A prospective study of reproductive factors and exogenous hormone use in relation to ovarian cancer risk among Black women

A dose-response meta-analysis of the relationship between number of pregnancies and risk of gynecological cancers

BACKGROUND

Despite several investigations, the association between the number of pregnancies and gynecological cancers remains inconclusive. To address this issue, we conducted a dose-response meta-analysis of observational studies.

METHODS

We searched PubMed, Web of Science, and Scopus databases up to Jun 8, 2023, to identify observational studies that examined the association between the number of pregnancies and gynecologic cancers. To assess the heterogeneity across studies, we used the χ2 test and I2 statistics. We also explored the possibility of publication bias using Begg's and Egger's tests. The overall effect sizes were reported as odds ratios (ORs) with a 95% confidence interval (CI) using a random-effects model.

RESULTS

Out of the 87,255 studies initially identified, a total of 101 studies involving 8,230,754 participants were included in the final meta-analysis. Our analysis revealed a positive trend between the number of pregnancies and cervical cancer; however, this association was not found to be statistically significant except for fifth pregnancy. Conversely, our findings showed a significant decreasing trend between the number of pregnancies and the risk of endometrial and ovarian cancers. There was insufficient evidence to establish a relationship between the number of pregnancies and the risk of vaginal, vulvar, and fallopian tube cancers.

CONCLUSIONS

Our study found a positive trend between the number of pregnancies and cervical cancer and a significant decreasing trend between the number of pregnancies and endometrial and ovarian cancers. These findings may have implications for counseling women about their reproductive health and the potential risks and benefits of pregnancy.

The association between oral contraceptive pills and ovarian cancer risk: A systematic review and meta-analysis

INTRODUCTION

Previous study results have been inconclusive, so this meta-analysis aims to evaluate the association between ovarian cancer and oral contraceptive pills (OCPs).

METHODS

PubMed, EMBASE, Scopus, and Web of Science were searched to identify studies on the association between OCPs and ovarian cancer from January 1, 2000 through February 5, 2023. The pooled relative risk (RR) and odds ratio (OR) were used to measure this relationship.

RESULTS

A total of 67 studies were included. In the association between ever-use compared with never-use of OCPs and ovarian cancer risk, the pooled RR in cohort studies was 0.69 [95% CI: 0.61, 0.78]. For the relationship between duration of OCPs use and ovarian cancer in the cohort studies, no association between duration of use1-12 months 0.92 [95% CI: 0.82, 1.03] and duration of use 13-60 months 0.87 [95% CI: 0.73, 1.04], but there is a statistically significant inverse relationship between duration of use 61-120 months 0.62 [95% CI: 0.48, 0.81] and more than 120 months 0.51 [95% CI: 0.32, 0.80] and ovarian cancer. For the relationship between OCPs and histological subtype of epithelial ovarian cancer in the cohort studies, the pooled RR for invasive was 0.70 [95% CI: 0.56, 0.87], but no association between OCPs and borderline ovarian cancer 0.64 [95% CI: 0.31, 1.31].

CONCLUSION

Our analysis shows a statistically significant inverse relationship between ever-use compared to never-use of OCPs and ovarian cancer risk,and also between invasive cancer and OCPs. By increasing the duration of OCPs use, the risk of ovarian cancer decreased.

The risk of ovarian cancer in hormone replacement therapy users: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Background

With the increasing use of hormone replacement therapy (HRT), there is a need to understand its impact on the occurrence of female malignant tumors. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to assess the risk of ovarian cancer associated with HRT and its related risk factors.

Methods

PUBMED, OVID, Embase, Cochrane, and Web of Science were searched from 1980 to April 2022 to identify studies on the risk of ovarian cancer and hormone replacement therapy. The random-effects model was used to estimate the pooled risk of HRT in ovarian cancer, both in cohort studies and case-control studies. Additionally, the analysis examined the outcomes associated with different types of estrogen plus progesterone regimens. Meta-regression and sensitive analysis were performed to evaluate the heterogeneity.

Results

21 cohort studies (involving 15,313 cases and 4,564,785 participants) and 30 case-control studies (including 18,738 cases and 57,747 controls) were analyzed. The pooled risks of ovarian cancer for HRT users were 1.20 (95% confidence interval [CI] 1.01-1.44) from cohort studies and 1.13 (95%CI 1.04-1.22) from case-control studies. However, after restricting the study period to recent decades, the significant results indicating a higher risk disappeared in cohort studies conducted after 2010 and in case-control studies conducted after 2006. Furthermore, the continuous use of estrogen-progesterone replacement therapy (EPRT) was associated with a risk comparable to that of sequential use. Subgroup analysis showed that both estrogen replacement treatment (ERT) and EPRT had minor risks; The risk further increased with prolonged exposure time, particularly for durations exceeding 10 years. Additionally, serous ovarian cancer appeared to be more susceptible than other pathological types.

