STUDY QUESTION: Do reproductive risk factor associations differ across subgroups of invasive epithelial ovarian cancer (EOC) defined by the dualistic model (type I/II) or a histologic pathway-based classification? SUMMARY ANSWER: Associations with parity, history of endometriosis, tubal ligation and hysterectomy were found to differ in the context of the type I/II and the histologic pathways classification of ovarian cancer. WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY: Shared molecular alterations and candidate precursor lesions suggest that tumor histology and grade may be used to classify ovarian tumors into likely etiologic pathways. DESIGN: This case-control study included 1571 women diagnosed with invasive EOC and 2100 population-based controls that were enrolled from 1992 to 2008. Reproductive risk factors as well as other putative risk factors for ovarian cancer were assessed through in-person interviews. PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING, METHODS: Eligible cases were diagnosed with incident ovarian cancer, were aged 18 and above and resided in eastern Massachusetts or New Hampshire, USA. Controls were identified through random digit dialing, drivers' license and town resident lists and were frequency matched with the cases based on age and study center. MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE: We used polytomous logistic regression to estimate odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for type I/II EOC or using a pathway-based grouping of histologic subtypes. In multivariate analyses, we observed that having a history of endometriosis (OR = 1.92, 95% CI: 1.36-2.71) increased the risk for a type I tumor. Factors that were strongly inversely associated with risk for a type I tumor included parity (≥ 3 versus 0 children, OR = 0.15, 95% CI: 0.11-0.21), having a previous tubal ligation (OR = 0.40, 95% CI: 0.26-0.60) and more weakly hysterectomy (OR = 0.71, 95% CI: 0.45-1.13). In analyses of histologic pathways, parity (≥ 3 versus 0 children, OR = 0.13, 95% CI: 0.10-0.18) and having a previous tubal ligation (OR = 0.41, 95% CI: 0.28-0.60) or hysterectomy (OR = 0.54, 95% CI: 0.34-0.86) were inversely associated with risk of endometrioid/clear cell tumors. Having a history of endometriosis strongly increased the risk for endometrioid/clear cell tumors (OR = 2.41, 95% CI: 1.78-3.26). We did not observe significant differences in the risk associations across these tumor classifications for age at menarche, menstrual cycle length or infertility. LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION: A potential limitation of this study is that dividing the cases into subgroups may limit the power of these analyses, particularly for the less common tumor types. Since cases were enrolled after their diagnosis, it is possible that the most aggressive cases were not included in the study. WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS: This study provides insights about the role of reproductive factors in relation to risk of pathway-based subgroups of ovarian cancer that with further confirmation may assist with the development of improved strategies for the prevention of these different tumor types. STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTEREST(S): This research is funded by grants from the National Cancer Institute, the Department of Defense Ovarian Cancer Research Program and the Ovarian Cancer Research Fund. The authors have no competing interests to declare. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: Not applicable.
STUDY QUESTION: Do reproductive risk factor associations differ across subgroups of invasive epithelial ovarian cancer (EOC) defined by the dualistic model (type I/II) or a histologic pathway-based classification? SUMMARY ANSWER: Associations with parity, history of endometriosis, tubal ligation and hysterectomy were found to differ in the context of the type I/II and the histologic pathways classification of ovarian cancer. WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY: Shared molecular alterations and candidate precursor lesions suggest that tumor histology and grade may be used to classify ovarian tumors into likely etiologic pathways. DESIGN: This case-control study included 1571 women diagnosed with invasive EOC and 2100 population-based controls that were enrolled from 1992 to 2008. Reproductive risk factors as well as other putative risk factors for ovarian cancer were assessed through in-person interviews. PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING, METHODS: Eligible cases were diagnosed with incident ovarian cancer, were aged 18 and above and resided in eastern Massachusetts or New Hampshire, USA. Controls were identified through random digit dialing, drivers' license and town resident lists and were frequency matched with the cases based on age and study center. MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE: We used polytomous logistic regression to estimate odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for type I/II EOC or using a pathway-based grouping of histologic subtypes. In multivariate analyses, we observed that having a history of endometriosis (OR = 1.92, 95% CI: 1.36-2.71) increased the risk for a type I tumor. Factors that were strongly inversely associated with risk for a type I tumor included parity (≥ 3 versus 0 children, OR = 0.15, 95% CI: 0.11-0.21), having a previous tubal ligation (OR = 0.40, 95% CI: 0.26-0.60) and more weakly hysterectomy (OR = 0.71, 95% CI: 0.45-1.13). In analyses of histologic pathways, parity (≥ 3 versus 0 children, OR = 0.13, 95% CI: 0.10-0.18) and having a previous tubal ligation (OR = 0.41, 95% CI: 0.28-0.60) or hysterectomy (OR = 0.54, 95% CI: 0.34-0.86) were inversely associated with risk of endometrioid/clear cell tumors. Having a history of endometriosis strongly increased the risk for endometrioid/clear cell tumors (OR = 2.41, 95% CI: 1.78-3.26). We did not observe significant differences in the risk associations across these tumor classifications for age at menarche, menstrual cycle length or infertility. LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION: A potential limitation of this study is that dividing the cases into subgroups may limit the power of these analyses, particularly for the less common tumor types. Since cases were enrolled after their diagnosis, it is possible that the most aggressive cases were not included in the study. WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS: This study provides insights about the role of reproductive factors in relation to risk of pathway-based subgroups of ovarian cancer that with further confirmation may assist with the development of improved strategies for the prevention of these different tumor types. STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTEREST(S): This research is funded by grants from the National Cancer Institute, the Department of Defense Ovarian Cancer Research Program and the Ovarian Cancer Research Fund. The authors have no competing interests to declare. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: Not applicable.
