1
|
Baboudjian M, Rajwa P, Barret E, Beauval JB, Brureau L, Créhange G, Dariane C, Fiard G, Fromont G, Gauthé M, Mathieu R, Renard-Penna R, Roubaud G, Ruffion A, Sargos P, Rouprêt M, Ploussard G. Vasectomy and Risk of Prostate Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis. EUR UROL SUPPL 2022; 41:35-44. [PMID: 35633829 PMCID: PMC9130083 DOI: 10.1016/j.euros.2022.04.012] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Accepted: 04/27/2022] [Indexed: 11/29/2022] Open
Abstract
Context Previous reports have shown an association between vasectomy and prostate cancer (PCa). However, there exist significant discrepancies between studies and systematic reviews due to a lack of strong causal association and residual confounding factors such as prostate-specific antigen (PSA) screening. Objective To assess the association between vasectomy and PCa, in both unadjusted and PSA screen-adjusted studies. Evidence acquisition We performed a systematic review according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses. The PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science databases were searched in January 2022 for studies that analyzed the association between vasectomy and PCa. Evidence synthesis A total of 37 studies including 16 931 805 patients met our inclusion criteria. A pooled analysis from all studies showed a significant association between vasectomy and any-grade PCa (odds ratio [OR] 1.23; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.10–1.37; p < 0.001; I2 = 96%), localized PCa (OR 1.08; 95% CI, 1.06–1.11; p < 0.00001; I2 = 31%), or advanced PCa (OR 1.07; 95% CI, 1.02–1.13; p = 0.006; I2 = 0%). The association with PCa remained significant when the analyses were restricted to studies with a low risk of bias (OR 1.06; 95% CI, 1.02–1.10; p = 0.02; I2 = 48%) or cohort studies (OR 1.09; 95% CI, 1.04–1.13; p < 0.0001; I2 = 64%). Among studies adjusted for PSA screening, the association with localized PCa (OR 1.06; 95% CI, 1.03–1.09; p < 0.001; I2 = 0%) remained significant. Conversely, vasectomy was no longer associated with localized high-grade (p = 0.19), advanced (p = 0.22), and lethal (p = 0.42) PCa. Conclusions Our meta-analysis found an association between vasectomy and any, mainly localized, PCa. However, the effect estimates of the association were increasingly close to null when examining studies of robust design and high quality. On exploratory analyses including studies, which adjusted for PSA screening, the association for aggressive and/or advanced PCa diminished. Patient summary In this study, we found an association between vasectomy and the risk of developing localized prostate cancer without being able to determine whether the procedure leads to a higher prostate cancer incidence.
Collapse
|
2
|
Association between vasectomy and risk of prostate cancer: a meta-analysis. Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis 2021; 24:962-975. [PMID: 33927357 DOI: 10.1038/s41391-021-00368-7] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/08/2021] [Revised: 03/12/2021] [Accepted: 04/12/2021] [Indexed: 02/03/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND The debate over the association between vasectomy and prostate cancer has been lasted about 40 years and there is no sign of stopping. In the present study, we aimed to evaluate whether vasectomy is associated with prostate cancer based on the most comprehensive and up-to-date evidence available. METHODS The PubMed, Cochrane Library, and EMBASE databases were systematically searched inception to March 14, 2021 without year or language restriction. Multivariable adjusted risk ratios (RRs) were used to assess each endpoint. Risk of bias was assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa scale. RESULTS A total of 58 studies involving 16,989,237 participants fulfilled inclusion criteria. There was significant association of vasectomy with risk of any prostate cancer (risk ratio, 1.18, 95% CI, 1.07-1.31). Association between vasectomy and advanced prostate cancer (risk ratio, 1.06, 95% CI, 1.01-1.12), low-grade prostate cancer (risk ratio, 1.06, 95% CI, 1.02-1.10), and intermediate-grade prostate cancer (risk ratio, 1.12, 95% CI, 1.03-1.22) were significant. There was no significant association between vasectomy and prostate cancer-specific mortality (risk ratio, 1.01, 95% CI, 0.93-1.10). CONCLUSIONS This study found that vasectomy was associated with the risk of any prostate cancer and advanced prostate cancer. From the current evidence, patients should be fully informed of the risk of prostate cancer before vasectomy.
