.26 
  P 0.43 0.34 0.93  P 0.38 0.66 0.52 

NOTE: The means presented are LS means of natural log-transformed hormone levels exponentiated back to physiologic levels.

*

P for homogeneity, categorical variable.

P for trend, continuous variable.

We observed that (see Table 2) plasma IGF-I and IGFBP-3 increased with height in men (IGF-I, Plinear trend men = 0.002; IGFBP-3, Plinear trend men = 0.003). In women, we observed that those with very high body weight and/or BMI (>29 kg/m2 in women) had depressed IGF-I and IGFBP-3 levels. In women, increasing parity was nonsignificantly associated with declines in both IGF-related protein levels. No clear statistically significant relationship could be seen between these proteins and physical activity or smoking. Of the diet variables, total fat and saturated fat intakes were significantly inversely associated with IGFBP-3 in men but not in women; they were not associated with IGF-I in either sex. We further analyzed total fat by investigating the food sources of fat, including fat from meat, fat from poultry, and fat from dairy. The nonsignificant decrease in IGF-I in men seen with increasing intake of total fat and saturated fat becomes significant when looking at fat intake from meat sources (IGF-I, Plinear trend men = 0.001), whereas the trends in women remain nonsignificant. Alcohol intake (measured by quartile of alcohol intake density in g/1,000 kcal/d) was directly associated with IGFBP-3 in women and inversely with IGFMR in men.

The results of a sex-stratified multiple regression of IGF-I, IGFBP-3, and IGFMR on race/ethnicity, age, height, weight, BMI, parity, age at menarche, age at menopause, physical activity, smoking, and dietary variables indicated that age, race/ethnicity, and BMI were statistically significantly associated with IGF-I and IGFBP-3 among women (Table 3). In addition, alcohol was directly associated with IGFBP-3 in this group. The R2 for the overall model in women was 0.08 for IGF-I and 0.16 for IGFBP-3. Race and BMI only were statistically significantly associated with IGFMR in women.

Table 3.

Multiple regression of IGF-I and IGFBP-3 on variables selected among race/ethnicity, age, parity, age at menarche, age at natural menopause, smoking, weight, height, BMI, physical activity, and dietary variables using Mallow's Cp selection and R2 selection

