1. |
- Gapstur, S. M., et al.
(author)
-
Menopausal hormone use and ovarian cancer risk: individual participant meta-analysis of 52 epidemiological studies
- 2015
-
In: The Lancet. - 1474-547X. ; 385:9980, s. 1835-1842
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- Background Half the epidemiological studies with information about menopausal hormone therapy and ovarian cancer risk remain unpublished, and some retrospective studies could have been biased by selective participation or recall. We aimed to assess with minimal bias the effects of hormone therapy on ovarian cancer risk. Methods Individual participant datasets from 52 epidemiological studies were analysed centrally. The principal analyses involved the prospective studies (with last hormone therapy use extrapolated forwards for up to 4 years). Sensitivity analyses included the retrospective studies. Adjusted Poisson regressions yielded relative risks (RRs) versus never-use. Findings During prospective follow-up, 12 110 postmenopausal women, 55% (6601) of whom had used hormone therapy, developed ovarian cancer. Among women last recorded as current users, risk was increased even with <5 years of use (RR 1.43, 95% CI 1.31-1.56; p<0.0001). Combining current-or-recent use (any duration, but stopped <5 years before diagnosis) resulted in an RR of 1.37 (95% CI 1.29-1.46; p<0.0001); this risk was similar in European and American prospective studies and for oestrogen-only and oestrogen-progestagen preparations, but differed across the four main tumour types (heterogeneity p<0.0001), being definitely increased only for the two most common types, serous (RR 1.53, 95% CI 1.40-1.66; p<0.0001) and endometrioid (1.42, 1.20-1.67; p<0.0001). Risk declined the longer ago use had ceased, although about 10 years after stopping long-duration hormone therapy use there was still an excess of serous or endometrioid tumours (RR 1.25, 95% CI 1.07-1.46, p=0.005). Interpretation The increased risk may well be largely or wholly causal; if it is, women who use hormone therapy for 5 years from around age 50 years have about one extra ovarian cancer per 1000 users and, if its prognosis is typical, about one extra ovarian cancer death per 1700 users.
|
|
2. |
- Beral, V., et al.
(author)
-
Ovarian Cancer and Body Size : Individual Participant Meta-Analysis Including 25,157 Women with Ovarian Cancer from 47 Epidemiological Studies
- 2012
-
In: PLoS Medicine. - : PUBLIC LIBRARY SCIENCE. - 1549-1277 .- 1549-1676. ; 9:4
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- Background: Only about half the studies that have collected information on the relevance of women's height and body mass index to their risk of developing ovarian cancer have published their results, and findings are inconsistent. Here, we bring together the worldwide evidence, published and unpublished, and describe these relationships. Methods and Findings: Individual data on 25,157 women with ovarian cancer and 81,311 women without ovarian cancer from 47 epidemiological studies were collected, checked, and analysed centrally. Adjusted relative risks of ovarian cancer were calculated, by height and by body mass index. Ovarian cancer risk increased significantly with height and with body mass index, except in studies using hospital controls. For other study designs, the relative risk of ovarian cancer per 5 cm increase in height was 1.07 (95% confidence interval [CI], 1.05-1.09; p<0.001); this relationship did not vary significantly by women's age, year of birth, education, age at menarche, parity, menopausal status, smoking, alcohol consumption, having had a hysterectomy, having first degree relatives with ovarian or breast cancer, use of oral contraceptives, or use of menopausal hormone therapy. For body mass index, there was significant heterogeneity (p<0.001) in the findings between ever-users and never-users of menopausal hormone therapy, but not by the 11 other factors listed above. The relative risk for ovarian cancer per 5 kg/m(2) increase in body mass index was 1.10 (95% CI, 1.07-1.13; p<0.001) in never-users and 0.95 (95% CI, 0.92-0.99; p = 0.02) in ever-users of hormone therapy. Conclusions: Ovarian cancer is associated with height and, among never-users of hormone therapy, with body mass index. In high-income countries, both height and body mass index have been increasing in birth cohorts now developing the disease. If all other relevant factors had remained constant, then these increases in height and weight would be associated with a 3% increase in ovarian cancer incidence per decade.
|
|
3. |
- Beral, V., et al.