Conclusion

The risk of ovarian cancer associated with HRT has been decreasing over time. However, ERT may increase this risk, particularly when used for an extended period. It is recommended that long-time users consider continuous EPRT as a safer alternative.

Systematic review registration

www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/, identifier CRD42022321279.

Menopausal hormone therapy use and risk of ovarian cancer by race: the ovarian cancer in women of African ancestry consortium

BACKGROUND

Most studies examining post-menopausal menopausal hormone therapy (MHT) use and ovarian cancer risk have focused on White women and few have included Black women.

METHODS

We evaluated MHT use and ovarian cancer risk in Black (n = 800 cases, 1783 controls) and White women (n = 2710 cases, 8556 controls), using data from the Ovarian Cancer in Women of African Ancestry consortium. Logistic regression was used to estimate odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for the association of MHT use with ovarian cancer risk, examining histotype, MHT type and duration of use.

RESULTS

Long-term MHT use, ≥10 years, was associated with an increased ovarian cancer risk for White women (OR = 1.38, 95%CI: 1.22-1.57) and the association was consistent for Black women (OR = 1.20, 95%CI: 0.81-1.78, pinteraction = 0.4). For White women, the associations between long-term unopposed estrogen or estrogen plus progesterone use and ovarian cancer risk were similar; the increased risk associated with long-term MHT use was confined to high-grade serous and endometroid tumors. Based on smaller numbers for Black women, the increased ovarian cancer risk associated with long-term MHT use was apparent for unopposed estrogen use and was predominately confined to other epithelial histotypes.

CONCLUSION

The association between long-term MHT use and ovarian cancer risk was consistent for Black and White women.

Prevention of Epithelial Ovarian Cancer

Given the challenges with achieving effective and durable treatment for epithelial ovarian cancer, primary prevention is highly desirable. Fortunately, decades of research have provided evidence for several strategies that can be deployed to optimize risk reduction. These include surgery, chemoprevention, and lifestyle factor modifications. These broad categories vary in terms of the magnitude of risk reduction possible, the possible short-term and long-term side effects, the degree of difficulty, and acceptability. Thus, the concept of a risk-based model to personalize preventive interventions is advocated to guide discussion between care providers and women at risk. For women with inherited major gene mutations that greatly increase risk of ovarian cancer, surgical approaches have favorable risk to benefit ratios. Chemoprevention and lifestyle factor modifications portend a lower degree of risk reduction but confer lower risk of undesirable side effects. Since complete prevention is not currently possible, better methods for early detection remain a high priority.

Hormone Therapy for the Primary Prevention of Chronic Conditions in Postmenopausal Persons: Updated Evidence Report and Systematic Review for the US Preventive Services Task Force

IMPORTANCE

It is uncertain whether hormone therapy should be used for the primary prevention of chronic conditions such as heart disease, osteoporosis, or some types of cancers.

OBJECTIVE

To update evidence for the US Preventive Services Task Force on the benefits and harms of hormone therapy in reducing risks for chronic conditions.

DATA SOURCES

PubMed/MEDLINE, Cochrane Library, EMBASE, and trial registries from January 1, 2016, through October 12, 2021; surveillance through July 2022.

STUDY SELECTION

English-language randomized clinical trials and prospective cohort studies of fair or good quality.

DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS

Dual review of abstracts, full-text articles, and study quality; meta-analyses when at least 3 similar studies were available.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

Morbidity and mortality related to chronic conditions; health-related quality of life.

