Ovulation induction treatment and risk of borderline ovarian tumors

Fertility drugs and cancer: a guideline

Methodological limitations in studying the association between the use of fertility drugs and cancer include the inherent increased risk of cancer in women who never conceive, the increased risk of cancer because of factors (endometriosis and unopposed estrogen) associated with infertility, the low incidence of most of these cancers, and that the diagnosis of cancer is typically several years after fertility drug use. On the basis of available data, there does not appear to be an association between fertility drugs and breast, colon, or cervical cancer. There is no conclusive evidence that fertility drugs increase the risk of uterine cancer, although women with infertility are at higher risk of uterine cancer. There are insufficient data to comment on the risk of melanoma and non-Hodgkin lymphoma associated with fertility drug use. Women should be informed that there may be an increased risk of invasive and borderline ovarian cancers and thyroid cancer associated with fertility treatment. It is difficult to determine whether this risk is related to underlying endometriosis, female infertility, or nulliparity.

Risk of borderline ovarian tumors after fertility treatment - Results from a Danish cohort of infertile women

OBJECTIVE

Results from previous studies examining the association between fertility treatment and borderline ovarian tumors are inconsistent. The aim of this study was to investigate the association between fertility treatment and borderline ovarian tumors in a cohort of infertile women.

METHODS

This cohort study was based on the Danish Infertility Cohort and included all infertile women aged 20-45 years living in Denmark between 1 January 1995 and 31 December 2017 (n = 146,891). Information on use of fertility drugs, borderline ovarian tumors and cancer diagnoses, covariates, emigration, and vital status was obtained by linkage to national registers. Cox proportional hazard models were used to estimate hazard ratios (HR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) with adjustment for potential confounders for overall borderline ovarian tumors and for serous- and mucinous borderline ovarian tumors separately.

RESULTS

During a median 11.3 years of follow-up, 144 women developed a borderline ovarian tumor. No marked associations between ever use of clomiphene citrate, gonadotropins, gonadotropin-releasing hormone receptor modulators, human chorionic gonadotropin or progesterone and borderline ovarian tumors were observed, neither overall nor for serous and mucinous borderline ovarian tumors analysed separately. Further, no clear associations with borderline ovarian tumors were found according to cumulative dose, time since first use or parity status for any fertility drugs.

CONCLUSIONS

No marked associations between use of fertility drugs and borderline ovarian tumors were observed. However, the cohort's relatively young age at end of follow-up emphasizes the importance of extending the follow-up period for women who have used fertility drugs.

Does controlled ovarian hyperstimulation in women with a history of borderline tumor influence recurrence rate?

PURPOSE

To determine the recurrence rate in the women with controlled ovarian hyperstimulation after a history of borderline ovarian tumors (BOT).

METHODS

This was a retrospective analysis of 275 patients with BOT undergoing surgery for fertility preservation in our hospital between 2001 and 2017. Cases were divided into an assisted reproductive technology (ART) treatment group (n = 15) and a non-ART treatment group (n = 260). We compared the recurrence rate, survival rate and pregnancy outcomes between these two groups.

RESULTS

The ART group had a higher recurrence rate (33.33% vs. 10.80%, P = 0.023). Survival analysis indicated that the recurrence time in patients undergoing ART was significantly shorter (P = 0.026). A low pregnancy rate before diagnosis, and high intraoperative blood loss, were associated with postoperative ART treatment (P < 0.05). Multivariate analysis showed that ART treatment and bilateral lesions both significantly increased the risk of recurrence (P < 0.05). The pathological type of recurrent tumors was often the same as the initial tumor.

CONCLUSION

The postoperative use of ART in patients with BOT significantly increased the recurrence rate, but does not significantly affect the overall survival rate of patients. Therefore, ART in such patients should be individualized, and close follow-up is necessary after ART.

Effects of Infertility Drug Exposure on the Risk of Borderline Ovarian Tumors: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Whether infertility drug exposure increases the risk of borderline ovarian tumors (BOTs) remains controversial. The present study was conducted with a comprehensive search for studies published from January 1990 to December 2021 in the online databases Cochrane Library, PubMed, Web of Science and EMBASE. We considered the first diagnosis of a BOT as the primary outcome. The odds ratio (OR) was calculated with corresponding 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for the risk of BOTs in patients who were treated with infertility drugs. Ten studies, a total of 2,779,511 women, qualified for inclusion in this meta-analysis. The pooled OR of 1.56 (95% CI: 1.09-2.22) revealed a significant positive association between infertility drugs and an increased risk for BOTs, but for specific drugs, only CC plus Gn had statistical significance. No publication bias was detected using the Egger and Begg tests (p > 0.05). A significant difference in BOT incidence was observed among infertile women and nulliparous women who were treated with or without infertility drugs. In conclusion, the use of infertility drugs may increase the risk of BOTs, but a dose-dependent relationship was not observed between the number of assisted reproduction technology cycles and the risk of BOTs, and infertile women who successfully became pregnant might have a reduced risk. Registration: PROSPERO, CRD42022330775.

