Oral contraceptive and reproductive risk factors for ovarian cancer within sisters in the breast cancer family registry

Risk factors for developing both primary breast and primary ovarian cancer: A systematic review

OBJECTIVE

Women with breast cancer have an increased risk of primary ovarian cancer (BR→OV), and women with ovarian cancer have an increased risk of primary breast cancer (OV→BR). This systematic review summarizes risk factors for developing BR→OV and OV→BR.

METHODS

We searched PubMed and Embase until June 2022.

RESULTS

We identified 23 articles meeting our inclusion criteria. Studies observed a lower risk of BR→OV for Black versus White women, alcohol consumption, radiotherapy and hormone therapy, BRCA2 versus BRCA1, and ER/PR positive versus negative breast tumors, and a higher risk with family history of breast/ovarian cancer, triple negative versus luminal breast cancer, and higher grade breast tumors. There was an increased risk of OV→BR with family history of cancer.

CONCLUSIONS

Tumor characteristics, and genetic and familial factors are associated with risk of BR→OV and OV→BR. These results could aid clinicians in decision-making for breast and ovarian cancer patients, including risk-reducing strategies.

Epidemiology and Risk Factors for Breast Cancer: 21st Century Advances, Gaps to Address through Interdisciplinary Science

Research methods to study risk factors and prevention of breast cancer have evolved rapidly. We focus on advances from epidemiologic studies reported over the past two decades addressing scientific discoveries, as well as their clinical and public health translation for breast cancer risk reduction. In addition to reviewing methodology advances such as widespread assessment of mammographic density and Mendelian randomization, we summarize the recent evidence with a focus on the timing of exposure and windows of susceptibility. We summarize the implications of the new evidence for application in risk stratification models and clinical translation to focus prevention-maximizing benefits and minimizing harm. We conclude our review identifying research gaps. These include: pathways for the inverse association of vegetable intake and estrogen receptor (ER)-ve tumors, prepubertal and adolescent diet and risk, early life adiposity reducing lifelong risk, and gaps from changes in habits (e.g., vaping, binge drinking), and environmental exposures.

Contraceptives and cancer risks in BRCA1/2 pathogenic variant carriers: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Increasing numbers of BReast CAncer (BRCA) 1 or 2 pathogenic variant (PV) carriers, who have an inherited predisposition to breast and ovarian cancer, are being identified. Among these women, data regarding the effects of contraception on cancer risks are unclear and various guidelines provide various recommendations.

OBJECTIVE AND RATIONALE

We aim to optimize counselling regarding contraception for BRCA1/2-PV carriers. Therefore, we performed a systematic review and meta-analysis. We investigated the risk ratio for developing breast cancer or ovarian cancer in BRCA1/2-PV carriers who have used any form of contraception versus non-users. Second, we analysed breast and ovarian cancer risk among BRCA1/2-PV carriers as influenced by the duration of contraceptive use and by the time since last use. In addition, we provide an overview of all relevant international guidelines regarding contraceptive use for BRCA1/2-PV carriers.

SEARCH METHODS

A systematic search in the Medline database and Cochrane library identified studies describing breast and/or ovarian cancer risk in BRCA1/2-PV carriers as modified by contraception until June 2021. The search included medical subject headings, keywords and synonyms related to BRCA and contraceptives (any kind). PRISMA guidance was followed. Risk Of Bias In Non-randomized Studies of Interventions and Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluations assessments were performed. Random-effects meta-analyses were used to estimate pooled effects for breast and ovarian cancer risk separately. Subgroup analyses were conducted for BRCA1 versus BRCA2 and for the various contraceptive methods.

OUTCOMES

Results of the breast cancer risk with oral contraceptive pill (OCP) analysis depended on the outcome measure. Meta-analyses of seven studies with 7525 women revealed a hazard ratio (HR) of 1.55 (95% CI: 1.36-1.76) and of four studies including 9106 women resulted in an odds ratio (OR) of 1.06 (95% CI: 0.90-1.25), heterogeneity (I2) 0% and 52%, respectively. Breast cancer risk was still increased in ever-users compared with never-users >10 years after last OCP use. In contrast, ovarian cancer risk was decreased among OCP users: HR 0.62 (95% CI: 0.52-0.74) based on two studies including 10 981 women (I2: 0%), and OR 0.49 (95% CI: 0.38-0.63) based on eight studies including 10 390 women (I2: 64%). The protective effect vanished after cessation of use. Tubal ligation also protects against ovarian cancer: one study including 3319 women (I2: 0%): HR: 0.44 (95% CI: 0.26-0.74) and three studies with 7691 women (I2: 44%): OR: 0.74 (95% CI: 0.53-1.03). Data regarding other contraceptives were unavailable. No differences were observed between BRCA1 and BRCA2-PV carriers. The quality of evidence was either low or very low.

WIDER IMPLICATIONS

The OCP potentially increases breast cancer risk, while ovarian cancer risk decreases with either the OCP and tubal ligation in BRCA1/2-PV carriers. Counselling of BRCA1/2-PV carriers should be personalized; the genetic and non-genetic factors (like prior risk-reducing surgeries, prior breast cancer and age) and patients' preferences (reversibility, ease of use, reliability and effect on menstrual cycle) should be balanced. To further optimize counselling for high-risk women, future research should focus on other (commonly used) contraceptive methods and cancer risks in this specific population, and on the potential impact of changing formulations over time.

