Depo-Provera Contraceptive Injection (FDA Prescribing Information)

The intrauterine device. Contraceptive or abortifacient?

Parchment M et al., 2026·Minn Med

Breast cancer risk factors in Iranian women: a systematic review and meta-analysis of matched case-control studies

Khoramdad M et al., 2022·Eur J Med Res

Identifying breast cancer risk factors is a critical component of preventative strategies for this disease. This study aims to identify modifiable and non-modifiable risk factors of breast cancer in Iranian women. We used international databases (PubMed/Medline, Scopus, Web of Knowledge, and Embase) and national databases (SID, Magiran, and ISC) to retrieve relevant studies until November 13, 2022. The odds ratio (OR) with a 95% confidence interval using the random-effect model was used to estimate the pooled effect. The publication bias was assessed by the Egger and Begg test. A sensitivity analysis was conducted to evaluate the effect of each included study on the final measurement. Of the 30,351 retrieved articles, 24 matched case-control records were included with 12,460 participants (5675 newly diagnosed cases of breast cancer and 6785 control). This meta-analysis showed that of the known modifiable risk factors for breast cancer, obesity (vs normal weight) had the highest risk (OR = 2.17, 95% CI 1.47 to 3.21; I(2) = 85.7) followed by age at marriage (25-29 vs < 18 years old) (OR = 2.00, 95% CI 1.53 to 2.61; I(2) = 0), second-hand smoking (OR = 1.86, 95% CI 1.58 to 2.19; I(2) = 0), smoking (OR = 1.83, 95% CI 1.41 to 2.38; I(2) = 18.9), abortion history (OR = 1.44, 95% CI 1.02 to 2.05; I(2) = 66.3), oral contraceptive use (OR = 1.35, 95% CI 1.11 to 1.63; I(2) = 74.1), age at marriage (18-24 vs < 18 years old) (OR: 1.22, 95% CI 1.02 to 1.47; I(2) = 0). Of non-modifiable risk factors, history of radiation exposure (OR = 3.48, 95% CI 2.17 to 5.59; I(2) = 0), family history of breast cancer (OR = 2.47, 95% CI 1.83 to 3.33; I(2) = 73), and age at menarche (12-13 vs ≥ 14 years old) (OR = 1.67, 95% CI 1.31-2.13; I(2) = 25.4) significantly increased the risk of breast cancer. Since most risk factors related to breast cancer incidence are modifiable, promoting healthy lifestyles can play an influential role in preventing breast cancer. In women with younger menarche age, a family history of breast cancer, or a history of radiation exposure, screening at short intervals is recommended.

Contraceptives and cancer risks in BRCA1/2 pathogenic variant carriers: a systematic review and meta-analysis