RESULTS

Twenty trials (N = 39 145) and 3 cohort studies (N = 1 155 410) were included. Participants using estrogen only compared with placebo had significantly lower risks for diabetes over 7.1 years (1050 vs 903 cases; 134 fewer [95% CI, 18-237]) and fractures over 7.2 years (1024 vs 1413 cases; 388 fewer [95% CI, 277-489]) per 10 000 persons. Risks per 10 000 persons were statistically significantly increased for gallbladder disease over 7.1 years (1113 vs 737 cases; 377 more [95% CI, 234-540]), stroke over 7.2 years (318 vs 239 cases; 79 more [95% CI, 15-159]), venous thromboembolism over 7.2 years (258 vs 181 cases; 77 more [95% CI, 19-153]), and urinary incontinence over 1 year (2331 vs 1446 cases; 885 more [95% CI, 659-1135]). Participants using estrogen plus progestin compared with placebo experienced significantly lower risks, per 10 000 persons, for colorectal cancer over 5.6 years (59 vs 93 cases; 34 fewer [95% CI, 9-51]), diabetes over 5.6 years (403 vs 482 cases; 78 fewer [95% CI, 15-133]), and fractures over 5 years (864 vs 1094 cases; 230 fewer [95% CI, 66-372]). Risks, per 10 000 persons, were significantly increased for invasive breast cancer (242 vs 191 cases; 51 more [95% CI, 6-106]), gallbladder disease (723 vs 463 cases; 260 more [95% CI, 169-364]), stroke (187 vs 135 cases; 52 more [95% CI, 12-104]), and venous thromboembolism (246 vs 126 cases; 120 more [95% CI, 68-185]) over 5.6 years; probable dementia (179 vs 91 cases; 88 more [95% CI, 15-212]) over 4.0 years; and urinary incontinence (1707 vs 1145 cases; 562 more [95% CI, 412-726]) over 1 year.

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

Use of hormone therapy in postmenopausal persons for the primary prevention of chronic conditions was associated with some benefits but also with an increased risk of harms.

Racial differences in the association of body mass index and ovarian cancer risk in the OCWAA Consortium

BACKGROUND

Obesity disproportionately affects African American (AA) women and has been shown to increase ovarian cancer risk, with some suggestions that the association may differ by race.

METHODS

We evaluated body mass index (BMI) and invasive epithelial ovarian cancer (EOC) risk in a pooled study of case-control and nested case-control studies including AA and White women. We evaluated both young adult and recent BMI (within the last 5 years). Associations were estimated using multi-level and multinomial logistic regression models.

RESULTS

The sample included 1078 AA cases, 2582 AA controls, 3240 White cases and 9851 White controls. We observed a higher risk for the non-high-grade serous (NHGS) histotypes for AA women with obesity (ORBMI 30+= 1.62, 95% CI: 1.16, 2.26) and White women with obesity (ORBMI 30+= 1.20, 95% CI: 1.02, 2.42) compared to non-obese. Obesity was associated with higher NHGS risk in White women who never used HT (ORBMI 30+= 1.40, 95% CI: 1.08, 1.82). Higher NHGS ovarian cancer risk was observed for AA women who ever used HT (ORBMI 30+= 2.66, 95% CI: 1.15, 6.13), while in White women, there was an inverse association between recent BMI and risk of EOC and HGS in ever-HT users (EOC ORBMI 30+= 0.81, 95% CI: 0.69, 0.95, HGS ORBMI 30+= 0.73, 95% CI: 0.61, 0.88).

CONCLUSION

Obesity contributes to NHGS EOC risk in AA and White women, but risk across racial groups studied differs by HT use and histotype.

Racial disparities in epithelial ovarian cancer survival: An examination of contributing factors in the Ovarian Cancer in Women of African Ancestry consortium

Black women diagnosed with epithelial ovarian cancer have poorer survival compared to white women. Factors that contribute to this disparity, aside from socioeconomic status and guideline-adherent treatment, have not yet been clearly identified. We examined data from the Ovarian Cancer in Women of African Ancestry (OCWAA) consortium which harmonized data on 1074 Black women and 3263 white women with ovarian cancer from seven US studies. We selected potential mediators and confounders by examining associations between each variable with race and survival. We then conducted a sequential mediation analysis using an imputation method to estimate total, direct, and indirect effects of race on ovarian cancer survival. Black women had worse survival than white women (HR = 1.30; 95% CI 1.16-1.47) during study follow-up; 67.9% of Black women and 69.8% of white women died. In our final model, mediators of this disparity include college education, nulliparity, smoking status, body mass index, diabetes, diabetes/race interaction, postmenopausal hormone (PMH) therapy duration, PMH duration/race interaction, PMH duration/age interaction, histotype, and stage. These mediators explained 48.8% (SE = 12.1%) of the overall disparity; histotype/stage and PMH duration accounted for the largest fraction. In summary, nearly half of the disparity in ovarian cancer survival between Black and white women in the OCWAA consortium is explained by education, lifestyle factors, diabetes, PMH use, and tumor characteristics. Our findings suggest that several potentially modifiable factors play a role. Further research to uncover additional mediators, incorporate data on social determinants of health, and identify potential avenues of intervention to reduce this disparity is urgently needed.