Females
Males
VariableRegression coefficientPR2VariableRegression coefficientPR2
IGF-I, ng/mL Age, y  −0.0105 0.0002  Age, y  −0.0088 <0.0001  
 Race/ethnicity AA 0.1271 0.048  Race/ethnicity AA 0.0145 0.821  
  −0.1237 0.050   −0.0267 0.673  
  0.0241 0.700   0.0637 0.344  
  0.0483 0.474   0.0623 0.320  
 BMI, kg/m2 Q2 0.0352 0.553  Height, in.  0.0201 0.007  
  Q3 −0.0321 0.583  Fat from meat, g/1,000 kcal/d  −0.0182 0.002  
  Q4 −0.1571 0.009  Smoking, current (vs never + past)  −0.1597 0.004  
     0.08     0.08 
IGFBP-3, ng/mL Age, y  −0.0119 <0.0001  Age, y  −0.0104 <0.0001  
 Race/ethnicity AA −0.0329 0.515  Race/ethnicity AA −0.1541 0.002  
  −0.1916 0.0001   −0.0723 0.146  
  0.0809 0.105   −0.0105 0.843  
  0.0472 0.370   −0.0194 0.692  
 BMI, kg/m2 Q2 0.1543 0.001  Height, in.  0.0123 0.035  
  Q3 0.0941 0.040  Fat from meat, g/1,000 kcal/d  −0.0143 0.002  
  Q4 −0.0091 0.846  Low-fat milk, g/1,000 kcal/d  −0.0661 0.037  
 Alcohol  0.0530 0.0003       
     0.18     0.12 
IGFMR Race/ethnicity AA 0.2057 0.0001  Race/ethnicity AA 0.1339 0.013  
  0.1185 0.0229   0.0302 0.563  
  −0.0039 0.940   0.0310 0.557  
  0.0373 0.501   0.0691 0.1863  
 BMI, kg/m2 Q2 −0.0910 0.064  Smoking, current (vs never + past)  −0.1394 0.002  
  Q3 −0.1177 0.015  Alcohol  −0.0391 0.009  
  Q4 −0.1411 0.004       
     0.05     0.04 
Females
Males
VariableRegression coefficientPR2VariableRegression coefficientPR2
IGF-I, ng/mL Age, y  −0.0105 0.0002  Age, y  −0.0088 <0.0001  
 Race/ethnicity AA 0.1271 0.048  Race/ethnicity AA 0.0145 0.821  
  −0.1237 0.050   −0.0267 0.673  
  0.0241 0.700   0.0637 0.344  
  0.0483 0.474   0.0623 0.320  
 BMI, kg/m2 Q2 0.0352 0.553  Height, in.  0.0201 0.007  
  Q3 −0.0321 0.583  Fat from meat, g/1,000 kcal/d  −0.0182 0.002  
  Q4 −0.1571 0.009  Smoking, current (vs never + past)  −0.1597 0.004  
     0.08     0.08 
IGFBP-3, ng/mL Age, y  −0.0119 <0.0001  Age, y  −0.0104 <0.0001  
 Race/ethnicity AA −0.0329 0.515  Race/ethnicity AA −0.1541 0.002  
  −0.1916 0.0001   −0.0723 0.146  
  0.0809 0.105   −0.0105 0.843  
  0.0472 0.370   −0.0194 0.692  
 BMI, kg/m2 Q2 0.1543 0.001  Height, in.  0.0123 0.035  
  Q3 0.0941 0.040  Fat from meat, g/1,000 kcal/d  −0.0143 0.002  
  Q4 −0.0091 0.846  Low-fat milk, g/1,000 kcal/d  −0.0661 0.037  
 Alcohol  0.0530 0.0003       
     0.18     0.12 
IGFMR Race/ethnicity AA 0.2057 0.0001  Race/ethnicity AA 0.1339 0.013  
  0.1185 0.0229   0.0302 0.563  
  −0.0039 0.940   0.0310 0.557  
  0.0373 0.501   0.0691 0.1863  
 BMI, kg/m2 Q2 −0.0910 0.064  Smoking, current (vs never + past)  −0.1394 0.002  
  Q3 −0.1177 0.015  Alcohol  −0.0391 0.009  
  Q4 −0.1411 0.004       
     0.05     0.04 

NOTE: Whites are reference group. Abbreviations for race/ethnicity: AA, African American; J, Japanese; H, Native Hawaiian; L, Latino; W, White.

In men, age, height, fat from meat, and current smoking were significantly associated with IGF-I level; however, race/ethnicity was not (overall R2 = 0.08; Table 3). For consistency, we added race to this model. Male plasma IGFBP-3 levels were significantly associated with race/ethnicity, age, height, fat from meat, and low-fat milk intake (R2 = 0.12). Race/ethnicity, smoking, and alcohol were significantly associated with IGFMR in men.

We saw some evidence of correlation between LS mean IGF-I levels and colon cancer incidence rates within the MEC by race/ethnicity in both sexes (see Table 4). For example, the African American women have the highest LS mean IGF-I level (160 ng/mL) and the highest colon cancer rate (139 cases per 100,000). White and Latino women rest at the low end of both measures. No other cancer incidence comparison across races/ethnicities seemed to have any clear relationship in this crude analysis.

Table 4.

