Megan S Rice1, Susan E Hankinson2, Shelley S Tworoger3. 1. Channing Division of Network Medicine, Department of Medicine, Brigham and Women's Hospital and Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts; Department of Epidemiology, Harvard School of Public Health, Boston, Massachusetts. Electronic address: nhmsr@channing.harvard.edu. 2. Channing Division of Network Medicine, Department of Medicine, Brigham and Women's Hospital and Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts; Department of Epidemiology, Harvard School of Public Health, Boston, Massachusetts; Division of Biostatistics and Epidemiology, University of Massachusetts, Amherst, Massachusetts. 3. Channing Division of Network Medicine, Department of Medicine, Brigham and Women's Hospital and Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts; Department of Epidemiology, Harvard School of Public Health, Boston, Massachusetts.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To prospectively examine whether the association between tubal ligation, hysterectomy, unilateral oophorectomy, and ovarian cancer varied by patient, tumor, and surgical characteristics. DESIGN: Two prospective cohort studies (Nurses' Health Study and Nurses' Health Study II). SETTING: Not applicable. PATIENT(S): A cohort of 121,700 married US female nurses, aged 30-55 years at baseline and another cohort of 116,430 US female nurses aged 25-42 years at baseline. INTERVENTION(S): We obtained data on gynecologic surgeries and ovarian cancer incidence through biennial questionnaires. We calculated hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) adjusted for known and suspected ovarian cancer risk factors. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S): Confirmed incident epithelial ovarian cancer. RESULT(S): Overall, tubal ligation was associated with a decreased risk of ovarian cancer (HR, 0.76; 95% CI 0.64-0.90). The inverse association was stronger for nonserous tumors (HR, 0.57; 95% CI 0.40-0.82) and among women younger than 35 years at surgery (HR, 0.67; 95% CI 0.49-0.90). Hysterectomy was associated with a decreased risk of ovarian cancer (HR, 0.80; 95% CI 0.66-0.97) and was somewhat stronger for nonserous tumors (HR, 0.70; 95% CI 0.49-1.02). Unilateral oophorectomy was associated with a 30% lower risk (HR, 0.70; 95% CI 0.53-0.91), which did not differ by histologic subtype. CONCLUSION(S): Our study provides further support that tubal ligation reduces the risk of ovarian cancer, particularly for nonserous tumors and when conducted before the age of 35 years. The inverse association with hysterectomy, along with the stronger associations for nonserous tumors, supports shared biologic mechanisms for tubal ligation and hysterectomy.
OBJECTIVE: To prospectively examine whether the association between tubal ligation, hysterectomy, unilateral oophorectomy, and ovarian cancer varied by patient, tumor, and surgical characteristics. DESIGN: Two prospective cohort studies (Nurses' Health Study and Nurses' Health Study II). SETTING: Not applicable. PATIENT(S): A cohort of 121,700 married US female nurses, aged 30-55 years at baseline and another cohort of 116,430 US female nurses aged 25-42 years at baseline. INTERVENTION(S): We obtained data on gynecologic surgeries and ovarian cancer incidence through biennial questionnaires. We calculated hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) adjusted for known and suspected ovarian cancer risk factors. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S): Confirmed incident epithelial ovarian cancer. RESULT(S): Overall, tubal ligation was associated with a decreased risk of ovarian cancer (HR, 0.76; 95% CI 0.64-0.90). The inverse association was stronger for nonserous tumors (HR, 0.57; 95% CI 0.40-0.82) and among women younger than 35 years at surgery (HR, 0.67; 95% CI 0.49-0.90). Hysterectomy was associated with a decreased risk of ovarian cancer (HR, 0.80; 95% CI 0.66-0.97) and was somewhat stronger for nonserous tumors (HR, 0.70; 95% CI 0.49-1.02). Unilateral oophorectomy was associated with a 30% lower risk (HR, 0.70; 95% CI 0.53-0.91), which did not differ by histologic subtype. CONCLUSION(S): Our study provides further support that tubal ligation reduces the risk of ovarian cancer, particularly for nonserous tumors and when conducted before the age of 35 years. The inverse association with hysterectomy, along with the stronger associations for nonserous tumors, supports shared biologic mechanisms for tubal ligation and hysterectomy.
Authors: Simone P Pinheiro; Susan E Hankinson; Shelley S Tworoger; Bernard A Rosner; John R McKolanis; Olivera J Finn; Daniel W Cramer Journal: Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev Date: 2010-05-25 Impact factor: 4.254
Authors: Mary Anne Rossing; Kara L Cushing-Haugen; Kristine G Wicklund; Jennifer A Doherty; Noel S Weiss Journal: Cancer Causes Control Date: 2008-08-14 Impact factor: 2.506
Authors: Louise M Stewart; C D'Arcy J Holman; Patrick Aboagye-Sarfo; Judith C Finn; David B Preen; Roger Hart Journal: Gynecol Oncol Date: 2012-10-29 Impact factor: 5.482
Authors: Hyo K Park; Joellen M Schildkraut; Anthony J Alberg; Elisa V Bandera; Jill S Barnholtz-Sloan; Melissa Bondy; Sydnee Crankshaw; Ellen Funkhouser; Patricia G Moorman; Edward S Peters; Paul Terry; Frances Wang; Julie J Ruterbusch; Ann G Schwartz; Michele L Cote Journal: Cancer Causes Control Date: 2018-09-29 Impact factor: 2.506
Authors: Mary B Daly; Charles W Dresher; Melinda S Yates; Joanne M Jeter; Beth Y Karlan; David S Alberts; Karen H Lu Journal: Cancer Prev Res (Phila) Date: 2015-01-13
Authors: Laura D Kubzansky; Shelley S Tworoger; Andrea L Roberts; Tianyi Huang; Karestan C Koenen; Yongjoo Kim Journal: Cancer Res Date: 2019-09-05 Impact factor: 12.701
Authors: Sarah R Irvin; Elisabete Weiderpass; Frank Z Stanczyk; Louise A Brinton; Britton Trabert; Hilde Langseth; Nicolas Wentzensen Journal: Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev Date: 2020-01-13 Impact factor: 4.254
Authors: Chrissy McNamara; Sarah E Abbott; Elisa V Bandera; Bo Qin; Lauren C Peres; Fabian Camacho; Patricia G Moorman; Anthony J Alberg; Jill S Barnholtz-Sloan; Melissa Bondy; Michele L Cote; Ellen Funkhouser; Edward S Peters; Ann G Schwartz; Joellen M Schildkraut; Paul Terry Journal: Cancer Causes Control Date: 2017-09-04 Impact factor: 2.506
Authors: Akila Subramaniam; Brett D Einerson; Christina T Blanchard; Britt K Erickson; Jeff Szychowski; Charles A Leath; Joseph R Biggio; Warner K Huh Journal: Gynecol Oncol Date: 2018-11-23 Impact factor: 5.482
Authors: Suzanne C Dixon-Suen; Penelope M Webb; Louise F Wilson; Karen Tuesley; Louise M Stewart; Susan J Jordan Journal: J Natl Cancer Inst Date: 2019-10-01 Impact factor: 13.506
Authors: Brenda M Birmann; Mollie E Barnard; Kimberly A Bertrand; Ying Bao; Marta Crous-Bou; Brian M Wolpin; Immaculata De Vivo; Shelley S Tworoger Journal: Am J Public Health Date: 2016-07-26 Impact factor: 9.308