Asian Pacific Journal of Cancer Prevention : APJCP, 16(9), 3685-3690, 2015
No increase in breast cancer risk in Japanese women taking oral contraceptives: a case-control study investigating reproductive, menstrual and familial risk factors for breast cancer
Low-dose oral contraceptives (OC) were approved by the Japanese Ministry of Health, Labor and Welfare in 1999, yet despite their contraceptive and non-contraceptive health benefits, only 5% of the target population use them. Fear of increased cancer risk, particularly breast cancer, is one reason for this. Due to low OC uptake and low screening participation, a paucity of data is available on the risk of OC use and breast cancer in Japanese women. The present study investigated OC use and breast cancer risk, as well as menstrual, reproductive and family factors.
Materials and Methods
This was a clinic-based case-control study of women aged 20-69yrs who had undergone breast screening between January 2007 and December 2013 in central Tokyo. In all, 28.8% of the participants had experience with OC use. Cases were 155 women with a pathologically confirmed diagnosis of breast cancer. Controls were the remaining 12,333 women.
Results
Increased age was a significant risk factor for breast cancer (p<0.001). A lower risk was found in premenopausal women presently taking OC compared to never users (OR 0.45; 95% CI 0.22-0.90) after adjusting for age, parity and breast feeding, and a family history of breast cancer.
Conclusions
Increased age rather than OC use had a greater effect on breast cancer risk. This risk may be decreased in premenopausal women with OC use, but further long-term prospective studies are necessary.
oral contraceptives breast cancer risk Japanese women, OC use breast cancer case-control study Japan, low dose oral contraceptives cancer risk premenopausal women, reproductive factors breast cancer risk Asian population, oral contraceptive protective effect breast cancer premenopausal, menstrual and familial risk factors breast cancer screening, oral contraceptive uptake Japan fear cancer risk, parity breastfeeding family history breast cancer oral contraceptive adjustment, age as risk factor breast cancer vs oral contraceptive use, contraceptive health benefits versus cancer risk perception
PMID 25987022 25987022 DOI 10.7314/apjcp.2015.16.9.3685 10.7314/apjcp.2015.16.9.3685 Ichida et al. 2015, Ichida 2015
Cite this article
Ichida, M., Kataoka, A., Tsushima, R., & Taguchi, T. (2015). No increase in breast cancer risk in Japanese women taking oral contraceptives: a case-control study investigating reproductive, menstrual and familial risk factors for breast cancer. Asian Pacific journal of cancer prevention : APJCP, 16(9), 3685-3690. https://doi.org/10.7314/apjcp.2015.16.9.3685
Ichida M, Kataoka A, Tsushima R, Taguchi T. No increase in breast cancer risk in Japanese women taking oral contraceptives: a case-control study investigating reproductive, menstrual and familial risk factors for breast cancer. Asian Pac J Cancer Prev. 2015;16(9):3685-3690. doi:10.7314/apjcp.2015.16.9.3685
Ichida, M., et al. "No increase in breast cancer risk in Japanese women taking oral contraceptives: a case-control study investigating reproductive, menstrual and familial risk factors for breast cancer." Asian Pacific journal of cancer prevention : APJCP, vol. 16, no. 9, 2015, pp. 3685-3690.
