Tubal ligation and risk of ovarian cancer subtypes: a pooled analysis of case-control studies

Sieh, Weiva; Salvador, Shannon; McGuire, Valerie; Weber, Rachel Palmieri; Terry, Kathryn L.; Rossing, Mary Anne; Risch, Harvey A.; Wu, Anna H.; Webb, Penelope M.; Moysich, Kirsten B.; Doherty, Jennifer A.; Felberg, Anna; Miller, Dianne; Jordan, Susan J.; Study, Australian Cancer; Goodman, Marc T.; Lurie, Galina; Chang‐Claude, Jenny; Rudolph, Anja; Kjær, Susanne K.; Jensen, Allan; Høgdall, Estrid; Bandera, Elisa V.; Olson, Sara H.; King, Melony; Rodrı́guez-Rodrı́guez, Lorna; Kiemeney, Lambertus A.; Marees, Tamara; Massuger, Leon F.A.G.; Altena, Anne M. van; Ness, Roberta B.; Cramer, Daniel W.; Pike, Malcolm C.; Pearce, Celeste Leigh; Berchuck, Andrew; Schildkraut, Joellen M.; Whittemore, Alice S.

doi:10.1093/ije/dyt042

Cited by 158 publications

(134 citation statements)

References 42 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

118

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…The Australian Ovarian Cancer Study group reported strikingly similar patterns of risk for serous ovarian and fallopian tube cancers and different results for primary peritoneal cancers suggesting that the former may be linked . Additional studies have reported that the protective effect of tubal ligation is subtype specific with risk reduction for invasive endometrioid and clear cell cancers (Sieh et al 2013b). Studies on women with BRCA1/BRCA2 mutations have provided convincing evidence that highgrade serous cancers can arise from cells within the fallopian tube (reviewed in Berns & Bowtell (2012)).…”

Section: Ovarian Cancermentioning

confidence: 99%

Evidence of androgen action in endometrial and ovarian cancers

Gibson

Simitsidellis

Collins

et al. 2014

Endocrine-Related Cancer

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Endometrial cancer (EC) and ovarian cancer are common gynaecological malignancies. The impact of androgen action in these cancers is poorly understood; however, there is emerging evidence to suggest that targeting androgen signalling may be of therapeutic benefit. Epidemiological evidence suggests that there is an increased risk of EC associated with exposure to elevated levels of androgens, and genetic variants in genes related to both androgen biosynthesis and action are associated with an increased risk of both EC and ovarian cancer. Androgen receptors (ARs) may be a potential therapeutic target in EC due to reported anti-proliferative activities of androgens. By contrast, androgens may promote growth of some ovarian cancers and anti-androgen therapy has been proposed. Introduction of new therapies targeting ARs expressed in EC or ovarian cancer will require a much greater understanding of the impacts of cell context-specific AR-dependent signalling and how ARs can crosstalk with other steroid receptors during progression of disease. This review considers the evidence that androgens may be important in the aetiology of EC and ovarian cancer with discussion of evidence for androgen action in normal and malignant endometrial and ovarian tissue.

show abstract

Section: Ovarian Cancermentioning

confidence: 99%

Evidence of androgen action in endometrial and ovarian cancers

Gibson

Simitsidellis

Collins

et al. 2014

Endocrine-Related Cancer

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Female occlusive sterilization procedures are estimated to reduce a woman's lifetime risk of ovarian cancer by 24-34% [6,7]. However, a recent meta-analysis Contraception 95 (2017) 505 -508 demonstrated that women who had undergone salpingectomy had an overall 49% reduction in ovarian carcinoma risk [8].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Safety outcomes of female sterilization by salpingectomy and tubal occlusion

Westberg

Scott²,

Creinin³

2015

Contraception

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

TitleAbstract Objective: Compare immediate and short-term complications and surgical times among women having laparoscopic salpingectomy or tubal occlusion for female sterilization. Study design: We used billing data to identify women having laparoscopic sterilization at our training institution between July 1, 2011, and June 30, 2015. We performed a retrospective chart review to extract demographic information, surgical times and complications within 30 days, including unscheduled clinic or emergency room visits. We categorized complications as immediate (prior to discharge) and short-term (within 30 days after the procedure). Surgeries including additional procedures other than IUD removal were considered mixed operations. Mixed operations and unilateral sterilization procedures were only included in safety evaluations. Results: The 149 procedures included 81 salpingectomies (including 18 mixed operations and 2 unilateral salpingectomies) and 68 tubal occlusions (including 8 mixed operations). All procedures involved Obstetrics and Gynecology residents. Salpingectomy and occlusion procedures had similar immediate (2.5% vs. 2.9%, p=1.0) and short-term (4.9% vs. 14.7%, p=.051) complication rates. Surgical time averaged 6 min longer for salpingectomies than occlusion procedures (44 vs. 38 min, respectively, p=.018). Average surgical times were shorter with more experienced (3rd/4th year) residents than less experienced (1st/2nd year) residents for both salpingectomy (32±18 min vs. 46±13 min, respectively, p=.124) and occlusion procedures (32±13 min vs. 41±12 min, respectively, p=.026). Conclusion: Salpingectomy for female sterilization takes slightly longer to complete than tubal occlusion procedures without evidence that it increases complications. Implications statement: Laparoscopic salpingectomy is a safe alternative to tubal occlusion with only a small increase in surgical time. Because salpingectomy offers higher efficacy and more ovarian cancer protection than occlusion procedures, salpingectomy should be an option offered to women seeking laparoscopic sterilization.

show abstract

“…The reduction in ovarian cancer risk has been reported by others (Cibula et al, 2011;Rice et al, 2012;Sieh et al, 2013). We previously reported significant heterogeneity by histological type of ovarian cancer, finding that tubal ligation was associated with a modest reduction of serous tumours overall (RR ¼ 0.84, 95% CI: 0.77-0.92), and about a 20% reduction in risk of high-grade serous carcinoma, and almost a halving of risk of endometrioid and clear cell ovarian tumours (Gaitskell et al, 2016).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 54%