Literature DB >> 11337604

Oral contraceptives, other methods of contraception, and risk reduction for ovarian cancer.

R B Ness1, J A Grisso, R Vergona, J Klapper, M Morgan, J E Wheeler.   

Abstract

Oral contraceptives reduce the risk of ovarian cancer, but the impact of other methods of contraception has not been fully explored. This population-based, case-control study involved women 20-69 years of age who had ever had intercourse. We compared cases with a recent diagnosis of ovarian cancer (N = 727) with community controls (N = 1,360). All methods of contraception evaluated were associated with a reduced risk for ovarian cancer. After adjustment for age, race, pregnancies, and family history of ovarian cancer, the odds ratios for ever-use of each method as compared with never-use were: oral contraceptives for contraception, 0.6 (95% confidence interval = 0.5-0.8); intrauterine device, 0.8 (95% confidence interval = 0.6-1.0); barrier methods, 0.8 (95% confidence interval = 0.6-0.9); tubal ligation, 0.5 (95% confidence interval 0.4-0.7); and vasectomy, 0.8 (95% confidence interval = 0.6-1.1). Nulligravid women were not protected by any of these contraceptive methods. Multigravid women, however, were protected by all methods. We conclude that various methods of contraception reduce ovarian cancer risk. This effect does not appear to result from contraceptive use being a nonspecific marker of fertility. The results imply mechanisms other than hormonal or ovulatory by which ovarian cancer risk is reduced.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2001        PMID: 11337604     DOI: 10.1097/00001648-200105000-00010

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Epidemiology        ISSN: 1044-3983            Impact factor:   4.822


  8 in total

1.  Exposure-measurement error is frequently ignored when interpreting epidemiologic study results.

Authors:  Anne M Jurek; George Maldonado; Sander Greenland; Timothy R Church
Journal:  Eur J Epidemiol       Date:  2006-12-21       Impact factor: 8.082

Review 2.  Molecular pathogenesis of endometrial and ovarian cancer.

Authors:  Melissa A Merritt; Daniel W Cramer
Journal:  Cancer Biomark       Date:  2010       Impact factor: 4.388

3.  Expression of membrane progesterone receptors (mPR/PAQR) in ovarian cancer cells: implications for progesterone-induced signaling events.

Authors:  Nathan J Charles; Peter Thomas; Carol A Lange
Journal:  Horm Cancer       Date:  2010-08       Impact factor: 3.869

4.  Contraceptive methods and ovarian cancer risk among Chinese women: A report from the Shanghai Women's Health Study.

Authors:  Zhezhou Huang; Yutang Gao; Wanqing Wen; Honglan Li; Wei Zheng; Xiao-Ou Shu; Alicia Beeghly-Fadiel
Journal:  Int J Cancer       Date:  2015-01-21       Impact factor: 7.396

5.  Contraception methods, beyond oral contraceptives and tubal ligation, and risk of ovarian cancer.

Authors:  Roberta B Ness; Rhiannon C Dodge; Robert P Edwards; Julie A Baker; Kirsten B Moysich
Journal:  Ann Epidemiol       Date:  2010-12-15       Impact factor: 3.797

6.  Intrauterine device use and risk of ovarian cancer: Results from the New England Case-Control study and Nurses' Health Studies.

Authors:  Jiaxi Yang; Naoko Sasamoto; Ana Babic; Allison F Vitonis; Mary K Townsend; Linda Titus; Daniel W Cramer; Shelley S Tworoger; Kathryn L Terry
Journal:  Int J Cancer       Date:  2021-03-17       Impact factor: 7.316

7.  Hormonal risk factors and invasive epithelial ovarian cancer risk by parity.

Authors:  C Bodelon; N Wentzensen; S J Schonfeld; K Visvanathan; P Hartge; Y Park; R M Pfeiffer
Journal:  Br J Cancer       Date:  2013-07-02       Impact factor: 7.640

8.  Global patterns and trends in ovarian cancer incidence: age, period and birth cohort analysis.

Authors:  Yanting Zhang; Ganfeng Luo; Mengjie Li; Pi Guo; Yuejiao Xiao; Huanlin Ji; Yuantao Hao
Journal:  BMC Cancer       Date:  2019-10-22       Impact factor: 4.430

  8 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.