Racial Differences in Population Attributable Risk for Epithelial Ovarian Cancer in the OCWAA Consortium

BACKGROUND

The causes of racial disparities in epithelial ovarian cancer (EOC) incidence remain unclear. Differences in the prevalence of ovarian cancer risk factors may explain disparities in EOC incidence among African American (AA) and White women.

METHODS

We used data from 4 case-control studies and 3 case-control studies nested within prospective cohorts in the Ovarian Cancer in Women of African Ancestry Consortium to estimate race-specific associations of 10 known or suspected EOC risk factors using logistic regression. Using the Bruzzi method, race-specific population attributable risks (PAR) were estimated for each risk factor individually and collectively, including groupings of exposures (reproductive factors and modifiable factors). All statistical tests were 2-sided.

RESULTS

Among 3244 White EOC cases and 9638 controls and 1052 AA EOC cases and 2410 controls, AA women had a statistically significantly higher PAR (false discovery rate [FDR] P < .001) for first-degree family history of breast cancer (PAR = 10.1%, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 6.5% to 13.7%) compared with White women (PAR = 2.6%, 95% CI = 0.8% to 4.4%). After multiple test correction, AA women had a higher PAR than White women when evaluating all risk factors collectively (PAR = 61.6%, 95% CI = 48.6% to 71.3% vs PAR = 43.0%, 95% CI = 32.8% to 51.4%, respectively; FDR P = .06) and for modifiable exposures, including body mass index, oral contraceptives, aspirin, and body powder (PAR = 36.0%, 95% CI = 21.0% to 48.8% vs PAR = 13.8%, 95% CI = 4.5% to 21.8%, respectively; FDR P = .04).

CONCLUSIONS

Collectively, the selected risk factors accounted for slightly more of the risk among AA than White women, and interventions to reduce EOC incidence that are focused on multiple modifiable risk factors may be slightly more beneficial to AA women than White women at risk for EOC.

Ovarian Cancer in Women of African Ancestry (OCWAA) consortium: a resource of harmonized data from eight epidemiologic studies of African American and white women

PURPOSE

Although the incidence rate of epithelial ovarian cancer (EOC) is somewhat lower in African American (AA) than white women, survival is worse. The Ovarian Cancer in Women of African Ancestry (OCWAA) consortium will overcome small, study-specific sample sizes to better understand racial differences in EOC risk and outcomes.

METHODS

We harmonized risk factors and prognostic characteristics from eight U.S.

STUDIES

the North Carolina Ovarian Cancer Study (NCOCS), the Los Angeles County Ovarian Cancer Study (LACOCS), the African American Cancer Epidemiology Study (AACES), the Cook County Case-Control Study (CCCCS), the Black Women's Health Study (BWHS), the Women's Health Initiative (WHI), the Multiethnic Cohort Study (MEC), and the Southern Community Cohort Study (SCCS).

RESULTS

Determinants of disparities for risk and survival in 1,146 AA EOC cases and 2,922 AA controls will be compared to 3,368 white EOC cases and 10,270 white controls. Analyses include estimation of population-attributable risk percent (PAR%) by race.

CONCLUSION

OCWAA is uniquely positioned to study the epidemiology of EOC in AA women compared with white women to address disparities. Studies of EOC have been underpowered to address factors that may explain AA-white differences in the incidence and survival. OCWAA promises to provide novel insight into disparities in ovarian cancer.

Menopausal Hormone Replacement Therapy and the Risk of Ovarian Cancer: A Meta-Analysis

Background: Findings by epidemiologic studies on menopausal hormone replacement therapy (HRT) and the risk of ovarian cancer are inconsistent. This study aimed to assess the association of menopausal HRT with the risk of ovarian cancer by histological subtype. Methods: A literature search was performed in PubMed, Web of Science, and EmBase for relevant articles published from inception to August 2018. Pooled relative risk ratios (RRs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were determined with a random-effects model. Results: Thirty-six studies involving 4, 229, 061 participants were included in this meta-analysis. The pooled RR of ovarian cancer was 1.29 (95%CI 1.19-1.40, I ² = 57.4%) for menopausal HRT. In subgroup analysis by study design, pooled RRs of ovarian cancer in cohort and case-control studies were 1.35 (95%CI 1.19-1.53) and 1.24 (95%CI 1.11-1.38), respectively. In subgroup analysis by continent, association of menopausal HRT with ovarian cancer was significant for North America (1.41 [1.23-1.61]), Europe (1.22 [1.12-1.34]), and Asia (1.76 [1.09-2.85]), but not Australia (0.96 [0.57-1.61]). Association differed across histological subtypes. Increased risk was only found for two common types, including serous (1.50 [1.35-1.68]) and endometrioid (1.48 [1.13-1.94]) tumors. Conclusion: This meta-analysis suggests that menopausal HRT may increase the risk of ovarian cancer, especially for serous and endometrioid tumors.

