Breast cancer and hormonal contraceptives: further results

Calle, E; Heath, CW; Miracle-McMahill, HL; Coates, R.J.; Liff, Jonathan; Franceschi, Silvia; Talamini, Renato; Chantarakul, N; Koetsawang, Suporn; Rachawat, Daungdao; Morabia, Alfredo; Schuman, Leonard M.; Stewart, Walter F.; Szklo, Moysés; Bain, Christopher; Schofield, F. D.; Siskind, Victor; Band, Pierre R.; Coldman, A.; Gallagher, R; Hislop, T. Gregory; Yang, Po‐Sheng; Duffy, SW; Kolonel, L. M.; Nomura, A. M.Y.; Oberle, M. W.; Ory, H. W.; Hb, Peterson; Wilson, Hg; Wingo, P.A.; Ebeling, K; Kunde, D; Nishan, P.; Colditz, Graham A.; Martin, Nimit; Pardthaisong, Tieng; Silpisornkosol, Suporn; Theetranont, Choti; Boosiri, Banpot; Chutivongse, Supawat; Jimakorn, P; Virutamasen, Pramuan; Wongsrichanalai, Chansuda; McMichael, A J; Rohan, Thomas E.; Ewertz, M.; Paul, Charlotte; Dc, Skegg; Spears, G. F.S.; Boyle, P; Evstifeeva, Tatiana V.; Daling, J. R.; Malone, Kathleen E.; Noonan, EA; Jl, Stanford; Thomas, D B; Weiss, N. S.; White, Emily; Andrieu, Nadine; Brémond, A.; Clavel, F; Gairard, B.; Lansac, J.; Piana, L; Rénaud, R; Fine, S. R.P.; Cuevas, Héctor Rodriguez; Ontiveros, Patricia; Palet, A.; Salazar, S. B.; Aristizabel, N.; Cuadros, Alvaro; Bachelot, Anne; Mg, Lee; Deacon, Judith; Peto, Julian; Taylor, C; Alfandary, Esther; Modan, Baruch; Ron, Elaine; Friedman, G D; Hiatt, RA; Bishop, Tim; Košmelj, Katarina; Primic-Žakelj, Maja; Ravnihar, B; Stare, Janez; Beeson, W. Lawrence; Fraser, Gary E.; Allen, D S; Bulbrook, R. D.; Cuzick, Jack; Fentiman, IS; Hayward, J. L.; Dy, Wang; Hanson, R. L.; Leske, M. C.; Mahoney, M. C.; Nasca, P. C.; Varma, A. O.; Weinstein, A. L.; Möller, T.; Olsson, Håkan; Ranstam, Jonas; Goldbohm, R. Alexandra; Brandt, Piet A. van den; Apelo, R. A.; Baens, J.; Cruz, J. de la; Benı́tez, Javier; Lacaya, Lyndon B.; Ngelangel, CA; Vecchia, Carlo La; Negri, Eva; Marbuni, E; Ferraroni, Monica; Gerber, Mariette; Richardson, Sylvia; Ségala, Claire; Gatei, D.; Kenya, Patrick; Kung'u, A; Mati, J. G.; La, Brinton; Hoover, RN; Schairer, Catherine; Spirtas, Robert; Hp, Lee; Rookus, M.A.; Leeuwen, FE van; Schoenberg, J. A.; Gammon,; Clarke, E. Aileen; Jones, Lesley; McPherson, Klim; Neil, Andrew; Vessey, Martin; Yeates, David; Beral, Valerie; Bull, Diana; Crossley, Barbara; Hermon, C; Jones, Stephanie; Key, Timothy J.; Reeves, Clewis G; Smith, Paul J.; Collins, Rory; Doll, Richard; Pető, Richárd; Hannaford, Philip Christopher; Kay, CliffordR.; Rosero-Bixby, Luis; Yuan, Jian‐Min; Wei, H. Y.; Yun, Tae-Jin; Chen, Zhiheng; Berry, Geoffrey; Booth, J. Cooper; Jelihovsky, Tatiana; MacLennan, Robert; Shearman, Rodney P.; Q-S., Wang; Cj, Baines; Ab, Miller; Wall, Claus; Lund, Eiliv; Stalsberg, Helge; Dabancens, A; Martinez, L.; Molina, Ramiro; Salas, O; Alexander, FE; Hulka, B; Chilvers, C. E. D.; Bernstein, Leslie; Rw, Haile; Paganini-Hill, A; Pike, M. C.; Rk, Ross; Ursin, Giske; Yu, M C; Adami, H O; Bergström, Reinhold; Mp, Longnecker; Farley, T. M.N.; Holck, S; Meirik, Olav

doi:10.1016/s0010-7824(15)30002-0

Cited by 97 publications

(5 citation statements)

References 26 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In our meta-analysis, based on accepted criteria, we found no increased risk of breast cancer associated with use of low-potency/low estrogen-dose oral contraceptives, a finding which was comparable with earlier high-potency/high-dose preparations. Our results confirmed earlier reports of Collaborative Group on Hormonal Factors in Breast Cancer [ 112 ] that among women for whom information was available concerning the OC formulations used, there was no significant variation in the breast cancer risk associated with use specific types and doses of estrogen or progestogen. In a meta-analysis based on different periods of inclusion in the study, Romieu et al [ 110 ] also showed no significant effect of different OC formulations on risk of breast cancer: Cases accrued between 1975–1989—RR = 1.08, and cases accrued between 1980–1989—RR = 1.06.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 91%

Use of Oral Contraceptives as a Potential Risk Factor for Breast Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Case-Control Studies Up to 2010

