ArticleAustralian and New Zealand journal of public health2015
Cancers in Australia in 2010 attributable to and prevented by the use of combined oral contraceptives.
Article in Australian and New Zealand journal of public health, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
10 citing papers in PubMed.
- Oral Contraceptive Use in BRCA1 and BRCA2 Mutation Carriers: Absolute Cancer Risks and Benefits.Journal of the National Cancer Institute · 2022Article
- Review of the literature on combined oral contraceptives and cancer.Ecancermedicalscience · 2022Review
- Article
- Alcohol consumption, drinking patterns and cancer incidence in an Australian cohort of 226,162 participants aged 45 years and over.British journal of cancer · 2021Article
- Bioethical and Moral Perspectives in Human Reproductive Medicine.The Linacre quarterly · 2018Article
- Exogenous reproductive hormone use in breast cancer survivors and previvors.Nature reviews. Clinical oncology · 2018Review
- Breast Cancer in Australian Indigenous Women: Incidence, Mortality, and Risk FactorsAsian Pacific journal of cancer prevention : APJCP · 2017Article
- Recent developments have made female permanent contraception an increasingly attractive option, and pregnant women in particular ought to be counselled about it.Contraception and reproductive medicine · 2016Review
- Article
- Cancers in Australia in 2010 attributable to modifiable factors: summary and conclusions.Australian and New Zealand journal of public health · 2015Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesTo estimate the proportion and number of cancers occurring in Australia in 2010 attributable to combined oral contraceptive pill (OCP) use.
methodsWe estimated the population attributable fraction (PAF) for cancers causally associated with combined OCP use (breast, cervix), and the proportion of endometrial and ovarian cancers prevented (prevented fraction [PF]). We used standard formulae incorporating prevalence of combined OCP use in the Australian population, relative risks of cancer associated with this exposure and cancer incidence.
resultsAn estimated 105 breast and 52 cervical cancers (0.7% and 6.4% of each cancer, respectively) in Australia in 2010 were attributable to current use of combined OCP. Past combined OCP use was estimated to have prevented 1,032 endometrial and 308 ovarian cancers in 2010, reducing the number of cancers that would otherwise have occurred by 31% and 19%, respectively.
conclusionsA small proportion of breast and cervical cancers is attributable to combined OCP use; OCP use is likely to have prevented larger numbers of endometrial and ovarian cancers. IMPLICATIONS: Women seeking contraceptive advice should be told of potential adverse effects, but should also be told that - along with reproductive health benefits - combined OCP use can reduce long-term risks of ovarian and endometrial cancers.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.