Ovarian cancer during pregnancy

Adnexal masses during pregnancy are a relatively uncommon entity. Their clinical management is challenging given the overlapping features of certain entities on imaging and histopathology, which can mimic malignancy, and the potential side effects to the mother and fetus, whether expectant management versus surgery is pursued. Ultrasonography with Doppler evaluation is the modality of choice for evaluating adnexal masses during pregnancy. Magnetic resonance imaging is the second-line modality useful when US findings are inconclusive/indeterminate. Most adnexal masses in pregnant patients are benign in origin (e.g., functional cysts, mature cystic teratoma, decidualization of endometrioma), but a few are malignant in origin (e.g., dysgerminoma, granulosa cell tumor). Most cases of adnexal masses are asymptomatic, but complications such as ovarian torsion can occur. This review aims to familiarize the radiologist with the imaging of adnexal lesions during pregnancy so that the radiologist can identify ovarian cancer. Specifically, the review will detail the most common benign and malignant adnexal masses in pregnancy, mimickers, and their corresponding imaging findings on US and MRI.

Ovulation induction drug and ovarian cancer: an updated systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

To explore the association between ovulation induction drugs and ovarian cancer.

DESIGN

Systematic review and meta-analysis.

SETTING

Not applicable.

PATIENT(S)

Women without ovarian cancer who ever or never underwent ovarian induction.

INTERVENTION(S)

An extensive electronic search of the following databases was performed: PubMed, EMBASE, MEDLINE, Google Scholar, Cochrane Library and CNKI, from inception until January 2022. A total of 34 studies fulfilled our inclusion criteria and were included in the final meta-analysis. The odds ratio (OR) and random-effects model were used to estimate the pooled effects. The Newcastle-Ottawa Scale was used to assess the quality of included studies. Funnel plots and Egger tests were used to assess publication bias.

MAIN OUTCOMES

New diagnosed borderline ovarian tumor (BOT) and invasive ovarian cancer (IOC) between ovulation induction (OI) group and control (CT) group considering fertility outcome, OI cycles and specific OI drugs.

RESULTS

Primarily, there was no significant difference in the incidence of IOC and BOT between the OI and CT groups. Secondly, OI treatment did not increase the risk of IOC and BOT in the multiparous women, nor did it increase the risk of IOC in the nulliparous women. However, the risk of BOT appeared to be higher in nulliparous women treated with OI treatment. Thirdly, among women exposed to OI, the risk of IOC and BOT was higher in nulliparous women than in multiparous women. Fourthly, the risk of IOC did not increase with increasing OI cycles. Lastly, exposure to specific OI drugs also did not contribute to the risk of IOC and BOT.

CONCLUSION

Overall, OI treatment did not increase the risk of IOC and BOT in most women, regardless of OI drug type and OI cycle. However, nulliparous women treated with OI showed a higher risk of ovarian cancer, necessitating their rigorous monitoring and ongoing follow-up.

Fertility treatment and cancers-the eternal conundrum: a systematic review and meta-analysis

STUDY QUESTION

Does fertility treatment (FT) significantly increase the incidence of breast, ovarian, endometrial or cervical cancer?

SUMMARY ANSWER

Overall, FT does not significantly increase the incidence of breast, ovarian or endometrial cancer and may even reduce the incidence of cervical cancer.

WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY

Infertility affects more than 14% of couples. Infertility and nulliparity are established risk factors for endometrial, ovarian and breast cancer, yet the association with FT is more contentious.

STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION

A literature search was carried out using Cochrane Library, EMBASE, Medline and Google Scholar up to December 2019. Peer-reviewed studies stating cancer incidence (breast, ovarian, endometrial or cervical) in FT and no-FT groups were identified. Out of 128 studies identified, 29 retrospective studies fulfilled the criteria and were included (n = 21 070 337).

PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING, METHODS

In the final meta-analysis, 29 studies were included: breast (n = 19), ovarian (n = 19), endometrial (n = 15) and cervical (n = 13), 17 studies involved multiple cancer types and so were included in each individual cancer meta-analysis. Primary outcome of interest was cancer incidence (breast, ovarian, endometrial and cervical) in FT and no-FT groups. Secondary outcome was cancer incidence according to specific fertility drug exposure. Odds ratio (OR) and random effects model were used to demonstrate treatment effect and calculate pooled treatment effect, respectively. A meta-regression and eight sub-group analyses were performed to assess the impact of the following variables, maternal age, infertility, study size, outliers and specific FT sub-types, on cancer incidence.

MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE

Cervical cancer incidence was significantly lower in the FT group compared with the no-FT group: OR 0.68 (95% CI 0.46-0.99). The incidences of breast (OR 0.86; 95% CI 0.73-1.01) and endometrial (OR 1.28; 95% CI 0.92-1.79) cancers were not found to be significantly different between the FT and no-FT groups. Whilst overall ovarian cancer incidence was not significantly different between the FT and no-FT groups (OR 1.19; 95% CI 0.98-1.46), separate analysis of borderline ovarian tumours (BOT) revealed a significant association (OR 1.69; 95% CI 1.27-2.25). In further sub-group analyses, ovarian cancer incidence was shown to be significantly higher in the IVF (OR 1.32; 95% CI 1.03-1.69) and clomiphene citrate (CC) treatment group (OR 1.40; 95% CI 1.10-1.77), respectively when compared with the no-FT group. Conversely, the incidences of breast (OR 0.75; 95% CI 0.61-0.92) and cervical cancer (OR 0.58; 95% CI 0.38-0.89) were significantly lower in the IVF treatment sub-group compared to the no-FT group.

LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION

The large, varied dataset spanning a wide study period introduced significant clinical heterogeneity. Thus, results have to be interpreted with an element of caution. Exclusion of non-English citations, unpublished work and abstracts, in order to ensure data accuracy and reliability was maintained, may have introduced a degree of selection bias.

WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS

The results for breast, ovarian, endometrial and cervical cancer are reassuring, in line with previously published meta-analyses for individual cancers but the association between IVF and CC treatment and an increase in ovarian cancer incidence requires additional work to understand the potential mechanism driving this association. In particular, focusing on (i) discriminating specific treatments effects from an inherent risk of malignancy; (ii) differential risk profiles among specific patient sub-groups (refractory treatment and obesity); and (iii) understanding the impact of FT outcomes on cancer incidence.

STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTEREST(S)

This study did not receive any funding. The authors have no financial, personal, intellectual and professional conflicts of interest to declare.

PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER

CRD42019153404.

The Diagnosis, Treatment, Prognosis and Molecular Pathology of Borderline Ovarian Tumors: Current Status and Perspectives

Borderline ovarian tumors (BOTs) are a type of low malignant potential tumor that is typically associated with better outcomes than ovarian cancer. Indeed, its 10-year survival rate is as high as 95%. However, there is a small subset of patients who experience relapse and eventually die. It has been shown that the prognosis of BOTs was based on pathological diagnosis, the age at diagnosis, pre-operative carbohydrate antigen 125 level, invasive implants, and micropapillary patterns. Now the molecular-targeted therapy and molecular-genetic diagnosis have developed into a form of precision medicine. Recent studies on extensive molecular characterizations and molecular pathological mechanisms of BOTs have helped us understand the genomic landscapes of BOTs, and therefore BOTs could be reclassified into biologically and clinically more accurate and effective subtypes. The purpose of this review is to summarize current status for the diagnosis and treatment of BOTs and to describe the research progress on molecular pathologies, with a goal of providing a theoretical perspective for the diagnosis and treatment of BOTs.

Risk of ovarian cancer in women treated with ovarian stimulating drugs for infertility

BACKGROUND

This is an updated version of the original Cochrane Review published in the Cochrane Library in 2013 (Issue 8) on the risk of ovarian cancer in women using infertility drugs when compared to the general population or to infertile women not treated. The link between fertility drugs and ovarian cancer remains controversial.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the risk of invasive ovarian cancer and borderline ovarian tumours in women treated with ovarian stimulating drugs for subfertility.

SEARCH METHODS

The original review included published and unpublished observational studies from 1990 to February 2013. For this update, we extended the searches from February 2013 to November 2018; we evaluated the quality of the included studies and judged the certainty of evidence by using the GRADE approach. We have reported the results in a Summary of findings table to present effect sizes across all outcome types.