Current or recent use of combined oral contraceptives (containing oestrogen+progestagen) has been associated with a small increase in breast cancer risk. Progestagen-only contraceptive use is increasing, but information on associated risks is limited. We aimed to assess breast cancer risk associated with current or recent use of different types of hormonal contraceptives in premenopausal women, with particular emphasis on progestagen-only preparations. Hormonal contraceptive prescriptions recorded prospectively in a UK primary care database (Clinical Practice Research Datalink [CPRD]) were compared in a nested case-control study for 9,498 women aged <50 years with incident invasive breast cancer diagnosed in 1996 to 2017, and for 18,171 closely matched controls. On average, 7.3 (standard deviation [SD] 4.6) years of clinical records were available for each case and their matched controls prior to the date of diagnosis. Conditional logistic regression yielded odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) of breast cancer by the hormonal contraceptive type last prescribed, controlled for age, GP practice, body mass index, number of recorded births, time since last birth, and alcohol intake. MEDLINE and Embase were searched for observational studies published between 01 January 1995 and 01 November 2022 that reported on the association between current or recent progestagen-only contraceptive use and breast cancer risk in premenopausal women. Fixed effects meta-analyses combined the CPRD results with previously published results from 12 observational studies for progestagen-only preparations. Overall, 44% (4,195/9,498) of women with breast cancer and 39% (7,092/18,171) of matched controls had a hormonal contraceptive prescription an average of 3.1 (SD 3.7) years before breast cancer diagnosis (or equivalent date for controls). About half the prescriptions were for progestagen-only preparations. Breast cancer ORs were similarly and significantly raised if the last hormonal contraceptive prescription was for oral combined, oral progestagen-only, injected progestagen, or progestagen-releasing intrauterine devices (IUDs): ORs = 1.23 (95% CI [1.14 to 1.32]; p < 0.001), 1.26 (95% CI [1.16 to 1.37]; p < 0.001), 1.25 (95% CI [1.07 to 1.45]; p = 0.004), and 1.32 (95% CI [1.17 to 1.49]; p < 0.001), respectively. Our meta-analyses yielded significantly raised relative risks (RRs) for current or recent use of progestagen-only contraceptives: oral = 1.29 (95% CI [1.21 to 1.37]; heterogeneity χ25 = 6.7; p = 0.2), injected = 1.18 (95% CI [1.07 to 1.30]; heterogeneity χ28 = 22.5; p = 0.004), implanted = 1.28 (95% CI [1.08 to 1.51]; heterogeneity χ23 = 7.3; p = 0.06), and IUDs = 1.21 (95% CI [1.14 to 1.28]; heterogeneity χ24 = 7.9; p = 0.1). When the CPRD results were combined with those from previous published findings (which included women from a wider age range), the resulting 15-year absolute excess risk associated with 5 years use of oral combined or progestagen-only contraceptives in high-income countries was estimated at: 8 per 100,000 users from age 16 to 20 years and 265 per 100,000 users from age 35 to 39 years. The main limitation of the study design was that, due to the nature of the CPRD data and most other prescription databases, information on contraceptive use was recorded during a defined period only, with information before entry into the database generally being unavailable. This means that although our findings provide evidence about the short-term associations between hormonal contraceptives and breast cancer risk, they do not provide information regarding longer-term associations, or the impact of total duration of contraceptive use on breast cancer risk. This study provides important new evidence that current or recent use of progestagen-only contraceptives is associated with a slight increase in breast cancer risk, which does not appear to vary by mode of delivery, and is similar in magnitude to that associated with combined hormonal contraceptives. Given that the underlying risk of breast cancer increases with advancing age, the absolute excess risk associated with use of either type of oral contraceptive is estimated to be smaller in women who use it at younger rather than at older ages. Such risks need be balanced against the benefits of using contraceptives during the childbearing years.
To extend knowledge about the long-term use of hormones in hormone therapy or oral contraception as prognostic factors in breast cancer. The MCC-Spain project is a cohort of 1,685 women with incident breast cancer recruited in Spain. Recruitment was carried out between 2007 and 2010, and the follow-up finished in December 2017. The impact of hormone therapy or oral contraception on breast cancer prognosis was analyzed considering year of birth and menopausal status (1,095 women [65%] were postmenopausal). Hazard ratios (HRs) were estimated using Cox regression models. Death by any cause was considered as the event, and hormone therapy or oral contraception were analyzed as regressors. Oral contraception use for less than 5 years shows an HR of 1.10 (95% CI, 0.75 to 1.62), whereas use for 5 or more years shows an HR of 1.46 (95% CI, 0.95 to 2.25), with a P trend of 0.01, showing a dose-dependent response. Regarding hormone therapy and restricting the analysis to postmenopausal women born between1940 and 1959, where most hormone therapy (consumption) is concentrated, the results did not show any trend. Concerning oral contraception use, our results demonstrate that their use is related to poor prognosis in breast cancer. However, research in this field is limited and controversial, indicating the need for more research in this area. Regarding hormone therapy consumption, our results indicate no association with better prognosis, which contradicts what has previously been published.
