History of oral contraceptive use in breast cancer patients: impact on prognosis and endocrine treatment response

The association between endometriosis and risk of endometrial cancer and breast cancer: a meta-analysis

Purpose

Endometriosis (EMS) is confirmed pathophysiologically to be an estrogen-dependent disease, similar to endometrial hyperplasia/cancer and breast cancer. Epidemiological and biological data on endometriosis might explain links between endometriosis and these cancers. We sought to identify the differences in the risk of endometrial cancer and breast cancer between women with and women without endometriosis.

Methods

We searched PubMed, EMBASE, the Cochrane Library, and four Chinese databases (CNKI, VIP, WanFang, CBM) to identify relevant studies published online between January 2011 and March 2021. In our meta-analysis, we used the Newcastle–Ottawa Scale (NOS) to evaluate the design and quality of all studies, and we calculated the pooled risk ratio (RR) using the random model. The Q test and I2 were used to evaluate the degree of heterogeneity of eligible studies. We used funnel plots and Begg’s and Egger’s tests to assess publication bias.

Results

Of the 1369 articles, we finally included 14 cohort studies and seven case–control studies. Data from large cohort and case–control studies indicate that women with endometriosis had an increased risk of both endometrial cancer [RR, 1.662; 95% CI, (1.148–2.407)] and breast cancer [RR, 1.082; 95% CI, (1.001–1.169)].

Conclusion

Endometriosis can increase the risk of endometrial cancer and breast cancer, and women with endometriosis are recommended to receive routine screening in long-term management.

Effect of the use of prediagnosis hormones on breast cancer prognosis: MCC-Spain study

OBJECTIVE

To extend knowledge about the long-term use of hormones in hormone therapy or oral contraception as prognostic factors in breast cancer.

METHODS

The MCC-Spain project is a cohort of 1,685 women with incident breast cancer recruited in Spain. Recruitment was carried out between 2007 and 2010, and the follow-up finished in December 2017. The impact of hormone therapy or oral contraception on breast cancer prognosis was analyzed considering year of birth and menopausal status (1,095 women [65%] were postmenopausal). Hazard ratios (HRs) were estimated using Cox regression models. Death by any cause was considered as the event, and hormone therapy or oral contraception were analyzed as regressors.

RESULTS

Oral contraception use for less than 5 years shows an HR of 1.10 (95% CI, 0.75 to 1.62), whereas use for 5 or more years shows an HR of 1.46 (95% CI, 0.95 to 2.25), with a P trend of 0.01, showing a dose-dependent response. Regarding hormone therapy and restricting the analysis to postmenopausal women born between1940 and 1959, where most hormone therapy (consumption) is concentrated, the results did not show any trend.

CONCLUSION

Concerning oral contraception use, our results demonstrate that their use is related to poor prognosis in breast cancer. However, research in this field is limited and controversial, indicating the need for more research in this area. Regarding hormone therapy consumption, our results indicate no association with better prognosis, which contradicts what has previously been published.

Structured reporting to improve transparency of analyses in prognostic marker studies

BACKGROUND

Factors contributing to the lack of understanding of research studies include poor reporting practices, such as selective reporting of statistically significant findings or insufficient methodological details. Systematic reviews have shown that prognostic factor studies continue to be poorly reported, even for important aspects, such as the effective sample size. The REMARK reporting guidelines support researchers in reporting key aspects of tumor marker prognostic studies. The REMARK profile was proposed to augment these guidelines to aid in structured reporting with an emphasis on including all aspects of analyses conducted.

METHODS

A systematic search of prognostic factor studies was conducted, and fifteen studies published in 2015 were selected, three from each of five oncology journals. A paper was eligible for selection if it included survival outcomes and multivariable models were used in the statistical analyses. For each study, we summarized the key information in a REMARK profile consisting of details about the patient population with available variables and follow-up data, and a list of all analyses conducted.

RESULTS

Structured profiles allow an easy assessment if reporting of a study only has weaknesses or if it is poor because many relevant details are missing. Studies had incomplete reporting of exclusion of patients, missing information about the number of events, or lacked details about statistical analyses, e.g., subgroup analyses in small populations without any information about the number of events. Profiles exhibit severe weaknesses in the reporting of more than 50% of the studies. The quality of analyses was not assessed, but some profiles exhibit several deficits at a glance.

