Journal of Clinical Oncology : Official Journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology, 31(33), 4188-4198, 2013
Oral contraceptives and risk of ovarian cancer and breast cancer among high-risk women: a systematic review and meta-analysis
Patricia G Moorman, Laura J Havrilesky, Jennifer M Gierisch
William J Lowery, Peragallo Urrutia R , Rachel Peragallo Urrutia, Michaela A. Dinan, Evan R Myers, Remy R Coeytaux , Vic Hasselblad , Amanda J McBroom , Gillian D Sanders
To estimate the risks of ovarian cancer and breast cancer associated with oral contraceptive (OC) use among women at elevated risk owing to mutations in BRCA1/2 or a strong family history.
Methods
We searched PubMed, Embase, the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, and ClinicalTrials.gov for studies published 2000 to 2012 that evaluated associations between OC use and breast or ovarian cancer among women who are carriers of a BRCA1/2 mutation or have a family history of breast or ovarian cancer.
Results
From 6,476 unique citations, we identified six studies examining ovarian cancer risk in BRCA1/2 mutation carriers and eight studies examining breast cancer risk in BRCA1/2 mutation carriers. For BRCA1/2 mutation carriers combined, meta-analysis showed an inverse association between OC use and ovarian cancer (odds ratio [OR], 0.58; 95% CI, 0.46 to 0.73) and a nonstatistically significant association with breast cancer (OR, 1.21; 95% CI, 0.93 to 1.58). Findings were similar when examining BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers separately. Data were inadequate to perform meta-analyses examining duration or timing of use. For women with a family history of ovarian or breast cancer, we identified four studies examining risk for ovarian cancer and three for breast cancer, but differences between studies precluded combining the data for meta-analyses, and no overall pattern could be discerned.
Conclusion
Our analyses suggest that associations between ever use of OCs and ovarian and breast cancer among women who are BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutation carriers are similar to those reported for the general population.
oral contraceptives BRCA1 BRCA2 ovarian cancer risk meta-analysis, oral contraceptive use breast cancer risk BRCA mutation carriers, BRCA1 BRCA2 mutation carriers oral contraceptive protective effect ovarian cancer, systematic review OC use high risk women cancer, oral contraceptives family history breast ovarian cancer risk, BRCA mutation carrier oral contraceptive odds ratio meta-analysis, hormonal contraception cancer risk hereditary breast ovarian cancer, oral contraceptive chemoprevention BRCA carriers ovarian cancer, Moorman Havrilesky oral contraceptive BRCA cancer risk, oral contraceptive duration timing BRCA cancer association
PMID 24145348 24145348 DOI 10.1200/JCO.2013.48.9021 10.1200/JCO.2013.48.9021
Cite this article
Moorman, P. G., Havrilesky, L. J., Gierisch, J. M., Coeytaux, R. R., Lowery, W. J., Peragallo Urrutia, R., Dinan, M., McBroom, A. J., Hasselblad, V., Sanders, G. D., & Myers, E. R. (2013). Oral contraceptives and risk of ovarian cancer and breast cancer among high-risk women: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology, 31(33), 4188-4198. https://doi.org/10.1200/JCO.2013.48.9021
Moorman PG, Havrilesky LJ, Gierisch JM, Coeytaux RR, Lowery WJ, Peragallo Urrutia R, et al. Oral contraceptives and risk of ovarian cancer and breast cancer among high-risk women: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Clin Oncol. 2013;31(33):4188-4198. doi:10.1200/JCO.2013.48.9021
Moorman, P. G., et al. "Oral contraceptives and risk of ovarian cancer and breast cancer among high-risk women: a systematic review and meta-analysis." Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology, vol. 31, no. 33, 2013, pp. 4188-4198.
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.