Authors: Stacey A Missmer; Jorge E Chavarro; Susan Malspeis; Elizabeth R Bertone-Johnson; Mark D Hornstein; Donna Spiegelman; Robert L Barbieri; Walter C Willett; Susan E Hankinson Journal: Hum Reprod Date: 2010-03-23 Impact factor: 6.918
Authors: Ian G Campbell; Sarah E Russell; David Y H Choong; Karen G Montgomery; Marianne L Ciavarella; Christine S F Hooi; Briony E Cristiano; Richard B Pearson; Wayne A Phillips Journal: Cancer Res Date: 2004-11-01 Impact factor: 12.701
Authors: Ko-Hui Tung; Marc T Goodman; Anna H Wu; Katharine McDuffie; Lynne R Wilkens; Laurence N Kolonel; Abraham M Y Nomura; Keith Y Terada; Michael E Carney; Leslie H Sobin Journal: Am J Epidemiol Date: 2003-10-01 Impact factor: 4.897
Authors: Christina M Nagle; Catherine M Olsen; Penelope M Webb; Susan J Jordan; David C Whiteman; Adèle C Green Journal: Eur J Cancer Date: 2008-08-15 Impact factor: 9.162
Authors: Marie Soegaard; Allan Jensen; Estrid Høgdall; Lise Christensen; Claus Høgdall; Jan Blaakaer; Susanne K Kjaer Journal: Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev Date: 2007-06 Impact factor: 4.254
Authors: Nonna V Kolomeyevskaya; J Brian Szender; Gary Zirpoli; Albina Minlikeeva; Grace Friel; Rikki A Cannioto; Rachel M Brightwell; Kassondra S Grzankowski; Kirsten B Moysich Journal: Int J Gynecol Cancer Date: 2015-11 Impact factor: 3.437
Authors: Camilla Sköld; Tone Bjørge; Anders Ekbom; Anders Engeland; Mika Gissler; Tom Grotmol; Laura Madanat-Harjuoja; Anne Gulbech Ording; Olof Stephansson; Britton Trabert; Steinar Tretli; Rebecca Troisi; Henrik Toft Sørensen; Ingrid Glimelius Journal: Int J Cancer Date: 2018-07-10 Impact factor: 7.396
Authors: Holly R Harris; Megan S Rice; Amy L Shafrir; Elizabeth M Poole; Mamta Gupta; Jonathan L Hecht; Kathryn L Terry; Shelley S Tworoger Journal: Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev Date: 2017-11-13 Impact factor: 4.254
Authors: Holly R Harris; Ana Babic; Penelope M Webb; Christina M Nagle; Susan J Jordan; Harvey A Risch; Mary Anne Rossing; Jennifer A Doherty; Marc T Goodman; Francesmary Modugno; Roberta B Ness; Kirsten B Moysich; Susanne K Kjær; Estrid Høgdall; Allan Jensen; Joellen M Schildkraut; Andrew Berchuck; Daniel W Cramer; Elisa V Bandera; Nicolas Wentzensen; Joanne Kotsopoulos; Steven A Narod; Catherine M Phelan; John R McLaughlin; Hoda Anton-Culver; Argyrios Ziogas; Celeste L Pearce; Anna H Wu; Kathryn L Terry Journal: Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev Date: 2017-11-15 Impact factor: 4.254
Authors: Helena Schock; Heljä-Marja Surcel; Anne Zeleniuch-Jacquotte; Kjell Grankvist; Hans-Åke Lakso; Renée Turzanski Fortner; Rudolf Kaaks; Eero Pukkala; Matti Lehtinen; Paolo Toniolo; Eva Lundin Journal: Endocr Relat Cancer Date: 2014 Impact factor: 5.678
Authors: Joanne Kotsopoulos; Jan Lubinski; Jacek Gronwald; Cezary Cybulski; Rochelle Demsky; Susan L Neuhausen; Charmaine Kim-Sing; Nadine Tung; Susan Friedman; Leigha Senter; Jeffrey Weitzel; Beth Karlan; Pal Moller; Ping Sun; Steven A Narod Journal: Int J Cancer Date: 2014-12-18 Impact factor: 7.396