CONCLUSIONS

A substantial part of prognostic factor studies is poorly reported and analyzed, with severe consequences for related systematic reviews and meta-analyses. We consider inadequate reporting of single studies as one of the most important reasons that the clinical relevance of most markers is still unclear after years of research and dozens of publications. We conclude that structured reporting is an important step to improve the quality of prognostic marker research and discuss its role in the context of selective reporting, meta-analysis, study registration, predefined statistical analysis plans, and improvement of marker research.

The impact of oral contraceptive use on breast cancer risk: State of the art and future perspectives in the era of 4P medicine

Breast cancer is the most commonly occurring cancer in women, the second most frequent cancer overall, and it causes the greatest number of cancer-related deaths among women. The significant increased concern of breast cancer worldwide may be attributed to the prolonged life expectancy and the adoption of the western lifestyle with its related risks factors. A woman's risk for breast cancer is linked to her reproductive history and with her lifetime hormonal exposure. Among the known risk factors for breast cancer, several studies investigated the possible role of the assumption of hormonal "pills" in both breast cancer incidence and development. Nevertheless, data about the association between the assumption of oral contraceptives and breast cancer incidence are still controversial and not conclusive. Given the public health importance of breast cancer and the popularity of hormonal "pills" as contraceptive, the impact of oral contraceptive use on breast cancer risk assumes relevance from both a clinical and a social point of view. Therefore, in this review we wanted to illustrate this issue by addressing the following major themes: a) the role of sex steroid hormones in female breast development and carcinogenesis; b) the clinical impact of hormonal oral contraception according to the state of the art literature; c) the actual scientific debate and future perspectives.

A review of the use of hormonal contraception in women with non-cardiovascular coexisting medical conditions. A comprehensive review

INTRODUCTION

Previously, the American College of Obstetrics and Gynecology (ACOG) had published an excellent practice bulletin addressing the use of hormone contraception in women with pre-existing medical conditions. This practice bulletin became out of date. The Centers for Disease Control and prevention (CDC) of the USA subsequently developed a point form guideline for the use of oral contraceptives in women with coexisting medical conditions.

EVIDENCE ACQUISITION

Although this acts as a guide, it leaves the clinician without an understanding of why they are doing what they are doing. This article is one of two related to women with coexisting medical conditions.

EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS

In this article we will provide an update of the scientific knowledge since the publication of the ACOG guideline (2006). It is to be used as a supplement for those who desire more information than that found in the CDC guidelines.

CONCLUSIONS

Although some recommendations have remained unchanged over the years, the development of lower dose contraceptive pills as well as the increased incidence of comorbid conditions, such as metabolic syndrome, in younger women seeking contraception has brought along new research and new evidence to guide clinicians in the prescription of these medications.

Prognostic Impact of Menopausal Hormone Therapy in Breast Cancer Differs According to Tumor Characteristics and Treatment

This study investigated how a history of menopausal hormone therapy (MHT) impacts clinical outcomes overall and in different subgroups of breast cancer patients. The study included 814 primary breast cancer patients aged ≥50 years in Sweden (2002–2012) with follow-up until 2016. Associations between patient- and tumor characteristics, recurrences, and overall survival were analyzed in relation to MHT. After a median follow-up of 7 years, 119 recurrences, and 111 deaths occurred. Ever MHT (n = 433, 53.2%) was associated with a lower BMI, frequency of alcohol abstinence, and histological grade, higher frequency of oral contraceptive use, and lobular cancer. Overall, MHT was not associated with prognosis, but there were significant effect modifications by estrogen receptor (ER) status, node status, main histological type, and aromatase inhibitor (AI) treatment on recurrence-risk (all P_interactions≤ 0.017). MHT conferred an increased recurrence-risk in patients with ER- tumors, adjusted Hazard Ratio (HR_adj) 3.99 (95% Confidence Interval (CI) 1.40–11.33), in node-negative patients HR_adj 1.88 (95% CI 1.11–3.17), and in non-AI-treated patients HR_adj 1.81 (95% CI 1.01–3.24), but decreased recurrence-risk in AI-treated patients HR_adj 0.46 (95% CI 0.25–0.84) and in patients with lobular cancer HR_adj 0.15 (95% CI 0.04–0.64). MHT was associated with lower risk of death in node-positive patients HR_adj of 0.48 (95% CI 0.27–0.86) and in AI-treated patients HR_adj of 0.41 (95% CI 0.22–0.77), but not in other patients (both P_interactions≤ 0.027). A history of MHT may have prognostic value for certain subgroups of breast cancer patients such as AI-treated or node-negative patients.