Collapse
|
3
|
Bhindi B, Wallis CJD, Nayan M, Farrell AM, Trost LW, Hamilton RJ, Kulkarni GS, Finelli A, Fleshner NE, Boorjian SA, Karnes RJ. The Association Between Vasectomy and Prostate Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis. JAMA Intern Med 2017; 177:1273-1286. [PMID: 28715534 PMCID: PMC5710573 DOI: 10.1001/jamainternmed.2017.2791] [Citation(s) in RCA: 24] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.4] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/30/2017] [Accepted: 05/07/2017] [Indexed: 12/30/2022]
Abstract
Importance Despite 3 decades of study, there remains ongoing debate regarding whether vasectomy is associated with prostate cancer. Objective To determine if vasectomy is associated with prostate cancer. Data Sources The MEDLINE, EMBASE, Web of Science, and Scopus databases were searched for studies indexed from database inception to March 21, 2017, without language restriction. Study Selection Cohort, case-control, and cross-sectional studies reporting relative effect estimates for the association between vasectomy and prostate cancer were included. Data Extraction and Synthesis Two investigators performed study selection independently. Data were pooled separately by study design type using random-effects models. The Newcastle-Ottawa Scale was used to assess risk of bias. Main Outcomes and Measures The primary outcome was any diagnosis of prostate cancer. Secondary outcomes were high-grade, advanced, and fatal prostate cancer. Results Fifty-three studies (16 cohort studies including 2 563 519 participants, 33 case-control studies including 44 536 participants, and 4 cross-sectional studies including 12 098 221 participants) were included. Of these, 7 cohort studies (44%), 26 case-control studies (79%), and all 4 cross-sectional studies were deemed to have a moderate to high risk of bias. Among studies deemed to have a low risk of bias, a weak association was found among cohort studies (7 studies; adjusted rate ratio, 1.05; 95% CI, 1.02-1.09; P < .001; I2 = 9%) and a similar but nonsignificant association was found among case-control studies (6 studies; adjusted odds ratio, 1.06; 95% CI, 0.88-1.29; P = .54; I2 = 37%). Effect estimates were further from the null when studies with a moderate to high risk of bias were included. Associations between vasectomy and high-grade prostate cancer (6 studies; adjusted rate ratio, 1.03; 95% CI, 0.89-1.21; P = .67; I2 = 55%), advanced prostate cancer (6 studies; adjusted rate ratio, 1.08; 95% CI, 0.98-1.20; P = .11; I2 = 18%), and fatal prostate cancer (5 studies; adjusted rate ratio, 1.02; 95% CI, 0.92-1.14; P = .68; I2 = 26%) were not significant (all cohort studies). Based on these data, a 0.6% (95% CI, 0.3%-1.2%) absolute increase in lifetime risk of prostate cancer associated with vasectomy and a population-attributable fraction of 0.5% (95% CI, 0.2%-0.9%) were calculated. Conclusions and Relevance This review found no association between vasectomy and high-grade, advanced-stage, or fatal prostate cancer. There was a weak association between vasectomy and any prostate cancer that was closer to the null with increasingly robust study design. This association is unlikely to be causal and should not preclude the use of vasectomy as a long-term contraceptive option.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Bimal Bhindi
- Department of Urology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota
| | - Christopher J. D. Wallis
- Division of Urology, Department of Surgery, Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
| | - Madhur Nayan
- Division of Urology, Department of Surgery, Princess Margaret Hospital, University Health Network, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
| | - Ann M. Farrell
- Mayo Clinic Libraries, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota
| | | | - Robert J. Hamilton
- Division of Urology, Department of Surgery, Princess Margaret Hospital, University Health Network, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
| | - Girish S. Kulkarni
- Division of Urology, Department of Surgery, Princess Margaret Hospital, University Health Network, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
| | - Antonio Finelli
- Division of Urology, Department of Surgery, Princess Margaret Hospital, University Health Network, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
| | - Neil E. Fleshner
- Division of Urology, Department of Surgery, Princess Margaret Hospital, University Health Network, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
| | | | | |
Collapse
|
4
|
Nayan M, Hamilton RJ, Macdonald EM, Li Q, Mamdani MM, Earle CC, Kulkarni GS, Jarvi KA, Juurlink DN. Vasectomy and risk of prostate cancer: population based matched cohort study. BMJ 2016; 355:i5546. [PMID: 27811008 PMCID: PMC5094198 DOI: 10.1136/bmj.i5546] [Citation(s) in RCA: 17] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.1] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/04/2022]
Abstract