Mean plasma protein levels from 955 Hawaii-Los Angeles MEC controls and age-adjusted incidence rates in the MEC through 1999 by race/ethnicity

Females
Males
IGF-I*IGFBP-3*Colon cancerBreast cancerIGF-I*IGFBP-3*Colon cancerProstate cancer
AA 160 2,951 AA 139 556 178 2,723 221 AA 1,124 
148 2,897 138 399 176 2,717 198 459 
145 2,768 119 360 AA 167 2,649 AA 192 443 
141 AA 2,616 79 AA 332 165 2,518 129 402 
126 2,254 77 246 162 AA 2,291 115 314 
Females
Males
IGF-I*IGFBP-3*Colon cancerBreast cancerIGF-I*IGFBP-3*Colon cancerProstate cancer
AA 160 2,951 AA 139 556 178 2,723 221 AA 1,124 
148 2,897 138 399 176 2,717 198 459 
145 2,768 119 360 AA 167 2,649 AA 192 443 
141 AA 2,616 79 AA 332 165 2,518 129 402 
126 2,254 77 246 162 AA 2,291 115 314 

NOTE: Abbreviations: H, Native Hawaiian; J, Japanese; W, White; AA, African American; L, Latino.

*

Protein concentrations are adjusted for covariates found to be significant in multivariate model (see Table 3) LS mean levels in ng/mL.

Cancer incidence rates are truncated to ages 50–74 years per 100,000 and age-adjusted to the U.S. 1970 standard population.

Our results confirmed the existence of statistically significant associations between plasma IGF-I and IGFBP-3 levels with race/ethnicity, sex, age, and body size. We also found an inverse association of IGF-I and IGFBP-3 levels with fat intake in men, possibly driven by fat intake from meat sources, and a direct association between IGFP-3 levels and alcohol in women. In addition, we observed associations between current smoking and low IGF-I levels and between low-fat milk intake and low IGFBP-3 levels in men. Finally, we found ecological evidence supporting an association between IGF-I and colorectal but not breast or prostate cancer. Overall, our models have explained only a small fraction of the variance in hormone levels.

Several factors have been investigated as potential determinants of the IGF-related proteins. The extensive epidemiologic literature on the determinants of IGF-I and IGFBP-3 has been reviewed recently (24, 25). Dietary findings have pointed to associations between improved nutritional status and increasing circulating IGF-I and IGFBP-3 levels, the exact drivers of these associations remain elusive possibly due to difficulty in deciphering independent effects among highly correlated and inexactly measured covariates. In this analysis, our primary aims were to test in our multiethnic population the reproducibility of our previous racial/ethnic finding and to investigate the cross-sectional relationship between plasma IGF-I and IGFBP-3 with various lifestyle and dietary factors, which had been previously implicated in determining circulating levels of these proteins.

After adjustment for possible confounders, IGF-I and IGFBP-3 levels varied significantly by racial/ethnic group among women in our data. Among men, IGFBP-3 differed strongly across racial/ethnic groups, but IGF-I did not. In a previous article, we reported that race/ethnicity was independently associated with plasma IGF-I levels in women (15). We confirmed that circulating IGF-I levels in postmenopausal women were significantly lower in Latino women compared with African American, Native Hawaiian, and Japanese women. Few past studies had sufficient power to test for differences in IGF levels across race/ethnicity. However, several studies have suggested that Latino neonates, girls, and premenopausal women have lower IGF-I compared with Whites or African Americans (26-28). In contrast to our finding in women of a higher mean IGF-I level for African Americans compared with Whites, Chang et al. (29) have reported no statistically significant difference in mean serum IGF-I between age-matched and weight-matched postmenopausal African American and White women. Chang et al. (29) reported no statistically significant difference in age-adjusted median IGF-I levels in middle-aged Caucasian, Asian, and African American men (224, 208, and 205 ng/mL, respectively; Pdiff = 0.08) but found a statistically significant difference in IGFBP-3 levels across races (3,868, 3,926, and 3,373 ng/mL, respectively; Pdiff = 0.01). These higher IGFBP-3 levels in White men compared with African American men agree with our findings, and the cause of this variation across racial/ethnic groups clearly warrants further investigation as it may shed light on the relationships between IGF proteins and disease incidence.