van Bommel MHD et al., 2022·Hum Reprod Update

Increasing numbers of BReast CAncer (BRCA) 1 or 2 pathogenic variant (PV) carriers, who have an inherited predisposition to breast and ovarian cancer, are being identified. Among these women, data regarding the effects of contraception on cancer risks are unclear and various guidelines provide various recommendations. We aim to optimize counselling regarding contraception for BRCA1/2-PV carriers. Therefore, we performed a systematic review and meta-analysis. We investigated the risk ratio for developing breast cancer or ovarian cancer in BRCA1/2-PV carriers who have used any form of contraception versus non-users. Second, we analysed breast and ovarian cancer risk among BRCA1/2-PV carriers as influenced by the duration of contraceptive use and by the time since last use. In addition, we provide an overview of all relevant international guidelines regarding contraceptive use for BRCA1/2-PV carriers. A systematic search in the Medline database and Cochrane library identified studies describing breast and/or ovarian cancer risk in BRCA1/2-PV carriers as modified by contraception until June 2021. The search included medical subject headings, keywords and synonyms related to BRCA and contraceptives (any kind). PRISMA guidance was followed. Risk Of Bias In Non-randomized Studies of Interventions and Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluations assessments were performed. Random-effects meta-analyses were used to estimate pooled effects for breast and ovarian cancer risk separately. Subgroup analyses were conducted for BRCA1 versus BRCA2 and for the various contraceptive methods. Results of the breast cancer risk with oral contraceptive pill (OCP) analysis depended on the outcome measure. Meta-analyses of seven studies with 7525 women revealed a hazard ratio (HR) of 1.55 (95% CI: 1.36-1.76) and of four studies including 9106 women resulted in an odds ratio (OR) of 1.06 (95% CI: 0.90-1.25), heterogeneity (I2) 0% and 52%, respectively. Breast cancer risk was still increased in ever-users compared with never-users >10 years after last OCP use. In contrast, ovarian cancer risk HR 0.62 (95% CI: 0.52-0.74) based on two studies including 10 981 women (I2: 0%), and OR 0.49 (95% CI: 0.38-0.63) based on eight studies including 10 390 women (I2: 64%). The protective effect vanished after cessation of use. Tubal ligation also protects one study including 3319 women (I2: 0%): HR: 0.44 (95% CI: 0.26-0.74) and three studies with 7691 women (I2: 44%): OR: 0.74 (95% CI: 0.53-1.03). Data regarding other contraceptives were unavailable. No differences were observed between BRCA1 and BRCA2-PV carriers. The quality of evidence was either low or very low. The OCP potentially increases breast cancer risk, while ovarian cancer risk decreases with either the OCP and tubal ligation in BRCA1/2-PV carriers. Counselling of BRCA1/2-PV carriers should be personalized; the genetic and non-genetic factors (like prior risk-reducing surgeries, prior breast cancer and age) and patients' preferences (reversibility, ease of use, reliability and effect on menstrual cycle) should be balanced. To further optimize counselling for high-risk women, future research should focus on other (commonly used) contraceptive methods and cancer risks in this specific population, and on the potential impact of changing formulations over time.

Hormonal contraception and risk of breast cancer and breast cancer in situ among Swedish women 15-34 years of age: A nationwide register-based study

Niemeyer Hultstrand J et al., 2022·Lancet Reg Health Eur

Evidence on a possible association between newer hormonal contraceptives (HC) and risk of breast cancer remains inconclusive, especially as concerns progestogen-only methods. In this nationwide prospective cohort study, all Swedish women aged 15-34 at study start on January 1(st) 2005, or who turned 15 years during the study period, were followed until December 31(st) 2017. Using information from seven National Registers, we assessed the risk ratio of developing breast cancer and breast cancer in situ in relation to different HC using Poisson regression. We adjusted the analyses for several known confounders of breast cancer. This cohort included 1.5 million women providing more than 14 million person-years. During the study period, 3842 women were diagnosed with breast cancer. Compared with never users of any HC, we found no increased risk of developing breast cancer among current users of any combined HC, IRR 1.03 (0.91-1.16), whereas current users of progestogen-only methods had an increased risk of developing breast cancer, IRR 1.32 (1.20-1.45). Across all types of HC, the risk of developing breast cancer appeared to be highest the first five years of use (combined HC IRR 1.39 (1.14-1.69); progestogen-only methods IRR 1.74 (1.44-2.10). The risk disappeared ten years after the women stopped using HC. The absolute risk of breast cancer per 100,000 women-years was 22.4 for never users, 10.9 for current users of combined HC, and 29.8 for current users of progestogen-only methods. Current use of progestogen-only methods is associated with a small increased risk of developing breast cancer, whereas we could only detect an increased risk among users of combined HC during the first five years of use. This may partly be explained by a selective prescription of progestogen-only methods to women with risk factors for breast cancer, like smoking or obesity. As the absolute risk of breast cancer was small, the many health benefits associated with HC must also be taken into account in contraceptive counselling. This study was funded by the Swedish Cancer Society and by the Uppsala County Council, the Faculty of Medicine at Uppsala University.