OBJECTIVE To determine the association between vasectomy and prostate cancer, adjusting for measures of health seeking behaviour. DESIGN Population based matched cohort study. SETTING Multiple validated healthcare databases in Ontario, Canada, 1994-2012. PARTICIPANTS 326 607 men aged 20 to 65 who had undergone vasectomy were identified through physician billing codes and matched 1:1 on age (within two years), year of cohort entry, comorbidity score, and geographical region to men who did not undergo a vasectomy. MAIN OUTCOMES MEASURES The primary outcome was incident prostate cancer. Secondary outcomes were prostate cancer related grade, stage, and mortality. RESULTS 3462 incident cases of prostate cancer were identified after a median follow-up of 10.9 years: 1843 (53.2%) in the vasectomy group and 1619 (46.8%) in the non-vasectomy group. In unadjusted analysis, vasectomy was associated with a slightly increased risk of incident prostate cancer (hazard ratio 1.13, 95% confidence interval 1.05 to 1.20). After adjustment for measures of health seeking behaviour, however, no association remained (adjusted hazard ratio 1.02, 95% confidence interval 0.95 to 1.09). Moreover, no association was found between vasectomy and high grade prostate cancer (adjusted odds ratio 1.05, 95% confidence interval 0.67 to 1.66), advanced stage prostate cancer (adjusted odds ratio 1.04, 0.81 to 1.34), or mortality (adjusted hazard ratio 1.06, 0.60 to 1.85). CONCLUSION The findings do not support an independent association between vasectomy and prostate cancer.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Madhur Nayan
- Division of Urology, Departments of Surgery and Surgical Oncology, Princess Margaret Cancer Centre, University Health Network and the University of Toronto, 610 University Ave 3-130, Toronto, ON, M5G 2M9, Canada
| | - Robert J Hamilton
- Division of Urology, Departments of Surgery and Surgical Oncology, Princess Margaret Cancer Centre, University Health Network and the University of Toronto, 610 University Ave 3-130, Toronto, ON, M5G 2M9, Canada
| | | | - Qing Li
- Institute for Clinical Evaluative Sciences, Toronto, ON, Canada
| | - Muhammad M Mamdani
- Institute for Clinical Evaluative Sciences, Toronto, ON, Canada
- Li Ka Shing Knowledge Institute, St Michael's Hospital, Toronto, ON, Canada
| | - Craig C Earle
- Institute for Clinical Evaluative Sciences, Toronto, ON, Canada
- Ontario Institute for Cancer Research, Toronto, ON, Canada
| | - Girish S Kulkarni
- Division of Urology, Departments of Surgery and Surgical Oncology, Princess Margaret Cancer Centre, University Health Network and the University of Toronto, 610 University Ave 3-130, Toronto, ON, M5G 2M9, Canada
- Institute for Clinical Evaluative Sciences, Toronto, ON, Canada
| | - Keith A Jarvi
- Division of Urology, Department of Surgery, Mount Sinai Hospital, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada; Faculty of Medicine, Institute of Medical Science, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada; Lunenfeld Tannenbaum Research Institute, Mount Sinai Hospital, Toronto, ON, Canada
| | - David N Juurlink
- Institute for Clinical Evaluative Sciences, Toronto, ON, Canada
- Department of Internal Medicine, Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
Nutt M, Reed Z, Köhler TS. Vasectomy and prostate cancer risk: a historical synopsis of undulating false causality. Res Rep Urol 2016; 8:85-93. [PMID: 27486569 PMCID: PMC4958361 DOI: 10.2147/rru.s71325] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.4] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/03/2022] Open
Abstract
The potential influence of vasectomy being a risk factor for the development of prostate cancer is not a new concept, with more than 30 publications addressing the topic. Given the global frequency of vasectomy and the prevalence of prostate cancer, this subject justifiably deserves scrutiny. Several articles have claimed that vasectomy puts men at risk for future development of prostate cancer. We explore articles that have shown the contrary (no link), explore the studies’ strengths and weaknesses, describe possible prostate cancer pathophysiologic mechanisms, and apply Bradford Hill criteria to help discern correlation with causation. The risk and interest of association of prostate cancer with vasectomy has waxed and waned over the last three decades. Based on our review, vasectomy remains a safe form of sterilization and does not increase prostate cancer risk.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Max Nutt
- Division of Urology, Southern Illinois University School of Medicine, Urology, Springfield, IL, USA
| | - Zachary Reed
- Division of Urology, Southern Illinois University School of Medicine, Urology, Springfield, IL, USA
| | - Tobias S Köhler
- Division of Urology, Southern Illinois University School of Medicine, Urology, Springfield, IL, USA
| |
Collapse
|
6
|
Vasectomy and prostate cancer risk: a meta-analysis of cohort studies. Sci Rep 2015; 5:9920. [PMID: 25927401 PMCID: PMC4415590 DOI: 10.1038/srep09920] [Citation(s) in RCA: 14] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.6] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/18/2014] [Accepted: 03/20/2015] [Indexed: 11/08/2022] Open
Abstract
Some studies have suggested that vasectomy is associated with the increased risk of prostate cancer, however, this conclusion is not supported by all the published studies. In order to examine the relationship between vasectomy and prostate cancer risk, we conducted a meta-analysis of cohort studies to clarify this controversial association. PubMed and Medline were used to identify the cohort studies that reported the association of vasectomy with prostate cancer risk from 1980 to January 2015. Based on a random effects model, the RR and 95% CI were used to assess the combined risk. In total, 10 cohort studies involving more than 7027 cases and 429914 participants were included. There was no significant relationship between vasectomy and prostate cancer risk, the pooled RR (95%CI) was 1.11[0.98, 1.27] (P = 0.109). In subgroup-analysis, the relationship between vasectomy and prostate cancer risk was not significantly modified by the length of follow-up and population distribution except Americans. Omission of any single study had little effect on the pooled risk estimate. Little evidence of publication bias was found. In conclusion, our meta-analysis suggests that vasectomy is not associated with the increased risk of prostate cancer. More studies based on other populations including the Chinese are needed.