(author)
-
Ovarian cancer and smoking: individual participant meta-analysis including 28 114 women with ovarian cancer from 51 epidemiological studies
- 2012
-
In: The Lancet Oncology. - 1474-5488. ; 13:9, s. 946-956
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- Background Smoking has been linked to mucinous ovarian cancer, but its effects on other ovarian cancer subtypes and on overall ovarian cancer risk are unclear, and the findings from most studies with relevant data are unpublished. To assess these associations, we review the published and unpublished evidence. Methods Eligible epidemiological studies were identified by electronic searches, review articles, and discussions with colleagues. Individual participant data for 28 114 women with and 94 942 without ovarian cancer from 51 epidemiological studies were analysed centrally, yielding adjusted relative risks (RRs) of ovarian cancer in smokers compared with never smokers. Findings After exclusion of studies with hospital controls, in which smoking could have affected recruitment, overall ovarian cancer incidence was only slightly increased in current smokers compared with women who had never smoked (RR 1.06, 95% CI 1.01-1.11, p=0.01). Of 17 641 epithelial cancers with specified histology, 2314 (13%) were mucinous, 2360 (13%) endometrioid, 969 (5%) clear-cell, and 9086 (52%) serous. Smoking-related risks varied substantially across these subtypes (p(heterogeneity)<0.0001). For mucinous cancers, incidence was increased in current versus never smokers (1.79, 95% CI 1.60-2.00, p<0.0001), but the increase was mainly in borderline malignant rather than in fully malignant tumours (2.25, 95% CI 1.91-2.65 vs 1.49, 1.28-1.73; p(heterogeneity)=0.01; almost half the mucinous tumours were only borderline malignant). Both endometrioid (0.81, 95% CI 0.72-0.92, p=0.001) and clear-cell ovarian cancer risks (0.80, 95% CI 0.65-0.97, p=0.03) were reduced in current smokers, and there was no significant association for serous ovarian cancers (0.99, 95% CI 0.93-1.06, p=0.8). These associations did not vary significantly by 13 sociodemographic and personal characteristics of women including their body-mass index, parity, and use of alcohol, oral contraceptives, and menopausal hormone therapy. Interpretation The excess of mucinous ovarian cancers in smokers, which is mainly of tumours of borderline malignancy, is roughly counterbalanced by the deficit of endometrioid and clear-cell ovarian cancers. The substantial variation in smoking-related risks by tumour subtype is important for understanding ovarian carcinogenesis.
|
|
4. |
|
|
5. |
- Beral, V, et al.
(author)
-
Alcohol, tobacco and breast cancer - collaborative reanalysis of individual data from 53 epidemiological studies, including 58515 women with breast cancer and 95067 women without the disease
- 2002
-
In: British Journal of Cancer. - : Springer Science and Business Media LLC. - 1532-1827 .- 0007-0920. ; 87, s. 1234-45
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- Alcohol and tobacco consumption are closely correlated and published results on their association with breast cancer have not always allowed adequately for confounding between these exposures. Over 80% of the relevant information worldwide on alcohol and tobacco consumption and breast cancer were collated, checked and analysed centrally. Analyses included 58515 women with invasive breast cancer and 95067 controls from 53 studies. Relative risks of breast cancer were estimated, after stratifying by study, age, parity and, where appropriate, women's age when their first child was born and consumption of alcohol and tobacco. The average consumption of alcohol reported by controls from developed countries was 6.0 g per day, i.e. about half a unit/drink of alcohol per day, and was greater in ever-smokers than never-smokers, (8.4 g per day and 5.0 g per day, respectively). Compared with women who reported drinking no alcohol, the relative risk of breast cancer was 1.32 (1.19 - 1.45, P < 0.00001) for an intake of 35 - 44 g per day alcohol, and 1.46 (1.33 - 1.61, P < 0.00001) for greater than or equal to 45 g per day alcohol. The relative risk of breast cancer increased by 7.1% (95% CI 5.5-8.7%; P<0.00001) for each additional 10 g per day intake of alcohol, i.e. for each extra unit or drink of alcohol consumed on a daily basis. This increase was the same in ever-smokers and never-smokers (7.1 % per 10 g per day, P < 0.00001, in each group). By contrast, the relationship between smoking and breast cancer was substantially confounded by the effect of alcohol. When analyses were restricted to 22 255 women with breast cancer and 40 832 controls who reported drinking no alcohol, smoking was not associated with breast cancer (compared to never-smokers, relative risk for ever-smokers= 1.03, 95% CI 0.98 - 1.07, and for current smokers=0.99, 0.92 - 1.05). The results for alcohol and for tobacco did not vary substantially across studies, study designs, or according to 15 personal characteristics of the women; nor were the findings materially confounded by any of these factors. If the observed relationship for alcohol is causal, these results suggest that about 4% of the breast cancers in developed countries are attributable to alcohol. In developing countries, where alcohol consumption among controls averaged only 0.4 g per day, alcohol would have a negligible effect on the incidence of breast cancer. In conclusion, smoking has little or no independent effect on the risk of developing breast cancer; the effect of alcohol on breast cancer needs to be interpreted in the context of its beneficial effects, in moderation, on cardiovascular disease and its harmful effects on cirrhosis and cancers of the mouth, larynx, oesophagus and liver. (C) 2002 Cancer Research UK.
|
|
6. |
|
|