Our findings were also consistent with the reported relationships of these IGF-related proteins with sex and age. In our data, women had statistically significantly lower plasma IGF-I and higher IGFBP-3 than men independent of race, age, and BMI. IGF-I and IGFBP-3 declined linearly (log-linearly) with age. These findings agree with previous reports (18, 19, 23, 29). In contrast, the association between these proteins and body size seemed to be complex. In our data, IGF-I and IGFBP-3 seemed to have sex-specific relationships with body size. IGF-I seemed to have a direct correlation with BMI in women until some critical BMI point at which IGF-I began to decline, a nonlinear relationship that Lukanova et al. also described in a Swedish cohort (30). However, unlike in the MEC, this pattern was also observed in males in this Swedish cohort. In addition, we found that height is better correlated with IGF-I and IGFBP-3 than BMI in men. The literature on this topic is not consistent possibly because of this nonlinear, sex-dependent relationship (20, 30, 31). Differences in body fat distribution, which may be driven in large part by genetics (32-34), may contribute to differences in hormonal regulation of the IGF system. Further investigation of these relationships may clarify regulatory pathways for IGF and eventually explain inconsistencies in IGF-cancer incidence relationships.

Potential lifestyle determinants of IGF-I and IGFBP-3 include physical activity, smoking, and alcohol, calorie, fat, and protein intakes (24, 35). Among women in our data, the only association found with diet was an inverse one between alcohol and IGFBP-3. In the Rancho Bernardo Study, IGF-I showed a relationship in the opposite direction with alcohol intake among women (18). In men, we found other associations in our data. Fat intake from meat sources and current smoking seemed to be inversely associated with IGF-I levels. Fat intake from meat sources and low-fat milk were also inversely associated with IGFBP-3. In contrast, in a cohort of U.S. men, Ma et al. (36) found a direct association between low-fat milk intake and both IGF-I and IGFBP-3 levels and no association with red meat intake. Thus, the data on diet and IGF proteins are inconsistent. The relationship between smoking and IGF levels is also not clear. In five studies that addressed smoking and IGF-I, two found a positive association, one found an inverse association, as we did in women, and two found no association. The study that addressed smoking and IGFBP-3 reported an inverse association between current smoking and IGFBP-3 levels (24).

The main result from this study was that, overall, our models did not explain much of the variance in plasma IGF-I or IGFBP-3 as indicated by the low R2 values. Previous investigators have reported similarly low R2 values (29), which may be indicative of an as yet ill-defined set of IGF-I and IGFBP-3 determinants. Either we have poorly measured or analyzed the relevant covariates or we have failed to identify the true determinants. Measurement error may have attenuated the relationships under study, although most of the variables measured in the MEC that we included in this analysis have been valid in previous studies (16, 37). Another potential explanation for the low explanatory value of our models is that IGF-I and IGFBP-3 levels are largely driven by factors we have not measured in this study, such as genetic factors. Harrela et al. (38) reported that the proportions of variance in IGF-I and IGFBP-3 attributable to genetic effects were 38% and 60%, respectively. The genetic contribution to interindividual variation in circulating IGF-I and IGFBP-3 levels merits further study. A genetic marker has not yet been confirmed, but inherited variants in the growth hormone gene (39), IGF-I (15, 40), and the gene for IGFBP-3 (41) have been studied for possible association with adult IGF hormone levels.

A potential limitation of our study is that it relied on a single measurement of IGF-I and IGFBP-3 to represent long-term circulating levels. Although many studies have shown measurable interindividual variation in IGF-I and IGFBP-3 (42-45), data from the Rancho Bernardo Study suggest that the intraindividual variation in IGF-I is minimal (45) and that a single measurement may be adequate. It is also possible that adult levels of these peptides are, at least partially, determined early in life. Our finding of an association with height in men suggests that factors (possibly nutritional) during adolescence may have long-lasting effect on IGF-I hormone levels.