Collapse
|
7
|
Rohrmann S, Paltoo DN, Platz EA, Hoffman SC, Comstock GW, Helzlsouer KJ. Association of Vasectomy and Prostate Cancer Among Men in a Maryland Cohort. Cancer Causes Control 2005; 16:1189-94. [PMID: 16215869 DOI: 10.1007/s10552-005-0304-8] [Citation(s) in RCA: 30] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.6] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/21/2004] [Accepted: 06/22/2005] [Indexed: 11/24/2022]
Abstract
OBJECTIVES To evaluate the association of vasectomy with prostate cancer. METHODS Participants were male members of the CLUE II cohort followed since 1989. On a questionnaire mailed in 1996, the men were asked if they had had a vasectomy and their age at vasectomy. Between 1996 and April 2004, 78 prostate cancer cases were confirmed among the 3373 men who were at least 35 years old at baseline and who completed the questions about vasectomy. Cox proportional hazards regression was used to estimate age-adjusted hazard ratios (HR) of prostate cancer. RESULTS The HR for prostate cancer for men who had had a vasectomy was 2.03 (95% CI: 1.24-3.32). Risk of low-grade disease (HR=2.87; 95% CI 1.49-5.54), but not high-grade disease (HR=0.99; 95% CI 0.36-2.76), was higher in men who had had a vasectomy. No statistically significant associations were observed for low- or high-stage disease. The association for vasectomy was more pronounced in men who were 40 years at the time of vasectomy (HR=2.63; 95% CI 1.40-4.94) than in men who were younger at vasectomy. CONCLUSIONS The results from this prospective study suggest a positive association between vasectomy and prostate cancer, especially low-grade disease.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Sabine Rohrmann
- Department of Epidemiology, Johns Hopkins University Bloomberg School of Public Health, 615 N. Wolfe St., Room E6138, Baltimore, MD 21205, USA
| | | | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
8
|
Dennis LK, Dawson DV, Resnick MI. Vasectomy and the risk of prostate cancer: a meta-analysis examining vasectomy status, age at vasectomy, and time since vasectomy. Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis 2003; 5:193-203. [PMID: 12496981 DOI: 10.1038/sj.pcan.4500586] [Citation(s) in RCA: 31] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/13/2001] [Accepted: 03/27/2002] [Indexed: 01/03/2023]
Abstract
The aim of this study was to conduct a quantitative review of prostate cancer studies to pool relative risk (RR) estimates on the association between prostate cancer and vasectomy, in an attempt to determine whether there is an association, and if so, its magnitude. Random-effects models were examined along with a linear model for time since vasectomy. The pooled RR estimate was 1.37 (95% CI=1.15-1.62) based on five cohort studies and 17 case-control studies. The RR estimate varied by study design with the lowest risk for population-based case-control studies. No difference was seen in risk by age at vasectomy. A linear trend based on the 16 studies reporting time since vasectomy suggested an 10% increase for each additional 10 y or a RR of 1.32 (95% CI=1.17-1.50) for 30 y since vasectomy. When null effects were assumed for the six studies not reporting information, the linear RR for the 22 studies was 1.07 (1.03-1.11) and 1.23 (1.11-1.37) for 10 and 30 y since vasectomy, respectively. These results suggest that men with a prior vasectomy may be at an increased risk of prostate cancer, however, the increase may not be causal since potential bias cannot be discounted. The overall association was small and therefore could be explained by bias. The latency effect shown here for time since vasectomy should be examined further.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- L K Dennis
- Department of Epidemiology, College of Public Health, University of Iowa, Iowa City, Iowa 52242, USA.
| | | | | |
Collapse
|