SELECTION CRITERIA

In the original review and in this update, we searched for randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and non-randomised studies and case series including more than 30 participants.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

At least two review authors independently conducted eligibility and 'Risk of bias' assessments and extracted data. We grouped studies based on the fertility drug used for two outcomes: borderline ovarian tumours and invasive ovarian cancer. We conducted no meta-analyses due to expected methodological and clinical heterogeneity.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 13 case-control and 24 cohort studies (an additional nine new cohort and two case-control studies), which included a total of 4,684,724 women.Two cohort studies reported an increased incidence of invasive ovarian cancer in exposed subfertile women compared with unexposed women. One reported a standardised incidence ratio (SIR) of 1.19 (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.54 to 2.25) based on 17 cancer cases. The other cohort study reported a hazard ratio (HR) of 1.93 (95% CI 1.18 to 3.18), and this risk was increased in women remaining nulligravid after using clomiphene citrate (HR 2.49, 95% CI 1.30 to 4.78) versus multiparous women (HR 1.52, 95% CI 0.67 to 3.42) (very low-certainty evidence). The slight increase in ovarian cancer risk among women having between one and three cycles of in vitro fertilisation (IVF) was reported, but this was not clinically significant (P = 0.18). There was no increase in risk of invasive ovarian cancer after use of infertility drugs in women with the BRCA mutation according to one cohort and one case-control study. The certainty of evidence as assessed using GRADE was very low.For borderline ovarian tumours, one cohort study reported increased risk in exposed women with an SIR of 3.61 (95% CI 1.45 to 7.44), and this risk was greater after treatment with clomiphene citrate (SIR 7.47, 95% CI 1.54 to 21.83) based on 12 cases. In another cohort study, the risk of a borderline ovarian tumour was increased, with an HR of 4.23 (95% CI 1.25 to 14.33), for subfertile women treated with IVF compared with a non-IVF-treated group with more than one year of follow-up. A large cohort reported increased risk of borderline ovarian tumours, with HR of 2.46 (95% CI 1.20 to 5.04), and this was based on 17 cases. A significant increase in serous borderline ovarian tumours was reported in one cohort study after the use of progesterone for more than four cycles (risk ratio (RR) 2.63, 95% CI 1.04 to 6.64). A case-control study reported increased risk after clomiphene citrate was taken, with an SIR of 2.5 (95% CI 1.3 to 4.5) based on 11 cases, and another reported an increase especially after human menopausal gonadotrophin was taken (odds ratio (OR) 9.38, 95% CI 1.66 to 52.08). Another study estimated an increased risk of borderline ovarian tumour, but this estimation was based on four cases with no control reporting use of fertility drugs. The certainty of evidence as assessed using GRADE was very low.However, although some studies suggested a slight increase in risks of ovarian cancer and borderline ovarian tumour, none provided moderate- or high-certainty evidence, as summarised in the GRADE tables.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Since the last version of this review, only a few new relevant studies have provided additional findings with supporting evidence to suggest that infertility drugs may increase the risk of ovarian cancer slightly in subfertile women treated with infertility drugs when compared to the general population or to subfertile women not treated. The risk is slightly higher in nulliparous than in multiparous women treated with infertility drugs, and for borderline ovarian tumours. However, few studies have been conducted, the number of cancers is very small, and information on the dose or type of fertility drugs used is insufficient.

Do the Fertility Drugs Increase the Risk of Cancer? A Review Study

Aim: All over the world, many couples cannot conceive a child and have problems with pregnancy. Ovulation-inducing drugs are among the most important drugs used for the treatment of infertility. In recent years, there have been many debates about the relationship between fertility medication and cancer. Due to the lack of comprehensive study of this matter, and as understanding the relationship between the use of fertility drugs and cancer is of importance, the present study was conducted to investigate the relationship between infertility drugs and cancer in women. Materials and Methods: To determine the relationship between infertility treatment and cancer, a comprehensive search was carried out in databases such as; Medline, Web of Science Core Collection, and Scopus using keywords words; "infertility," "ovulation induction," "cancer," "infertility treatment," "ART," "tumor," "controlled ovarian stimulation," "fertility agents," and "neoplasms." Full-text, English language, and original articles were included in this study. Results: In total, 81 articles were entered into the study. The relationship between fertility medications and breast, ovary, endometrial, uterus, colon, thyroid, skin, cervical, and non-Hodgkin's lymphoma cancers were studied. Although the relationship between fertility medications and cancer is theoretically justifiable, most studies have shown that risk of cancer will not increase after fertility treatment. Conclusion: The results of this study did not show that fertility medications increase the risk of cancer among users. In summary, the relationship between infertility treatment and cancer incidence remains an open question.

