Contemporary hormonal contraception and cervical cancer in women of reproductive age

To determine cervical cancer risk associated with contemporary hormonal contraceptives, we conducted a cohort study of women aged 15 to 49 living in Denmark from 1995 to 2014, using routinely collected information about redeemed prescriptions, incident cancer and potential confounders. Poisson regression calculated adjusted cervical cancer risks among different contraceptive user groups by duration of use, time since last use, hormonal content and cancer histology. During >20 million person-years, 3643 incident cervical cancers occurred. Ever users of any hormonal contraceptives compared to never users had a relative risk (RR) of 1.19 (95% confidence interval [CI] 1.10-1.29). Increased risks were seen in current or recent users of any hormonal: RR 1.30 (95% CI 1.20-1.42) and combined: RR 1.40 (95% CI 1.28-1.53), but not progestin-only contraception: RR 0.91 (95% CI 0.78-1.07). Current or recent users of any hormonal contraception had an increased risk of both adenocarcinoma (RR 1.29, 95% CI 1.05-1.60) and squamous cancer (RR 1.31, 95% CI 1.19-1.44). The risk pattern among any hormonal and combined contraceptive users generally increased with longer duration of use and declined after stopping, possibly taking longer to disappear among prolonged users. Combined products containing different progestins had similar risks. Approximately one extra cervical cancer occurred for every 14 700 women using combined contraceptives for 1 year. Most women in our study were not vaccinated against human papillomavirus (HPV) infections. Our findings reinforce the urgent need for global interventions such as systematic screening, treatment of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia and HPV vaccination programmes to prevent cervical cancer, especially among users of combined contraceptives.

Estradiol Valerate in COC Has More Favorable Inflammatory Profile Than Synthetic Ethinyl Estradiol: A Randomized Trial

CONTEXT

Combined oral contraceptives (COCs) alter inflammatory status and lipid metabolism. Whether different estrogens have different effects is poorly understood.

OBJECTIVE

We compared the effects of COCs containing ethinyl estradiol (EE) or estradiol valerate (EV) and dienogest (DNG) with those containing DNG only on inflammation and lipid metabolism.

DESIGN

Randomized, controlled, open-label clinical trial.

SETTING

Two-center study in Helsinki and Oulu University Hospitals.

PARTICIPANTS

Fifty-nine healthy, young, nonsmoking women with regular menstrual cycles. Age, body mass index, and waist-to-hip ratio were comparable in all study groups at the beginning. Fifty-six women completed the study (EV + DNG, n = 20; EE + DNG, n = 19; DNG only, n = 17).

INTERVENTIONS

Nine-week continuous use of COCs containing either EV + DNG or EE + DNG, or DNG only as control.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Parameters of chronic inflammation (high-sensitivity C-reactive protein [hs-CRP], and pentraxin 3 [PTX-3]) and lipid profile (high-density lipoprotein [HDL], low-density lipoprotein [LDL], triglycerides, and total cholesterol).

RESULTS

Serum hs-CRP increased after 9-week use of EE + DNG (mean change ± standard deviation 1.10 ± 2.11 mg/L) compared with EV + DNG (-0.06 ± 0.97 mg/L, P = 0.001) or DNG only (0.13 ± 0.68 mg/L, P = 0.021). Also, PTX-3 increased in the EE + DNG group compared with EV + DNG and DNG-only groups (P = 0.017 and P = 0.003, respectively). In the EE + DNG group, HDL and triglycerides increased compared with other groups (HDL: EE + DNG 0.20 ± 0.24 mmol/L vs EV + DNG 0.02 ± 0.20 mmol/L [P = 0.002] vs DNG 0.02 ± 0.18 mmol/L [P = 0.002]; triglycerides: EE + DNG 0.45 ± 0.21 mmol/L vs EV + DNG 0.18 ± 0.36 mmol/L [P = 0.003] vs DNG 0.06 ± 0.18 mmol/L [P < 0.001]).

CONCLUSIONS

EV + DNG and DNG only had a neutral effect on inflammation and lipids, while EE + DNG increased both hs-CRP and PTX-3 levels as well as triglycerides and HDL.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02352090.