Kanadys

Barańska

Malm

et al. 2021

IJERPH

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Despite numerous studies evaluating the risk of breast cancer among oral contraception users, the effect of oral contraceptive on developing breast cancer remains inconclusive. Therefore, we conducted a systematic review of literature with meta-analysis in order to quantitative estimate this association. The bibliographic database MEDLINE and EMBASE, and reference lists of identified articles were searched, with no language restrictions, from the start of publication to August 2010. We performed a reanalysis and overall estimate of 79 case-control studies conducted between 1960–2010, including a total of 72,030 incidents, histologically confirmed cases of breast cancer and 123,650 population/hospital controls. A decrease was observed in cancer risk in OC users before age 25 years (0.91, 0.83–1.00). However, the use of OCs before the first full-term pregnancy had a significant increased risk of breast cancer (OR, 1.14, 1.01–1.28, p = 0.04), as did OC use longer than 5 years (1.09, 1.01–1.18, p = 0.02). Pooled crude odds ratios of breast cancer in ever-users of oral contraceptives was 1.01 [95% confidence interval (CI), 0.95–1.07], compared with never-users. There was no significant increase in risk among premenopausal women (1.06, 0.92–1.22), postmenopausal women (0.99, 0.89–1.10), or nulliparous women (1.02, 0.82–1.26). Oral contraceptives do not appear to increase the risk of breast cancer among users. However, OC use before a first full-term pregnancy or using them longer than 5 years can modify the development of the breast cancer.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 91%

Use of Oral Contraceptives as a Potential Risk Factor for Breast Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Case-Control Studies Up to 2010

Kanadys

Barańska

Malm

et al. 2021

IJERPH

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Maternal use of synthetic estrogen diethylstilbestrol, which was widely prescribed in 1940–1960s to prevent pregnancy complications, has been shown to significantly increase the risk of breast cancer in offspring ( 108 , 109 ), but not until after the age of 40. Combined OCP use (estrogen + progestin) increases the risk of breast cancer ( 12 , 110 , 111 ) and like early age at menarche, the younger a woman is at the start of use, the higher her risk of breast cancer. One large meta-analysis reporting on 54 studies including 53,279 cases and 100,239 controls observed an RR of 1.6 (SD 0.142, p = 0.0001) for women who began OCP use before the age of 17 compared to an RR 1.2 (SD 0.047) in women commencing treatment after 22 years of age.…”

Section: Aberrant Hormone Exposure Is More Influential In the Young mentioning

confidence: 99%

Estrogen Effects on the Mammary Gland in Early and Late Life and Breast Cancer Risk

2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A woman has an increased risk of breast cancer if her lifelong estrogen exposure is increased due to an early menarche, a late menopause, and/or an absence of childbearing. For decades, it was presumed that the number of years of exposure drove the increased risk, however, recent epidemiological data have shown that early life exposure (young menarche) has a more significant effect on cancer risk than late menopause. Thus, rather than the overall exposure it seems that the timing of hormone exposure plays a major role in defining breast cancer risk. In support of this, it is also known that aberrant hormonal exposure prior to puberty can also increase breast cancer risk, yet the elevated estrogen levels during pregnancy decrease breast cancer risk. This suggests that the effects of estrogen on the mammary gland/breast are age-dependent. In this review article, we will discuss the existing epidemiological data linking hormone exposure and estrogen receptor-positive breast cancer risk including menarche, menopause, parity, and aberrant environmental hormone exposure. We will discuss the predominantly rodent generated experimental data that confirm the association with hormone exposure and breast cancer risk, confirming its use as a model system. We will review the work that has been done attempting to define the direct effects of estrogen on the breast, which are beginning to reveal the mechanism of increased cancer risk. We will then conclude with our views on the most pertinent questions to be addressed experimentally in order to explore the relationship between age, estrogen exposure, and breast cancer risk.

show abstract

“… 91 , 92 In addition, any increased risk of breast cancer returns to baseline 10 years after cessation of combined oral contraception. 93 …”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Current and recent use of estrogen-containing hormonal contraception is thought to increase breast cancer risk through a tumor promoter effect rather than an initiator effect on preexisting cancer cells . In addition, any increased risk of breast cancer returns to baseline 10 years after cessation of combined oral contraception …”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Association of Hormonal Contraceptive Use With Adverse Health Outcomes

et al. 2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Key Points Question What are the quality and certainty of evidence for an association between hormonal contraceptive use and the risk of adverse health outcomes in meta-analyses of randomized clinical trials and cohort studies? Findings In this umbrella review of 58 meta-analyses of randomized clinical trials and cohort studies describing 156 associations between hormonal contraceptive use and adverse health outcomes among women, no associations with adverse outcomes, including cardiovascular and cancer risk, were supported by high-quality evidence. However, the association between the use of a levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine system and reductions in endometrial polyps associated with tamoxifen use was graded as having high-quality evidence. Meaning The results of this umbrella review supported preexisting understandings of the risks and benefits associated with hormonal contraceptive use, suggesting that the associations between hormonal contraceptive use and adverse health outcomes are not supported by high-quality evidence.

show abstract

Breast cancer and hormonal contraceptives: further results

Cited by 97 publications

References 26 publications

Use of Oral Contraceptives as a Potential Risk Factor for Breast Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Case-Control Studies Up to 2010

Use of Oral Contraceptives as a Potential Risk Factor for Breast Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Case-Control Studies Up to 2010

Estrogen Effects on the Mammary Gland in Early and Late Life and Breast Cancer Risk

Association of Hormonal Contraceptive Use With Adverse Health Outcomes

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About