If differences in IGF-I and IGFBP-3 levels are related to the risk of breast, prostate, and colon cancers, as has been hypothesized, then one might expect mean levels of these proteins to correlate with racial/ethnic–specific cancer incidence rates in the MEC. The correlation between IGF-I levels and colon cancer incidence rates across racial/ethnic groups shown here provided support for this hypothesis. The cross-sectional nature of the data precluded our drawing conclusions about causation; however, we plan to use future analyses to follow up on these findings. In future work investigating the IGF system and cancer, it will be of value to use the blood samples that are being prospectively collected from the MEC to carry out nested case-control studies.

It is unclear whether the risk factors found here to be associated with IGF-I and IGFBP-3 have confounded previous association studies, leading to the inconsistency in the epidemiologic data on circulating levels of these proteins and cancer risk. However, it would be prudent to adjust for these factors in ongoing and future studies. Because of the relatively weak differences in IGF-I and IGFBP-3 across racial/ethnic groups, it seems unlikely that the identified determinants of these proteins would be a major source of population stratification in studies with significant admixture. However, we intend to further explore racial/ethnic differences in the determinants of IGF-I and IGFBP-3 levels in the MEC as additional data become available.

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.

We thank Jennifer Yamamoto for help with data analysis.

1
Baxter RC, Binoux MA, Clemmons DR, et al. Recommendations for nomenclature of the insulin-like growth factor binding protein superfamily.
J Clin Endocrinol Metab
1998
;
83
:
3213
.
2
Stewart CE, Rotwein P. Growth, differentiation, and survival: multiple physiological functions for insulin-like growth factors.
Physiol Rev
1996
;
76
:
1005
–26.
3
Cohen P, Clemmons DR, Rosenfeld RG. Does the GH-IGF axis play a role in cancer pathogenesis?
Growth Horm IGF Res
2000
;
10
:
297
–305.
4
Monzavi R, Cohen P. IGFs and IGFBPs: role in health and disease.
Best Pract Res Clin Endocrinol Metab
2002
;
16
:
433
–47.
5
Macaulay VM, Miller JL, Smith IE. Insulin-like growth factors and cancer.
Br J Cancer
1992
;
65
:
388
–92.
6
Baxter RC. Insulin-like growth factor (IGF)-binding proteins: interactions with IGFs and intrinsic bioactivities.
Am J Physiol Endocrinol Metab
2000
;
278
:
E967
–76.
7
Ma J, Pollak MN, Giovannucci E, et al. Prospective study of colorectal cancer risk in men and plasma levels of insulin-like growth factor (IGF)-I and IGF-binding protein-3 [see comments].
J Natl Cancer Inst
1999
;
91
:
620
–5.
8
Giovannucci E, Pollak MN, Platz EA, et al. A prospective study of plasma insulin-like growth factor-1 and binding protein-3 and risk of colorectal neoplasia in women.
Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev
2000
;
9
:
345
–9.
9
Chan JM, Stampfer MJ, Giovannucci E, et al. Plasma insulin-like growth factor-I and prostate cancer risk: a prospective study [see comments].
Science
1998
;
279
:
563
–6.
10
Hankinson SE, Willett WC, Colditz GA, et al. Circulating concentrations of insulin-like growth factor-I and risk of breast cancer [see comment].
Lancet
1998
;
351
:
1393
–6.
11
Jernstrom H, Barrett-Connor E. Obesity, weight change, fasting insulin, proinsulin, C-peptide, and insulin-like growth factor-1 levels in women with and without breast cancer: the Rancho Bernardo Study.
J Womens Health Gend Based Med
1999
;
8
:
1265
–72.
12
