Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25684585›Full record

SynthesisLancet (London, England)2015

Menopausal hormone use and ovarian cancer risk: individual participant meta-analysis of 52 epidemiological studies.

Collaborative Group On Epidemiological Studies Of Ovarian Cancer, V Beral, K Gaitskell, C Hermon, K Moser, G Reeves, R Peto

Open access · hybridAbstract readMeta-Analysis
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Lancet (London, England), 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 192 papers, 12 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
192citing papers in PubMed, 12 pooled it
69.1field-weighted citation impact, top 1% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

192 citing papers in PubMed, 12 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 454 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Systematic review and meta-analysis on the impact of the levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine system in reducing risk of ovarian cancer.International journal of gynaecology and obstetrics: the official organ of the International Federation of Gynaecology and Obstetrics · 2022
    Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Hormone replacement therapy after surgery for epithelial ovarian cancer.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2020
    Pooled it
  7. Pooled it
  8. Pooled it
  9. Pooled it
  10. Pooled it
  11. Pooled it
  12. Pooled it
  13. Trial
  14. Trial
  15. Trial
  16. Trial
  17. Trial
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. Article

132 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Collaborative Group On Epidemiological Studies Of Ovarian Cancer
V Beral
K Gaitskell
C Hermon
K Moser
G Reeves
R Peto
Departamento de Epidemiología · GT

Funding

University of Hawaii Cancer Center CCSGP30CA071789 · NCI · UNIVERSITY OF HAWAII AT MANOA · PI Xin Chen · 1996 to 2026
$56.2M
Shanghai Womens Health StudyUM1CA182910 · NCI · VANDERBILT UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CENTER · PI ZHENG, WEI · 2014 to 2018
$5.9M
Cancer Research UK 16491Cancer Research UK 16896Medical Research Council MC_U137686850NCI NIH HHS P30 CA071789NCI NIH HHS UM1 CA182910
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundHalf 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.

methodsIndividual 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.

findingsDuring 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).

interpretationThe 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.

fundingMedical Research Council, Cancer Research UK.

Indexed as

Drug Administration ScheduleEstrogen Replacement TherapyFemaleHumansIncidenceMiddle AgedOvarian NeoplasmsPostmenopauseRisk Assessment

Identifiers

PMID25684585
PMCPMC4427760
OpenAlexW1695897458

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.