Cancer Risk in Women Treated with Fertility Drugs According to Parity Status-A Registry-based Cohort Study

Background: Long-term safety of assisted reproductive techniques (ART) is of interest as their use is increasing. Cancer risk is known to be affected by parity. This study examined the risk of cancer after fertility treatment, stratified by women's parity.Methods: Data were obtained from all women (n = 1,353,724) born in Norway between 1960 and 1996. Drug exposure data (2004-2014) were obtained from the Norwegian Prescription Database (drugs used in ART and clomiphene citrate). The Medical Birth Registry of Norway provided parity status. HRs were calculated for all site cancer, breast, cervical, endometrial, ovarian, colorectal, central nervous system, thyroid cancer, and malignant melanoma.Results: In 12,354,392 person-years of follow-up, 20,128 women were diagnosed with cancer. All-site cancer risk was 1.14 [95% confidence interval (95% CI), 1.03-1.26] and 1.10 (95% CI, 0.98-1.23) after clomiphene citrate and ART exposure, respectively. For ovarian cancer, a stronger association was observed for both exposures in nulliparous (HR, 2.49; 95% CI, 1.30-4.78; and HR, 1.62; 95% CI, 0.78-3.35) versus parous women (HR, 1.37; 95% CI, 0.64-2.96; and HR, 0.87; 95% CI, 0.33-2.27). Elevated risk of endometrial cancers was observed for clomiphene citrate exposure in nulliparous women (HR, 4.49; 95% CI, 2.66-7.60 vs. HR, 1.52; 95% CI, 0.67-3.42). Risk was elevated for breast cancer in parous women exposed to clomiphene citrate (HR, 1.26; 95% CI, 1.03-1.54) for thyroid cancer and among nulliparous women after ART treatment (HR, 2.19; 95% CI, 1.08-4.44).Conclusions: Clomiphene citrate appears associated with increased risk of ovarian and endometrial cancer. Elevations in risks of breast and thyroid cancer were less consistent across type of drug exposure and parity.Impact: Continued monitoring of fertility treatments is warranted. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev; 26(6); 953-62. ©2017 AACR.

Fertility drugs and cancer: a guideline

Methodological limitations in studying the association between the use of fertility drugs and cancer include the inherent increased risk of cancer in women who never conceive, the low incidence of most of these cancers, and that the age of diagnosis of cancer typically is many years after fertility drug use. Based on available data, there does not appear to be a meaningful increased risk of invasive ovarian cancer, breast cancer, or endometrial cancer following the use of fertility drugs. Several studies have shown a small increased risk of borderline ovarian tumors; however, there is insufficient consistent evidence that a particular fertility drug increases the risk of borderline ovarian tumors, and any absolute risk is small. Given the available literature, patients should be counseled that infertile women may be at an increased risk of invasive ovarian, endometrial, and breast cancer; however, use of fertility drugs does not appear to increase this risk.

Assisted reproductive techniques after fertility-sparing treatments in gynaecological cancers

BACKGROUND

The trend toward late childbearing has made fertility preservation a major issue for women who face gynecological cancer. New techniques in assisted reproductive medicine enable conception after primary treatment of these cancers. Here, we aimed to review the efficacy and safety of assisted reproductive techniques (ART) after fertility-preserving treatment of gynaecological cancers.

METHODS

We conducted a systematic literature review of both prospective and retrospective studies in the PubMed, EMBASE, CENTRAL and SciSearch databases. In the retrieved studies, we evaluated live births, clinical pregnancies, overall survival and disease-free survival.

RESULTS

We identified many prospective and retrospective studies on this topic, but no relevant randomized clinical trials. Fertility-sparing treatments with safe oncological outcomes are feasible in endometrial, cervical and ovarian cancer cases. After cancer treatment, ART seem safe and show variable obstetrical outcomes.

CONCLUSIONS

After fertility-preserving treatment for gynaecological cancers, ART can enable pregnancy to be achieved with apparent oncological safety. The success of such procedures should directly impact clinical practice and management of those patients who require fertility-sparing treatment.

Fertility treatments and invasive epithelial ovarian cancer risk in Jewish Israeli BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutation carriers

OBJECTIVE

To determine whether BRCA mutation carriers who undergo fertility treatments are at increased risk of developing invasive epithelial ovarian cancer (IEOC).

DESIGN

Historical cohort study.

SETTING

Tertiary university-affiliated medical center and the National Cancer Registry.

PATIENT(S)

A total of 1,073 Jewish Israeli BRCA mutation carriers diagnosed in a single institution between 1995 and 2013, including 164 carriers (15.2%) who had fertility treatments that included clomiphene citrate (n = 82), gonadotropin (n = 69), in vitro fertilization (IVF) (n = 66), or a combination (n = 50), and 909 carriers not treated for infertility.

INTERVENTION(S)

None.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S)

Odds ratios (OR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) for IEOC association with fertility treatments and other hormone and reproductive variables.

