Inserm, Centre for research in Epidemiology and Population Health (CESP), U318, Nutrition, Hormones and Women's Health team, F-94705, Villejuif, France.
Large numbers of hormone replacement therapies (HRTs) are available for the treatment of menopausal symptoms. It is still unclear whether some are more deleterious than others regarding breast cancer risk. The goal of this study was to assess and compare the association between different HRTs and breast cancer risk, using data from the French E3N cohort study. Invasive breast cancer cases were identified through biennial self-administered questionnaires completed from 1990 to 2002. During follow-up (mean duration 8.1 postmenopausal years), 2,354 cases of invasive breast cancer occurred among 80,377 postmenopausal women. Compared with HRT never-use, use of estrogen alone was associated with a significant 1.29-fold increased risk (95% confidence interval 1.02-1.65). The association of estrogen-progestagen combinations with breast cancer risk varied significantly according to the type of progestagen: the relative risk was 1.00 (0.83-1.22) for estrogen-progesterone, 1.16 (0.94-1.43) for estrogen-dydrogesterone, and 1.69 (1.50-1.91) for estrogen combined with other progestagens. This latter category involves progestins with different physiologic activities (androgenic, nonandrogenic, antiandrogenic), but their associations with breast cancer risk did not differ significantly from one another. This study found no evidence of an association with risk according to the route of estrogen administration (oral or transdermal/percutaneous). These findings suggest that the choice of the progestagen component in combined HRT is of importance regarding breast cancer risk; it could be preferable to use progesterone or dydrogesterone.
PMID 17333341 17333341 DOI 10.1007/s10549-007-9523-x 10.1007/s10549-007-9523-x Fournier et al. 2008, Fournier 2008
Cite this article
Fournier, A., Berrino, F., & Clavel-Chapelon, F. (2008). Unequal risks for breast cancer associated with different hormone replacement therapies: results from the E3N cohort study. Breast Cancer Research and Treatment. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10549-007-9523-x
Fournier A, Berrino F, Clavel-Chapelon F. Unequal risks for breast cancer associated with different hormone replacement therapies: results from the E3N cohort study. Breast Cancer Research and Treatment. 2008. doi:10.1007/s10549-007-9523-x
Fournier, A., et al. "Unequal risks for breast cancer associated with different hormone replacement therapies: results from the E3N cohort study." Breast Cancer Research and Treatment, 2008.
This study tested progesterone for perimenopausal hot flush ± night sweat (vasomotor symptom, VMS) treatment. It was a double-blind, randomized trial of 300 mg oral micronized progesterone@bedtime versus placebo for 3-months (m) after a 1-m untreated baseline during 2012/1-2017/4. We randomized untreated, non-depressed, screenand baseline-eligible by VMS, perimenopausal women (with flow within 1-year), ages 35-58 (n = 189). Participants aged 50 (± SD = 4.6) were mostly White, educated, minimally overweight with 63% in late perimenopause; 93% participated remotely. The 1° outcome was 3rd-m VMS Score difference. Participants recorded VMS number and intensity (0-4 scale)/24 h on a VMS Calendar. Randomization required VMS (intensity 2-4/4) of sufficient frequency and/or ≥ 2/week night sweat awakenings. Baseline total VMS Score (SD) was 12.2 (11.3) without assignment difference. Third-m VMS Score did not differ by therapy (Rate Difference - 1.51). However, the 95% CI [- 3.97, 0.95] P = 0.222, did not exclude 3, a minimal clinically important difference. Women perceived progesterone caused decreased night sweats (P = 0.023) and improved sleep quality (P = 0.005); it decreased perimenopause-related life interference (P = 0.017) without increased depression. No serious adverse events occurred. Perimenopausal night sweats ± hot flushes are variable; this RCT was underpowered but could not exclude a minimal clinically important VMS benefit. Perceived night sweats and sleep quality significantly improved.
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.
Niemeyer Hultstrand J et al., 2022·Lancet Reg Health Eur·
Open Access
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. Findings: 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. Interpretation: 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.
Hormonal contraception exposes women to synthetic progesterone receptor (PR) agonists, progestins, and transiently increases breast cancer risk. How progesterone and progestins affect the breast epithelium is poorly understood because we lack adequate models to study this. We hypothesized that individual progestins differentially affect breast epithelial cell proliferation and hence breast cancer risk. Using mouse mammary tissue ex vivo, we show that testosterone-related progestins induce the PR target and mediator of PR signaling-induced cell proliferation receptor activator of NF-κB ligand (Rankl), whereas progestins with anti-androgenic properties in reporter assays do not. We develop intraductal xenografts of human breast epithelial cells from 36 women, show they remain hormone-responsive and that progesterone and the androgenic progestins, desogestrel, gestodene, and levonorgestrel, promote proliferation but the anti-androgenic, chlormadinone, and cyproterone acetate, do not. Prolonged exposure to androgenic progestins elicits hyperproliferation with cytologic changes. Androgen receptor inhibition interferes with PR agonist- and levonorgestrel-induced RANKL expression and reduces levonorgestrel-driven cell proliferation. Thus, different progestins have distinct biological activities in the breast epithelium to be considered for more informed choices in hormonal contraception.