Skip to main content

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

Reply to comment on: ‘Second to fourth digit ratio (2D:4D), breast cancer risk factors, and breast cancer risk: a prospective cohort study’

This article has been updated

Sir,

We thank Costas et al (2012), this issue) for their interest in our recently published paper (Muller et al, 2012). They raise the important point that Δr−1, the difference between right and left 2D : 4D, is subject to greater measurement error than 2D : 4D itself. This fact is uncontentious, and follows directly from the propagation of measurement errors from both left and right 2D : 4D. Despite this, in our study we found measurement of Δr−1 to be acceptably reliable, with intraclass correlation coefficients of 0.72 and 0.54 for intra- and inter-rater reliability, respectively.

Costas et al, correctly note that non-differential measurement error tends to bias estimates towards the null, except in the case of a categorical variable with more than two levels. They state in their correspondence: ‘However, if the exposure variable has more than two levels, like it is the case, bias away from the null may be present’. As we clearly stated in the methods and results sections of our paper, we analysed Δr−1 as a continuous variate. At no stage did we consider Δr−1 as a categorical variable. We would thus expect any bias arising as a result of measurement error to be towards the null. Such bias would reinforce our results.

Finally, we agree completely with Costas et al that it is important to include information on the reliability of measurements. That this information was incomplete in our paper was an oversight, and we are glad that we could rectify that oversight in this letter.

Change history

  • 19 February 2013

    This paper was modified 12 months after initial publication to switch to Creative Commons licence terms, as noted at publication

References

  1. Costas L, Kogevinas M, de Sanjosé S (2012) Comment on: ‘Second to fourth digit ratio (2D:4D), breast cancer risk factors, and breast cancer risk: a prospective cohort study’. Br J Cancer 108: 742

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  2. Muller DC, Baglietto L, Manning JT, McLean C, Hopper JL, English DR, Giles GG, Severi G (2012) Second to fourth digit ratio (2D:4D), breast cancer risk factors, and breast cancer risk: a prospective cohort study. Br J Cancer 107: 1631–1636

    CAS  Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding authors

Correspondence to D C Muller or G Severi.

Rights and permissions

From twelve months after its original publication, this work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-Share Alike 3.0 Unported License. To view a copy of this license, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/3.0/

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Muller, D., Baglietto, L., Manning, J. et al. Reply to comment on: ‘Second to fourth digit ratio (2D:4D), breast cancer risk factors, and breast cancer risk: a prospective cohort study’. Br J Cancer 108, 743 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1038/bjc.2012.531

Download citation

Further reading

Search

Quick links