State of the evidence 2017: an update on the connection between breast cancer and the environment

BACKGROUND

In this review, we examine the continually expanding and increasingly compelling data linking radiation and various chemicals in our environment to the current high incidence of breast cancer. Singly and in combination, these toxicants may have contributed significantly to the increasing rates of breast cancer observed over the past several decades. Exposures early in development from gestation through adolescence and early adulthood are particularly of concern as they re-shape the program of genetic, epigenetic and physiological processes in the developing mammary system, leading to an increased risk for developing breast cancer. In the 8 years since we last published a comprehensive review of the relevant literature, hundreds of new papers have appeared supporting this link, and in this update, the evidence on this topic is more extensive and of better quality than that previously available.

CONCLUSION

Increasing evidence from epidemiological studies, as well as a better understanding of mechanisms linking toxicants with development of breast cancer, all reinforce the conclusion that exposures to these substances - many of which are found in common, everyday products and byproducts - may lead to increased risk of developing breast cancer. Moving forward, attention to methodological limitations, especially in relevant epidemiological and animal models, will need to be addressed to allow clearer and more direct connections to be evaluated.

The prognostic impact of COX-2 expression in breast cancer depends on oral contraceptive history, preoperative NSAID use, and tumor size

The association between tumor cyclooxygenase 2 (COX-2) expression and breast cancer prognosis has been inconsistent. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the prognostic significance of COX-2 tumor expression according to adjuvant treatment, and potential effect modifications of non-steroid anti-inflammatory drug (NSAID) use, and other tumor and lifestyle factors. A prospective cohort of 1,116 patients with primary breast cancer in Lund, Sweden, included 2002-2012 was followed until June 2014 (median 5 years). Tumor-specific COX-2 expression was evaluated on tissue microarrays using immunohistochemistry. Associations between COX-2 intensity (negative, weak-moderate, high) and patient and tumor characteristics as well as prognosis were analyzed. Tumor-specific COX-2 expression was available for 911 patients and was significantly associated with higher age at diagnosis and less aggressive tumor characteristics. Higher COX-2 expression was associated with lower risk for breast cancer events during the first five years of follow-up, _adj HR 0.60 (95%CI: 0.37-0.97), per category. The association between COX-2 expression and prognosis was significantly modified by oral contraceptive (OC) use (P_interaction  = 0.048), preoperative NSAID use (P_interaction  = 0.009), and tumor size (P_interaction  = 0.039). COX-2 negativity was associated with increased risk for events during the first five years in ever OC users, _adj HR 1.94 (1.01-3.72) and during the 11-year follow-up in preoperative NSAID users, _adj HR 4.51 (1.18-11.44) as well as in patients with large tumors, _adj HR 2.57 (1.28-5.15). In conclusion, this study, one of the largest evaluating COX-2 expression in breast cancer, indicates that the prognostic impact of COX-2 expression depends on host factors and tumor characteristics.

Impacts of smoking on endocrine treatment response in a prospective breast cancer cohort

BACKGROUND

The association between smoking and breast cancer prognosis remains unclear. The purpose of this study was to investigate whether preoperative smoking was associated with prognosis in different treatment groups.

METHODS

This population-based cohort consisted of 1065 breast cancer patients without preoperative treatment included between 2002 and 2012 in Lund, Sweden. Smoking status was examined in relation to patient and tumour characteristics, and prognosis in different treatment groups.

RESULTS

At the preoperative visit, 21.0% smoked. Median follow-up time was 5.1 years. Overall, in the 1016 patients included in the survival analyses, there was no significant association between smoking and risk of breast cancer events (adjusted hazard ratio (adjHR): 1.45; 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.95-2.20). For the 309 aromatase inhibitor (AI)-treated patients ⩾50 years with oestrogen receptor-positive (ER+) tumours, smoking was associated with risk of breast cancer events (adjHR: 2.97; 95% CI: 1.44-6.13), distant metastasis (adjHR: 4.19; 95% CI: 1.81-9.72), and death (adjHR: 3.52; 95% CI: 1.59-7.81). Smoking was not associated with breast cancer events or distant metastasis in other treatment groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Preoperative smoking was only associated with an increased risk for breast cancer events and distant metastasis in AI-treated patients. If confirmed, smoking status should be taken into consideration when selecting an endocrine therapy.