Amy L Shafrir1,2, Helena Schock3, Elizabeth M Poole4, Kathryn L Terry5,6, Rulla M Tamimi4,5, Susan E Hankinson4,5,7, Bernard A Rosner4,8, Shelley S Tworoger4,5. 1. Division of Adolescent/Young Adult Medicine, Boston Center for Endometriosis, Boston Children's Hospital, 1 Autumn Street, 5th Floor, Boston, MA, 02115, USA. amy.shafrir@childrens.harvard.edu. 2. Department of Pediatrics, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA. amy.shafrir@childrens.harvard.edu. 3. Division of Cancer Epidemiology, German Cancer Research Center, Heidelberg, Germany. 4. Channing Division of Network Medicine, Department of Medicine, Brigham and Women's Hospital and Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA. 5. Department of Epidemiology, Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health, Boston, MA, USA. 6. Obstetrics and Gynecology Epidemiology Center, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Brigham and Women's Hospital and Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA. 7. Department of Biostatistics and Epidemiology, School of Public Health and Health Sciences, University of Massachusetts, Amherst, MA, USA. 8. Department of Biostatistics, Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health, Boston, MA, USA.
Abstract
PURPOSE: Oral contraceptives (OCs) have been consistently associated with a reduced ovarian cancer risk; however, most previous studies included women in older birth cohorts using high-dose OC formulations. We assessed OC use, including type and dose, and ovarian cancer risk among women born between 1947 and 1964 using more recent formulations. METHODS: We included 110,929 Nurses' Health Study II participants. Women reported duration of OC use and brands used from age 13 to baseline (1989) and every 2 years thereafter through 2009. We categorized brands by estrogen and progestin type, dose, and potency, and used Cox proportional hazards models, adjusted for age, calendar time, reproductive factors, and body mass index, to assess associations with ovarian cancer. RESULTS: Over 2,178,679 person-years of follow-up, we confirmed 281 cases. At baseline, 83% of participants reported ever using OCs. Compared to never use, we observed an increased risk of ovarian cancer with ≤6 months of OC use (HR 1.82; 95% CI 1.13-2.93) but a non-significant 57% (95% CI 0.18-1.03) decreased risk with ≥15 years of OC use. The increased risk among short-term users (≤1 year) was restricted to OCs containing mestranol (HR 1.83; 95% CI 1.16-2.88) and first-generation progestin (HR 1.72; 95% CI 1.11-2.65). CONCLUSION: The associations between OCs and ovarian cancer observed for this younger birth cohort differ substantially from the results of previous cohort studies, possibly reflecting changes in OC formulations and use patterns over time, although these results could be due to chance. Additional studies should evaluate newer OC formulations and ovarian cancer risk.
PURPOSE: Oral contraceptives (OCs) have been consistently associated with a reduced ovarian cancer risk; however, most previous studies included women in older birth cohorts using high-dose OC formulations. We assessed OC use, including type and dose, and ovarian cancer risk among women born between 1947 and 1964 using more recent formulations. METHODS: We included 110,929 Nurses' Health Study II participants. Women reported duration of OC use and brands used from age 13 to baseline (1989) and every 2 years thereafter through 2009. We categorized brands by estrogen and progestin type, dose, and potency, and used Cox proportional hazards models, adjusted for age, calendar time, reproductive factors, and body mass index, to assess associations with ovarian cancer. RESULTS: Over 2,178,679 person-years of follow-up, we confirmed 281 cases. At baseline, 83% of participants reported ever using OCs. Compared to never use, we observed an increased risk of ovarian cancer with ≤6 months of OC use (HR 1.82; 95% CI 1.13-2.93) but a non-significant 57% (95% CI 0.18-1.03) decreased risk with ≥15 years of OC use. The increased risk among short-term users (≤1 year) was restricted to OCs containing mestranol (HR 1.83; 95% CI 1.16-2.88) and first-generation progestin (HR 1.72; 95% CI 1.11-2.65). CONCLUSION: The associations between OCs and ovarian cancer observed for this younger birth cohort differ substantially from the results of previous cohort studies, possibly reflecting changes in OC formulations and use patterns over time, although these results could be due to chance. Additional studies should evaluate newer OC formulations and ovarian cancer risk.
Entities:
Keywords:
Ethinyl estradiol; Mestranol; Oral contraceptives; Ovarian cancer
Authors: R J Lipnick; J E Buring; C H Hennekens; B Rosner; W Willett; C Bain; M J Stampfer; G A Colditz; R Peto; F E Speizer Journal: JAMA Date: 1986-01-03 Impact factor: 56.272
Authors: Annekatrin Lukanova; Eva Lundin; Arslan Akhmedkhanov; Andrea Micheli; Sabina Rinaldi; Anne Zeleniuch-Jacquotte; Per Lenner; Paola Muti; Carine Biessy; Vittorio Krogh; Franco Berrino; Göran Hallmans; Elio Riboli; Rudolf Kaaks; Paolo Toniolo Journal: Int J Cancer Date: 2003-05-01 Impact factor: 7.396
Authors: Tianyi Huang; Amy L Shafrir; A Heather Eliassen; Kathryn M Rexrode; Shelley S Tworoger Journal: Am J Epidemiol Date: 2020-07-01 Impact factor: 4.897
Authors: Tianyi Huang; Amy L Shafrir; A Heather Eliassen; Kathryn M Rexrode; Shelley S Tworoger Journal: Am J Epidemiol Date: 2020-07-01 Impact factor: 4.897
Authors: Lusine Yaghjyan; Carmen Smotherman; John Heine; Graham A Colditz; Bernard Rosner; Rulla M Tamimi Journal: Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev Date: 2021-12-03 Impact factor: 4.090
Authors: Jennifer A Doherty; Allan Jensen; Linda E Kelemen; Celeste L Pearce; Elizabeth Poole; Joellen M Schildkraut; Kathryn L Terry; Shelley S Tworoger; Penelope M Webb; Nicolas Wentzensen Journal: J Natl Cancer Inst Date: 2017-10-01 Impact factor: 13.506
Authors: Norah A Burchardt; Amy L Shafrir; Rudolf Kaaks; Shelley S Tworoger; Renée T Fortner Journal: Eur J Epidemiol Date: 2020-12-17 Impact factor: 8.082