An assessment of bone fluoride and osteosarcoma
Journal or Publication
J of Dent Res. 2011;90(10):1171-6.
Kim FM, Hayes C, Williams PL et al.
Mark E. Moss, DDS, MS, PhD
Level of rigor
- A - Strong methodology and unbiased, appeared in peer-reviewed in respected science journal
- B - Strong methodology and unbiased, not in peer-reviewed journal
- C - Weak methodology and/or biased
- F - Not a scientific finding
Support from other studies
- High - All the peer-reviewed research to date support these findings, and a significant amount of research has been done in this area.
- Medium - Most, but not all, peer-reviewed research to date support these findings, and a significant amount of research has been done in this area.
- Low - Not a lot of research has been done in this area, or some, but not most, other peer-reviewed research supports these findings.
- Not Supported - No other studies support this study's conclusions.
- Contradicted - Most studies contradict this study's conclusions.
Direct measurement of fluoride in bone. A large sample of cases (n=200) and controls (n=114) were recruited. A careful assessment to rule out bias and alternative explanation. A thorough discussion of the limitations.
Age-matching of controls was abandoned early in the study, so only 32 age-matched pairs were available for analysis. If risk of osteosarcoma is related to exposures at a specific time in life rather than total accumulated dose, then this study would not be able to detect the risk.
Relevance and validity
This is a hospital-based case control study involving 9 hospitals across the US. The initial study protocol called for matching controls on gender and age. Because it was difficult to recruit controls, this was abandoned early in the study.