RESULT(S)

In 175 (16.3%) mutation carriers, IEOC was diagnosed; 139 women carried BRCA1, 33 carried BRCA2, and 3 had unknown mutations. Fertility treatments were not associated with IEOC risk (age-adjusted OR 0.63; 95% CI, 0.38-1.05) regardless of treatment type (with clomiphene citrate, OR 0.87; 95% CI, 0.46-1.63; with gonadotropin, OR 0.59; 95% CI, 0.26-1.31; with IVF, OR 1.08, 95% CI, 0.57-2.06). Multivariate analysis indicated an increased risk of IEOC with hormone-replacement therapy (OR 2.22; 95% CI, 1.33-3.69) and a reduced risk with oral contraceptives (OR 0.19; 95% CI, 0.13-0.28) in both BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers. Parity was a risk factor for IEOC by univariate but not multivariate analysis.

CONCLUSION(S)

According to our results, treatments for infertile BRCA mutation carriers should not be contraindicated or viewed as risk modifiers for IEOC. Parity as a risk factor in BRCA mutation carriers warrants further investigation.

Fertility drugs, reproductive strategies and ovarian cancer risk

Several adverse effects have been related to infertility treatments, such as cancer development. In particular, the relationship between infertility, reproductive strategies, and risk of gynecological cancers has aroused much interest in recent years. The evaluation of cancer risk among women treated for infertility is very complex, mainly because of many factors that can contribute to occurrence of cancer in these patients (including parity status). This article addresses the possible association between the use of fertility treatments and the risk of ovarian cancer, through a scrupulous search of the literature published thus far in this field. Our principal objective was to give more conclusive answers on the question whether the use of fertility drug significantly increases ovarian cancer risk. Our analysis focused on the different types of drugs and different treatment schedules used. This study provides additional insights regarding the long-term relationships between fertility drugs and risk of ovarian cancer.

Risk of ovarian cancer in women treated with ovarian stimulating drugs for infertility

BACKGROUND

The use of assisted reproductive techniques is increasing, but the possible link between fertility drugs and ovarian cancer remains controversial.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the risk of ovarian cancer in women treated with ovulation stimulating drugs for subfertility.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched for published and unpublished observational studies from 1990 to February 2013. The following databases were used: the Cochrane Gynaecological Cancer Collaborative Review Group's Trial Register, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) 2013, Issue 1, MEDLINE (to February week 4 2013), EMBASE (to 2013 week 09) and databases of conference abstracts. We also scanned reference lists of retrieved articles. The search was not restricted by language of publication.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We searched for randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and non-randomised studies, and case series including more than 30 participants, reporting on women with exposure to ovarian stimulating drugs for treatment of subfertility and histologically confirmed borderline or invasive ovarian cancer.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

At least two review authors independently conducted eligibility and 'Risk of bias' assessment, and extracted data. We grouped studies based on the fertility drug used for two outcomes: borderline ovarian tumours and invasive ovarian cancer. We expressed findings as adjusted odds ratio (OR), risk ratio (RR), hazard ratio (HR) or crude OR if adjusted values were not reported and standardised incidence ratio (SIR) where reported. We conducted no meta-analyses due to expected methodological and clinical heterogeneity.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 11 case-control studies and 14 cohort studies, which included a total of 182,972 women.Seven cohort studies showed no evidence of an increased risk of invasive ovarian cancer in subfertile women treated with any drug compared with untreated subfertile women. Seven case-control studies showed no evidence of an increased risk, compared with control women of a similar age. Two cohort studies reported an increased incidence of invasive ovarian cancer in subfertile women treated with any fertility drug compared with the general population. One of these reported a SIR of 5.0 (95% confidence interval (CI) 1.0 to 15), based on three cancer cases, and a decreased risk when cancer cases diagnosed within one year of treatment were excluded from the analysis(SIR 1.67, 95% CI 0.02 to 9.27). The other cohort study reported an OR of 2.09 (95% CI 1.39 to 3.12), based on 26 cases.For borderline ovarian tumours, exposure to any fertility drug was associated with a two to three-fold increased risk in two case-control studies. One case-control study reported an OR of 28 (95% CI 1.5 to 516), which was based on only four cases. In one cohort study, there was more than a two-fold increase in the incidence of borderline tumours compared with the general population (SIR 2.6, 95% CI 1.4 to 4.6) and in another the risk of a borderline ovarian tumour was HR 4.23 (95% CI 1.25 to 14.33) for subfertile women treated with in vitro fertilisation (IVF) compared with a non-IVF treated group with more than one year of follow-up.There was no evidence of an increased risk in women exposed to clomiphene alone or clomiphene plus gonadotrophin, compared with unexposed women. One case-control study reported an increased risk in users of human menopausal gonadotrophin (HMG)(OR 9.4, 95% CI 1.7 to 52). However, this estimate is based on only six cases with a history of HMG use.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

We found no convincing evidence of an increase in the risk of invasive ovarian tumours with fertility drug treatment. There may be an increased risk of borderline ovarian tumours in subfertile women treated with IVF. Studies showing an increase in the risk of ovarian cancer had a high overall risk of bias, due to retrospective study design, lack of accounting for potential confounding and estimates based on a small number of cases. More studies at low risk of bias are needed.