Association between contemporary hormonal contraception and ovarian cancer in women of reproductive age in Denmark: prospective, nationwide cohort study

OBJECTIVES

To investigate the association between contemporary combined hormonal contraceptives (including progestogen types in combined preparations and all progestogen-only products) and overall and specific types of ovarian cancer.

DESIGN

Prospective, nationwide cohort study.

SETTING

Denmark, 1995-2014.

PARTICIPANTS

All women aged 15-49 years during 1995-2014 were eligible. Women were excluded if they immigrated after 1995, had cancer (except non-melanoma skin cancer), had venous thrombosis, or were treated for infertility before entry (final study population included 1 879 227 women). Women were categorised as never users (no record of being dispensed hormonal contraception), current or recent users (≤1 year after stopping use), or former users (>1 year after stopping use) of different hormonal contraceptives.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Poisson regression was used to calculate relative risk of ovarian cancer among users of any contemporary combined hormonal contraceptives and by progestogen type in combined preparations and all progestogen-only products, including non-oral preparations. Separate analyses examined women followed up to their first contraception type switch and those with full contraceptive histories. Duration, time since last use, and tumour histology were examined and the population prevented fraction were calculated.

RESULTS

During 21.4 million person years, 1249 incident ovarian cancers occurred. Among ever users of hormonal contraception, 478 ovarian cancers were recorded over 13 344 531 person years. Never users had 771 ovarian cancers during 8 150 250 person years. Compared with never users, reduced risks of ovarian cancer occurred with current or recent use and former use of any hormonal contraception (relative risk 0.58 (95% confidence interval 0.49 to 0.68) and 0.77 (0.66 to 0.91), respectively). Relative risks among current or recent users decreased with increasing duration (from 0.82 (0.59 to 1.12) with ≤1 year use to 0.26 (0.16 to 0.43) with >10 years' use; P<0.001 for trend). Similar results were achieved among women followed up to their first switch in contraceptive type. Little evidence of major differences in risk estimates by tumour type or progestogen content of combined oral contraceptives was seen. Use of progestogen-only products were not associated with ovarian cancer risk. Among ever users of hormonal contraception, the reduction in the age standardised absolute rate of ovarian cancer was 3.2 per 100 000 person years. Based on the relative risk for the never use versus ever use categories of hormonal contraception (0.66), the population prevented fraction was estimated to be 21%-that is, use of hormonal contraception prevented 21% of ovarian cancers in the study population.

CONCLUSIONS

Use of contemporary combined hormonal contraceptives is associated with a reduction in ovarian cancer risk in women of reproductive age-an effect related to duration of use, which diminishes after stopping use. These data suggest no protective effect from progestogen-only products.

Doherty JA, Jensen A, Kelemen LE, Pearce CL, Poole E, Schildkraut JM, Terry KL, Tworoger SS, Webb PM, Wentzensen N. Current Gaps in Ovarian Cancer Epidemiology: The Need for New Population-Based Research

With recent ovarian cancer screening studies showing no clinically significant mortality benefit, preventing this disease, identifying high-risk populations, and extending survival remain priorities. However, several challenges are impeding progress in ovarian cancer research. With most studies capturing exposure information from 10 or more years ago, evaluation of how changing patterns of exposures, such as new oral contraceptive formulations and increased intrauterine device use, might influence ovarian cancer risk and survival is difficult. Risk factors for ovarian cancer should be evaluated in the context of tumor histotypes, which have unique molecular features and cells of origin; this is a task that requires large collaborative studies to achieve meaningful sample sizes. Importantly, identification of novel modifiable risk factors, in addition to those currently known to reduce risk (eg, childbearing, tubal ligation, oral contraceptive use), is needed; this is not feasibly implemented at a population level. In this Commentary, we describe important gaps in knowledge and propose new approaches to advance epidemiologic research to improve ovarian cancer prevention and survival, including updated classification of tumors, collection of data on changing and novel exposures, longer follow-up on existing studies, evaluation of diverse populations, development of better risk prediction models, and collaborating prospectively with consortia to develop protocols for new studies that will allow seamless integration for future pooled analyses.

A prospective cohort study of oral contraceptive use and ovarian cancer among women in the United States born from 1947 to 1964

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.