Asthana S et al., 2020·Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol
Role of Oral Contraceptive (OC) as a risk factor for cervical cancer remained controversial and unclear. To evaluate risk of cervical cancer in OC users and non-users through a comprehensive systematic review. Literature search conducted in databases from January 1990 till August 2019 using various search terms. Primary research studies that evaluated and assessed the association of OC use with cervical cancer with study design of case control or cohort types published in English language. PRISMA guided review was done by two independent researchers. Effect size estimated by pooled Odds ratio with 95 % Confidence Interval (CI) in random effect models on OC pill use for the risk of cervical cancer. Review included 19 studies. Overall risk of invasive cancer on OC use was found to be significant with unknown status of HPV OR (95 % CI) as 1.51 (1.35, 1.68) and for unknown HPV as 1.66 (1.24, 2.21). Adenocarcinoma, squamous cell carcinoma and carcinoma in situ had significant association with OR (95 % CI) of 1.77 (1.4, 2.24), 1.29 (1.18, 1.42) and 1.7 (1.18, 2.44) respectively. OC pills use had a definite associated risk for developing cervical cancer specially for Adenocarcinoma and longer duration of OC pills use.
Contraception/ComparisonCancer RiskCervical Neoplasia RiskCervical Cancer Risk Factors
Open Access
Hormonal contraceptive use has been associated with the development of cervical cancer, although inconsistent results are reported on the association with intrauterine device (IUD) use. The aim of this study was to evaluate the association between the type of contraceptive use and the development of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade III or worse (CIN3+). A retrospective population-based cohort study including women aged 29-44 years attending the cervical cancer screening program with normal cytology between 2005 and 2009 identified from the Dutch Pathology Registry. Subgroups with at least 5 years registered use of an oral contraceptive (OC) or IUD were compared with non-users. Risk ratios of CIN3+ were estimated per contraceptive type. s702,037 women were included with a median follow-up of 9.7 years, of which 6705 (0.96%) and 559 (0.08%) women developed CIN3 and cervical cancer, respectively. IUD use was associated with an increased risk of developing CIN3+ (risk ratio (RR) 1.51, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.32-1.74), and OC use was associated with an increased risk of developing CIN3+ (RR 2.77, 95%CI 2.65-3.00) and cervical cancer (RR 2.06, 95%CI 1.52-2.79). The risk of developing CIN3+ and cervical cancer was higher for OC users compared with IUD users (RR 1.83, 95%CI 1.60-2.09 and RR 1.70, 95%CI 1.00-2.90, respectively). Both OC use and IUD use were associated with an increased risk of developing CIN3+. However, for women with a contraceptive wish, an IUD seems safer than an OC as the risk of developing CIN3+ and cervical cancer was higher for OC users.
As the HIV/AIDS epidemic continues to spread in Africa and Asia, use of the injectable contraceptive steroid DMPA is widespread and has been increasing. Since studies dating back to 1992 have suggested that DMPA may increase the transmission of HIV to women, we endeavored to determine if the extant epidemiological and biological evidence is sufficient to conclude that DMPA use constitutes a definite hazard to women's health. We searched contraceptives or contraception AND HIV and searched bibliographies of articles thus identified. We included in the meta-analysis all studies examining the association between use of DMPA (or injectable contraceptives comprising mostly DMPA) and the presence (cross-sectional studies, n = 8) or acquisition (longitudinal studies, n = 16) of HIV+ status in women, using a random effects models to estimate odds ratios (ORs; cross-sectional studies) and hazard ratios (HRs; longitudinal studies). Studies were excluded if the comparison group included women using any form of steroidal contraception. Statistically significant positive associations between DMPA use and HIV positivity were observed both in cross-sectional (OR = 1.41, 95% CI 1.15 - 1.73) and longitudinal studies (HR = 1.49, 95% CI 1.28 - 1.73). The biological plausibility of increased vulnerability to HIV infection due to progestational action (via thinning of the vaginal epithelial barrier and immunosuppression) as well as glucocorticoid agonistic immunosuppression, are discussed. The epidemiological and biological evidence now make a compelling case that DMPA adds significantly to the risk of male-to-female HIV transmission.