Association of Combined Estrogen-Progestogen and Progestogen-Only Contraceptives with the Development of Cancer

Combined estrogen-progestogen contraceptives (oral contraceptives or OCs) and progestogen-only contraceptives (POCs) are synthetic steroids that bind to steroid hormone receptors, which are widespread throughout the body. They have a profound effect on cellular physiology. Combined OCs have been classified by the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) as Group 1 carcinogens, but their findings have not been updated recently. In order to update the information and better understand the impact that OCs and POCs have on the risk of development of cancers, a comprehensive literature search was undertaken, focusing on more recently published papers. In agreement with the IARC, the recent literature confirms an increased risk of breast cancer and cervical cancer with the use of OCs. The recent literature also confirms the IARC conclusion that OCs decrease the risk of ovarian and endometrial cancers. However, there is little support from recent studies for the IARC conclusion that OCs decrease the risk of colorectal cancer or increase the risk of liver cancer. For liver cancer, this may be due to the recent studies having been performed in areas where hepatitis is endemic. In one large observational study, POCs also appear to increase the overall risk of developing cancer. OCs and POCs appear to increase the overall risk of cancer when carefully performed studies with the least intrinsic bias are considered.

Summary

OCs have been classified as cancer-causing agents, especially leading to increases in breast cancer and cervical cancer. A review of the recent scientific literature was performed to see whether this still appears to be the case. The recent literature supports the cancer-causing role of OCs especially for breast cancer and cervical cancer. Studies also indicate that progesterone-only contraceptives (such as implants and vaginal rings) also can cause cancer. This is especially true for breast cancer and cervical cancer.

Parenclitic networks for predicting ovarian cancer

Prediction and diagnosis of complex disease may not always be possible with a small number of biomarkers. Modern 'omics' technologies make it possible to cheaply and quantitatively assay hundreds of molecules generating large amounts of data from individual samples. In this study, we describe a parenclitic network-based approach to disease classification using a synthetic data set modelled on data from the United Kingdom Collaborative Trial of Ovarian Cancer Screening (UKCTOCS) and serological assay data from a nested set of samples from the same study. This approach allows us to integrate quantitative proteomic and categorical metadata into a single network, and then use network topologies to construct logistic regression models for disease classification. In this study of ovarian cancer, comprising of 30 controls and cases with samples taken <14 months to diagnosis (n = 30) and/or >34 months to diagnosis (n = 29), we were able to classify cases with a sensitivity of 80.3% within 14 months of diagnosis and 18.9% in samples exceeding 34 months to diagnosis at a specificity of 98%. Furthermore, we use the networks to make observations about proteins within the cohort and identify GZMH and FGFBP1 as changing in cases (in relation to controls) at time points most distal to diagnosis. We conclude that network-based approaches may offer a solution to the problem of complex disease classification that can be used in personalised medicine and to describe the underlying biology of cancer progression at a system level.

Importance of hereditary and selected environmental risk factors in the etiology of inflammatory breast cancer: a case-comparison study

Background

To assess the importance of heredity in the etiology of inflammatory breast cancer (IBC), we compared IBC patients to several carefully chosen comparison groups with respect to the prevalence of first-degree family history of breast cancer.

Methods

IBC cases (n = 141) were compared to non-inflammatory breast cancer cases (n = 178) ascertained through George Washington University (GWU) with respect to the prevalence of first-degree family history of breast cancer and selected environmental/lifestyle risk factors for breast cancer. Similar comparisons were conducted with subjects from three case–control studies: breast cancer cases (n = 1145) and unaffected controls (n = 1142) from the Cancer Genetic Markers of Susceptibility (CGEMS) study, breast cancer cases (n = 465) and controls (n = 9317) from the Women’s Health Initiative (WHI) study, and ovarian cancer cases (n = 260) and controls (n = 331) from a study by University of Toronto (UT).

Results

The frequency of first-degree breast cancer family history among IBC cases was 17.0 % compared to 24.4 % for GWU breast cancer cases, 23.9 % and 17.9 % for CGEMS breast cancer cases and controls, respectively, 16.9 % and 12.6 % for WHI breast cancer cases and controls, respectively, and 24.2 % and 11.2 % for UT ovarian cancer cases and controls, respectively.

IBC cases had a significantly lower prevalence of parous women than WHI breast cancer cases (OR = 0.46, 95 % CI:0.27–0.81) and controls (OR = 0.31, 95 % CI:0.20–0.49). Oral contraceptive use was significantly higher among IBC cases compared to WHI breast cancer cases (OR = 7.77, 95 % CI:4.82–12.59) and controls (OR = 8.14, 95 % CI:5.28–12.61). IBC cases had a significantly higher frequency of regular alcohol consumption (≥1 drink per day) compared to WHI controls (OR = 1.84, 95 % CI:1.20–2.82) and UT controls (OR = 1.86, 95 % CI:1.07–3.22) and higher (statistically non-significant) prevalence (21.3 %) compared to breast cancer cases from GWU (18.2 %) and WHI (15.2 %).

Conclusions

The prevalence of first-degree breast cancer family history among IBC cases was lower compared to breast and ovarian cancer cases but higher than unaffected individuals. Our multiple-case inflammatory and non-inflammatory breast cancer families may reflect aggregation of common genetic and/or environmental factors predisposing to both types of breast cancer. Our findings that oral contraceptive use and regular alcohol consumption may be associated with IBC warrant further investigations.