Kurek R, Tunn UW, Eckart O, Aumuller G, Wong J, Renneberg H. The significance of serum levels of insulin-like growth factor-I in patients with prostate cancer.
BJU Int
2000
;
85
:
125
–9.
13
Serel TA, Kecelioglu M. Serum insulin-like growth factor is not a useful marker of prostate cancer [comment].
BJU Int
2000
;
85
:
559
–60.
14
Kaaks R, Toniolo P, Akhmedkhanov A, et al. Serum C-peptide, insulin-like growth factor (IGF)-I, IGF-binding proteins, and colorectal cancer risk in women.
J Natl Cancer Inst
2000
;
92
:
1592
–600.
15
DeLellis K, Ingles S, Kolonel L, et al. IGF1 genotype, mean plasma level and breast cancer risk in the Hawaii/Los Angeles Multiethnic Cohort.
Br J Cancer
2003
;
88
:
277
–82.
16
Kolonel LN, Henderson BE, Hankin JH, et al. A multiethnic cohort in Hawaii and Los Angeles: baseline characteristics.
Am J Epidemiol
2000
;
151
:
346
–57.
17
Willett W. Nutritional epidemiology. Monographs in epidemiology and biostatistics. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 1998.
18
Barrett-Connor E, Goodman-Gruen D. Gender differences in insulin-like growth factor and bone mineral density association in old age: the Rancho Bernardo Study.
J Bone Miner Res
1998
;
13
:
1343
–9.
19
Goodman-Gruen D, Barrett-Connor E. Epidemiology of insulin-like growth factor-I in elderly men and women. The Rancho Bernardo Study [see comment].
Am J Epidemiol
1997
;
145
:
970
–6. Erratum in: Am J Epidemiol 1997 Aug 15;146:357.
20
Holmes MD, Pollak MN, Hankinson SE. Lifestyle correlates of plasma insulin-like growth factor I and insulin-like growth factor binding protein 3 concentrations.
Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev
2002
;
11
:
862
–7.
21
Holmes MD, Pollak MN, Willett WC, Hankinson SE. Dietary correlates of plasma insulin-like growth factor I and insulin-like growth factor binding protein 3 concentrations.
Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev
2002
;
11
:
852
–61.
22
Lukanova A, Toniolo P, Akhmedkhanov A, et al. A cross-sectional study of IGF-I determinants in women.
Eur J Cancer Prev
2001
;
10
:
443
–52.
23
Probst-Hensch NM, Wang H, Goh VH, Seow A, Lee HP, Yu MC. Determinants of circulating insulin-like growth factor I and insulin-like growth factor binding protein 3 concentrations in a cohort of Singapore men and women.
Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev
2003
;
12
:
739
–46.
24
Yu H, Rohan T. Role of the insulin-like growth factor family in cancer development and progression [see comment].
J Natl Cancer Inst
2000
;
92
:
1472
–89.
25
Thissen JP, Ketelslegers JM, Underwood LE. Nutritional regulation of the insulin-like growth factors.
Endocr Rev
1994
;
15
:
80
–101.
26
Girgis R, Abrams SA, Castracane VD, Gunn SK, Ellis KJ, Copeland KC. Ethnic differences in androgens, IGF-I and body fat in healthy prepubertal girls.
J Pediatr Endocrinol Metab
2000
;
13
:
497
–503.
27
Shibata A, Harris DT, Billings PR. Concentrations of estrogens and IGFs in umbilical cord blood plasma: a comparison among Caucasian, Hispanic, and Asian-American females.
J Clin Endocrinol Metab
2002
;
87
:
810
–5.
28
Vadgama JV, Wu Y, Datta G, Khan H, Chillar R. Plasma insulin-like growth factor-I and serum IGF-binding protein 3 can be associated with the progression of breast cancer, and predict the risk of recurrence and the probability of survival in African-American and Hispanic women.
Oncology
1999
;
57
:
330
–40.
29
Chang S, Wu X, Yu H, Spitz MR. Plasma concentrations of insulin-like growth factors among healthy adult men and postmenopausal women: associations with body composition, lifestyle, and reproductive factors.
Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev
2002