Fertility drug use and the risk of ovarian tumors in infertile women: a case-control study

OBJECTIVE

To assess the influence of infertility and fertility drugs on risk of ovarian tumors.

DESIGN

Case-control study (Mayo Clinic Ovarian Cancer Study).

SETTING

Ongoing academic study of ovarian cancer.

PATIENT(S)

A total of 1,900 women (1,028 with ovarian tumors and 872 controls, frequency matched on age and region of residence) who had provided complete information in a self-report questionnaire about history of infertility and fertility drug use.

INTERVENTION(S)

None.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S)

Effect of infertility history, use of fertility drugs and oral contraception, and gravidity on the risk of ovarian tumor development, after controlling for potential confounders.

RESULT(S)

Among women who had a history of infertility, use of fertility drugs was reported by 44 (24%) of 182 controls and 38 (17%) of 226 cases. Infertile women who used fertility drugs were not at increased risk of developing ovarian tumors compared with infertile women who did not use fertility drugs; the adjusted odds ratio was 0.64 (95% CI, 0.37, 1.11). The findings were similar when stratified by gravidity and when analyzed separately for borderline versus invasive tumors.

CONCLUSION(S)

We found no statistically significant association between fertility drug use and risk of ovarian tumors. Further larger, prospective studies are needed to confirm this observation.

Ovarian epithelial tumors and reproductive factors: a systematic review

PURPOSE

The aim of this systematic review is to summarize the current knowledge about the etiology and pathogenesis of borderline tumors ovarian cancer with special emphasis on the role of endocrine treatments and reproductive factors to establish a foundation for future studies.

METHODS

We performed a systematic review on the relation between ovarian epithelial tumors (OET) and reproductive factors using the keywords: ovarian cancer, ovarian tumor, ovarian borderline tumor, age at menarche, age at menopause, parity, infertility, PCO syndrome, oral contraception, menopausal hormone therapy, fertility treatment. Totally, 3,290 abstracts were scanned for their relevance in this publication and 127 were finally included.

RESULTS

The incidence of ovarian epithelial cancer and ovarian borderline tumors is influenced by certain reproductive factors. The strongest protective effects are conferred by parity and use of oral contraceptive pills. Recent molecular biologic and histopathologic studies prove that OET represent a diverse group of tumors, each histologic type with a different genetic background. This is at least partly reflected in epidemiologic and clinical studies showing different risk modulating effects of reproductive factors and endocrine therapies on OET.

CONCLUSIONS

The etiology and pathogenesis of ovarian cancer are still not fully understood. None of the so far proposed hypothesis on the development of OET can fully account for the epidemiologic and clinical findings in the context of reproductive factors and OET development. Further research approaches are warranted and need to put more weight on the clinical and genetical diversity of OET to yield a more detailed insight into their pathogenesis.

Fertility drug use and risk of ovarian tumors: a debated clinical challenge

Infertility itself increases the incidence of ovarian carcinoma, while the potential additional risk associated with the use of fertility drugs is still debated. In 1992, the cumulative analysis of 12 US case-control studies revealed that women who received ovulation-inducing drugs had approximately three-fold higher incidence of invasive ovarian carcinoma. Other investigations reported a lower increase of the risk of invasive carcinoma or borderline tumor of the ovary in women treated with these agents. Conversely, several other case-control or cohort studies failed to detect a significant correlation between fertility drug use and ovarian tumor risk in either parous or nulliparous women compared with untreated infertile women. Moreover neither the number of treatment cycles nor the type of drug used was associated with an increased risk in most studies. Incessant ovulation and excessive gonadotropin secretion have been long considered to play a major role in the development of ovarian carcinoma, and therefore fertility drugs, which raise the serum levels of gonadotropins and increase the chances of multiple ovulations, have been retained as a risk factor for this malignancy, However, the large majority of literature data as well as the new hypotheses on ovarian carcinogenesis appear to exclude a relevant impact of fertility drug use on the risk of ovarian tumors, and especially of high-grade invasive epithelial ovarian cancers.