Lovett JL et al., 2017·Evolution, medicine, and public health
In the evolutionary past, women spent most of their reproductive lives either pregnant or in lactational amenorrhea, and rarely menstruated. The current pattern of frequent menses, and the associated increase in endogenous hormonal exposure, has been implicated in the current breast cancer epidemic. It is not known, however, whether oral contraceptives further increase, or actually decrease, hormonal exposure over one menstrual cycle. Here, we examined variation in hormonal exposure across seven oral contraceptive (OC) formulations, and produced the first quantitative comparison of exogenous versus endogenous hormone exposure. Methodology: Data from 12 studies of serum estradiol (E2) and progesterone (P4) were aggregated to create a composite graph of endogenous hormone levels over one menstrual cycle in European or American women (age 19-40 years). Pharmacokinetic package insert data, also from Western women, were used to calculate exposures for hormones in seven different OC formulations. Endogenous and exogenous hormone levels were compared after adjusting for the relative binding affinity (RBA) of progestin to the progesterone receptor and ethinyl estradiol (EE) to the estrogen receptor. After adjusting for RBA, median ethinyl estradiol exposure across 28 days in the OCs was 11.4 nmol/l, similar to median E2 exposure. One formulation, however, was 40% higher in ethinyl estradiol exposure relative to median endogenous estradiol. Median exposure from progestins in OCs (1496 nmol/l) was 4-fold higher than the median endogenous exposure from P4 (364 nmol/l). Exposure from OC progestins ranged from one sixtieth to 8-fold median endogenous P4 over 28 days. Conclusions and Given that breast cancer risk increases with hormonal exposure, our finding that four widely prescribed formulations more than quadruple progestin exposure relative to endogenous progesterone exposure is cause for concern. As not all formulations produce the same exposures, these findings are pertinent to contraceptive choice. We also identify critical gaps in the provision of relevant data on pharmacokinetics and carcinogenicity by drug manufacturers.
gynecology/breast-health/breast-cancer-riskcontraception/oral-contraceptives/cancer-risktherapeutics/hormonal-agents/progesterone-and-progestins
Open Access
Oral contraceptive pills have been implicated in the pathophysiology of breast cancer. Although many studies have examined the relationship between combined oral contraceptives (COCs) and breast cancer, there is a paucity of literature that discusses progestin-only oral contraceptives (POCs) and breast cancer. The purpose of this investigation is to examine potential associations between different types of oral contraceptives and breast cancer mortality in the South Carolina Medicaid population among different racial/ethnic groups. Subjects included 4816 women diagnosed with breast cancer between 2000 and 2013. Kaplan-Meier curves were calculated to determine time-to-mortality rates among users of oral contraceptives. Competing-risks models and Cox multivariate survival models were used to estimate the hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) of breast cancer and other-cause mortality, as well as all-cause mortality. POCs were associated with a significantly decreased risk of breast cancer mortality (HR: 0.07; 95% CI: 0.01, 0.52) and a non-significant increased risk of all-cause mortality (HR: 1.04; 95% CI: 0.52, 2.07). COCs increased the risk of breast cancer mortality (HR: 1.61; 95% CI: 1.14, 2.28) and all-cause mortality (HR: 1.83; 95% CI: 1.30, 2.57). Use of POCs may be associated with a decreased risk of breast cancer mortality. Due to the small sample size of POC users in the current study, additional research is needed to confirm these findings.