;
11
:
758
–66.
30
Lukanova A, Soderberg S, Stattin P, et al. Nonlinear relationship of insulin-like growth factor (IGF)-I and IGF-I/IGF-binding protein-3 ratio with indices of adiposity and plasma insulin concentrations (Sweden).
Cancer Causes Control
2002
;
13
:
509
–16.
31
Landin-Wilhelmsen K, Wilhelmsen L, Lappas G, et al. Serum insulin-like growth factor I in a random population sample of men and women: relation to age, sex, smoking habits, coffee consumption and physical activity, blood pressure and concentrations of plasma lipids, fibrinogen, parathyroid hormone and osteocalcin.
Clin Endocrinol (Oxf)
1994
;
41
:
351
–7.
32
Menzaghi C, Ercolino T, Di Paola R, et al. A haplotype at the adiponectin locus is associated with obesity and other features of the insulin resistance syndrome.
Diabetes
2002
;
51
:
2306
–12.
33
Hill JO, Melanson EL. Overview of the determinants of overweight and obesity: current evidence and research issues.
Med Sci Sports Exerc
1999
;
31
:
S515
–21.
34
Hill JO, Wyatt HR, Melanson EL. Genetic and environmental contributions to obesity.
Med Clin North Am
2000
;
84
:
333
–46.
35
Thissen JP, Pucilowska JB, Underwood LE. Differential regulation of insulin-like growth factor I (IGF-I) and IGF binding protein-1 messenger ribonucleic acids by amino acid availability and growth hormone in rat hepatocyte primary culture.
Endocrinology
1994
;
134
:
1570
–6.
36
Ma J, Giovannucci E, Pollak M, et al. Milk intake, circulating levels of insulin-like growth factor-I, and risk of colorectal cancer in men.
J Natl Cancer Inst
2001
;
93
:
1330
–6.
37
Stram DO, Hankin JH, Wilkens LR, et al. Calibration of the dietary questionnaire for a multiethnic cohort in Hawaii and Los Angeles.
Am J Epidemiol
2000
;
151
:
358
–70.
38
Harrela M, Koistinen H, Kaprio J, et al. Genetic and environmental components of interindividual variation in circulating levels of IGF-I, IGF-II, IGFBP-1, and IGFBP-3.
J Clin Invest
1996
;
98
:
2612
–5.
39
Le Marchand L, Donlon T, Seifried A, Kaaks R, Rinaldi S, Wilkens LR. Association of a common polymorphism in the human GH1 gene with colorectal neoplasia.
J Natl Cancer Inst
2002
;
94
:
454
–60.
40
Rosen CJ, Kurland ES, Vereault D, et al. Association between serum insulin growth factor-I (IGF-I) and a simple sequence repeat in IGF-I gene: implications for genetic studies of bone mineral density.
J Clin Endocrinol Metab
1998
;
83
:
2286
–90.
41
Deal C, Ma J, Wilkin F, et al. Novel promoter polymorphism in insulin-like growth factor-binding protein-3: correlation with serum levels and interaction with known regulators.
J Clin Endocrinol Metab
2001
;
86
:
1274
–80.
42
Juul A, Bang P, Hertel NT, et al. Serum insulin-like growth factor-I in 1030 healthy children, adolescents, and adults: relation to age, sex, stage of puberty, testicular size, and body mass index.
J Clin Endocrinol Metab
1994
;
78
:
744
–52.
43
Juul A, Main K, Blum WF, Lindholm J, Ranke MB, Skakkebaek NE. The ratio between serum levels of insulin-like growth factor (IGF)-I and the IGF binding proteins (IGFBP-1, 2 and 3) decreases with age in healthy adults and is increased in acromegalic patients.
Clin Endocrinol (Oxf)
1994
;
41
:
85
–93.
44
Jernstrom H, Deal C, Wilkin F, et al. Genetic and nongenetic factors associated with variation of plasma levels of insulin-like growth factor-I and insulin-like growth factor-binding protein-3 in healthy premenopausal women.
Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev
2001
;
10
:
377
–84.
45
Goodman-Gruen D, Barrett-Connor E. Epidemiology of insulin-like growth factor-I in elderly men and women.
Am J Clin Epidemiol
1997
;
145
:
970
–6.