Characteristics of responders to a request for a buccal cell specimen among survivors of childhood cancer and their siblings

Pediatric Blood and Cancer

Volumn 55, Issue 1, 2010, Pages 165-170

  Ness, Kirsten K ^a   Li, Chenghong ^a   Mitby, Pauline A ^b   Radloff, Gretchen A ^c   Mertens, Ann C ^d   Davies, Stella M ^c   Hammond, Sue ^e   Armstrong, Gregory T ^a   Robison, Leslie L ^a  

^a ST JUDE CHILDREN S RESEARCH HOSPITAL   (United States)

^b CHILDREN S HOSPITALS AND CLINICS OF MINNESOTA   (United States)

^c CINCINNATI CHILDREN'S HOSPITAL MEDICAL CENTER   (United States)

^d EMORY UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF MEDICINE   (United States)

^e THE OHIO STATE UNIVERSITY COLLEGE OF MEDICINE   (United States)

Author keywords

Buccal mucosa; Cohort study; DNA; Neoplasm; Pediatric

Indexed keywords

ALKYLATING AGENT; ANTHRACYCLINE; EPIPODOPHYLLOTOXIN;

ADOLESCENT; ADULT; ARTICLE; BLOOD SAMPLING; BONE CANCER; CANCER SURVIVOR; CENTRAL NERVOUS SYSTEM TUMOR; CHEEK MUCOSA; CHILD; CHILDHOOD CANCER; CIGARETTE SMOKING; EDUCATIONAL STATUS; ETHNIC DIFFERENCE; FEMALE; HEALTH CARE SYSTEM; HODGKIN DISEASE; HUMAN; HUMAN CELL; INFANT; LEUKEMIA; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MALE; NEPHROBLASTOMA; NEUROBLASTOMA; NONHODGKIN LYMPHOMA; PRESCHOOL CHILD; PRIORITY JOURNAL; SCHOOL CHILD; SECOND CANCER; SEX DIFFERENCE; SIBLING; SOFT TISSUE SARCOMA;

CHILD; CHILD, PRESCHOOL; COHORT STUDIES; FEMALE; HUMANS; INFANT; INFANT, NEWBORN; MALE; MOUTH MUCOSA; MULTICENTER STUDIES AS TOPIC; NEOPLASMS; PREDICTIVE VALUE OF TESTS; SIBLINGS; SPECIMEN HANDLING; SURVIVORS;

EID: 77953233817     PISSN: 15455009     EISSN: 15455017     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/pbc.22513     Document Type: Article

References (16)

1. Calle EE, Rodriguez C, Jacobs EJ, et al. The American Cancer Society Cancer Prevention Study II Nutrition Cohort: Rationale, study design, and baseline characteristics. Cancer 2002;94:2490-2501. (Pubitemid 34457132)
2. Hansen TV, Simonsen MK, Nielsen FC, et al. Collection of blood, saliva, and buccal cell samples in a pilot study on the Danish nurse cohort: Comparison of the response rate and quality of genomic DNA. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 2007;16:2072-2076.
3. Harty LC, Shields PG, Winn DM, et al. Self-collection of oral epithelial cell DNA under instruction from epidemiologic interviewers. Am J Epidemiol 2000;151:199-205.
4. Zheng S, Ma X, Buffler PA, et al. Whole genome amplification increases the efficiency and validity of buccal cell genotyping in pediatric populations. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 2001;10:697-700. (Pubitemid 32703205)
5. Hayes RB, Sigurdson A, Moore L, et al. Methods for etiologic and early marker investigations in the PLCO trial. Mutat Res 2005;592:147-154.
6. Oeffinger KC, Mertens AC, Sklar CA, et al. Chronic health conditions in adult survivors of childhood cancer. N Engl J Med 2006;355:1572-1582. (Pubitemid 44547808)
7. Robison LL, Mertens AC, Boice JD, et al. Study design and cohort characteristics of the Childhood Cancer Survivor Study: A multi-institutional collaborative project. Med Pediatr Oncol 2002;38:229-239.
8. Leisenring WM, Mertens AC, Armstrong GT, et al. Pediatric cancer survivorship research: Experience of the Childhood Cancer Survivor Study. J Clin Oncol 2009;27:2319-2327.
9. Robison LL, Armstrong GT, Boice JD, et al. The Childhood Cancer Survivor Study: A National Cancer Institute-supported resource for outcome and intervention research. J Clin Oncol 2009;27:2308-2318.
10. Heath EM, Morken NW, Campbell KA, et al. Use of buccal cells collected in mouthwash as a source of DNA for clinical testing. Arch Pathol Lab Med 2001;125:127-133.
11. Le Marchand L, Lum-Jones A, Saltzman B, et al. Feasibility of collecting buccal cell DNA by mail in a cohort study. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 2001;10:701-703. (Pubitemid 32703206)
12. Zheng W, Chow WH, Yang G, et al. The Shanghai Women's Health Study: Rationale, study design, and baseline characteristics. Am J Epidemiol 2005;162:1123-1131. (Pubitemid 41746625)
13. Engel LS, Rothman N, Knott C, et al. Factors associated with refusal to provide a buccal cell sample in the Agricultural Health Study. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 2002;11:493-496. (Pubitemid 34517946)
14. Cozier YC, Palmer JR, Rosenberg L. Comparison of methods for collection of DNA samples by mail in the Black Women's Health Study. Ann Epidemiol 2004;14:117-122. (Pubitemid 38221169)
15. Garoufalis P, Chen CY, Dirani M, et al. Methodology and recruitment of probands and their families for the Genes in Myopia (GEM) Study. Ophthalmic Epidemiol 2005;12:383-392. (Pubitemid 41807601)
16. Kaiser J. Biobanks population databases boom, from Iceland to the U.S. Science 2002;298:1158-1161. (Pubitemid 35285457)