Infertility treatment and the risk of cancer

BACKGROUND

A possible correlation between hormonal stimulation during treatment of infertility and the risk of cancer of the breast, the ovaries, the cervix or the uterus has been investigated in a number of epidemiological studies. The purpose of this article is to review the relevant literature and summarise the findings. KNOWLEDGE BASE: This review article is based on literature searches in the databases MEDLINE, Cochrane and EMBASE.

RESULTS

No studies showed a specific general correlation between hormonal ovulatory stimulation used as pre-treatment to assisted fertilisation and an increased risk of cancer of the breast, the ovaries, the cervix or the uterus. Most studies detected no increased risk. Some studies, however, showed an increased risk of cancer among certain sub-groups, such as women who have received repeated treatment with clomiphene citrate.

INTERPRETATION

On the basis of the studies reviewed, the conclusions are ambiguous. It is therefore necessary to monitor the long-term effects of infertility treatment on women's health. Further good-quality large-scale population studies are necessary, with longer follow-up periods and better adjustment for confounding factors.

Use of fertility drugs and risk of ovarian cancer: results from a U.S.-based case-control study

BACKGROUND

Previous studies examining associations between use of fertility drugs and ovarian cancer risk have provided conflicting results. We used data from a large case-control study to determine whether fertility drug use significantly impacts ovarian cancer risk when taking into account parity, gravidity, and cause of infertility.

METHODS

Data from the Hormones and Ovarian Cancer Prediction (HOPE) study were used (902 cases, 1,802 controls). Medical and reproductive histories were collected via in-person interviews. Logistic regression was used to calculate ORs and 95% confidence intervals (CI). Models were adjusted for age, race, education, age at menarche, parity, oral contraceptive use, breastfeeding, talc use, tubal ligation, and family history of breast/ovarian cancer.

RESULTS

Ever use of fertility drugs was not significantly associated with ovarian cancer within the total HOPE population (OR, 0.93; 95% CI, 0.65-1.35) or among women who reported seeking medical attention for infertility (OR, 0.87; 95% CI, 0.54-1.40). We did observe a statistically significant increased risk of ovarian cancer for ever use of fertility drugs among women who, despite seeking medical attention for problems getting pregnant, remained nulligravid (OR, 3.13; 95% CI, 1.01-9.67).

CONCLUSIONS

These results provide further evidence that fertility drug use does not significantly contribute to ovarian cancer risk among the majority of women; however, women who despite infertility evaluation and fertility drug use remain nulligravid, may have an elevated risk for ovarian cancer.

IMPACT

Our results suggest that fertility drug use does not significantly contribute to overall risk of ovarian cancer when adjusting for known confounding factors.

Fertility drugs and ovarian cancer risk: a critical review of the literature

There is evidence that medications used for ovarian stimulation and in vitro fertilization may be associated with ovarian cancer. In this review, we attempt to describe this relationship according to the most recent epidemiologic data and to present the possible mechanisms on the molecular level that could potentially explain this correlation. Currently there is no proven relationship between any type of ovarian cancer and drugs used for infertility treatment. Overall, infertile women have increased risk for ovarian malignancies. Nulligravidas that received treatment are at increased risk for ovarian malignancy as compared to women that conceived after treatment. More studies with the appropriate statistical power and follow-up time, as well as with better adjustment for confounding factors, which coexist in infertile patients, are required to evaluate accurately the long-term effects of these drugs and procedures.

Fertility drugs and risk of ovarian cancer: dispelling the myth

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Worldwide 50-80 million people suffer from infertility. Assisted reproductive technology has provided a way of overcoming infertility and childlessness. The current article will focus on data linking infertility and its treatment to ovarian cancer.

RECENT FINDINGS

Ovarian cancer risks associated with fertility drug treatment are encouraging, but not decisive. In view of the limited ability to evaluate drug effects on borderline tumors, given their rare occurrence, studies involving patient reports of prior drug exposures have noted an elevated risk of borderline tumors associated with fertility drugs. Nevertheless, the risk of invasive ovarian cancer appears to be restricted to those women who remain childless despite the infertility treatment.

SUMMARY

As long as doubt persists, it might be advisable to reflect on a few clinical recommendations: identify high-risk infertile patients for ovarian cancer, investigate preexisting cancer before fertility treatment, inform patients regarding potential risks, obtain an informed consent, avoid exposure to long periods of ovulation induction cycles that are given before patients are referred for in-vitro fertilization and embryo transfer for women at greater risk and monitor women who have been treated with these drugs, especially those who failed to conceive, regularly and thoroughly.