Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30257920›Full record

ArticleBMJ (Clinical research ed.)2018

Association between contemporary hormonal contraception and ovarian cancer in women of reproductive age in Denmark: prospective, nationwide cohort study.

Lisa Iversen, Shona Fielding, Øjvind Lidegaard, Lina S Mørch, Charlotte W Skovlund, Philip C Hannaford

Open access · bronzeAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMJ (Clinical research ed.), 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 37 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
37citing papers in PubMed, 4 pooled it
9.7field-weighted citation impact, top 2% 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

37 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 95 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. Trial
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Estrogens and breast cancer.Annals of oncology : official journal of the European Society for Medical Oncology · 2025
    Review
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Epidemiological trends and risk factors of gynecological cancers: an update.Medical oncology (Northwood, London, England) · 2023
    Review
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Proliferation of the Fallopian Tube Fimbriae and Cortical Inclusion Cysts: Effects of the Menstrual Cycle and the Levonorgestrel Intrauterine Contraceptive System.Cancer epidemiology, biomarkers & prevention : a publication of the American Association for Cancer Research, cosponsored by the American Society of Preventive Oncology · 2022
    Article
  20. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Lisa IversenAcademic Primary Care, Institute of Applied Health Sciences, University of Aberdeen, Aberdeen AB25 2ZD, UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2524-5229
Shona FieldingMedical Statistics Team, Institute of Applied Health Sciences, University of Aberdeen, Aberdeen, UK.
Øjvind LidegaardRigshospitalet, Juliane Marie Centre, Department of Gynaecology, University of Copenhagen, Denmark.
Lina S MørchRigshospitalet, Juliane Marie Centre, Department of Gynaecology, University of Copenhagen, Denmark.
Charlotte W SkovlundRigshospitalet, Juliane Marie Centre, Department of Gynaecology, University of Copenhagen, Denmark.
Philip C HannafordAcademic Primary Care, Institute of Applied Health Sciences, University of Aberdeen, Aberdeen AB25 2ZD, UK.
University of Aberdeen · GBUniversity of Copenhagen · DK

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesTo investigate the association between contemporary combined hormonal contraceptives (including progestogen types in combined preparations and all progestogen-only products) and overall and specific types of ovarian cancer.

designProspective, nationwide cohort study.

settingDenmark, 1995-2014.

participantsAll women aged 15-49 years during 1995-2014 were eligible. Women were excluded if they immigrated after 1995, had cancer (except non-melanoma skin cancer), had venous thrombosis, or were treated for infertility before entry (final study population included 1 879 227 women). Women were categorised as never users (no record of being dispensed hormonal contraception), current or recent users (≤1 year after stopping use), or former users (>1 year after stopping use) of different hormonal contraceptives.

main outcome measuresPoisson regression was used to calculate relative risk of ovarian cancer among users of any contemporary combined hormonal contraceptives and by progestogen type in combined preparations and all progestogen-only products, including non-oral preparations. Separate analyses examined women followed up to their first contraception type switch and those with full contraceptive histories. Duration, time since last use, and tumour histology were examined and the population prevented fraction were calculated.

resultsDuring 21.4 million person years, 1249 incident ovarian cancers occurred. Among ever users of hormonal contraception, 478 ovarian cancers were recorded over 13 344 531 person years. Never users had 771 ovarian cancers during 8 150 250 person years. Compared with never users, reduced risks of ovarian cancer occurred with current or recent use and former use of any hormonal contraception (relative risk 0.58 (95% confidence interval 0.49 to 0.68) and 0.77 (0.66 to 0.91), respectively). Relative risks among current or recent users decreased with increasing duration (from 0.82 (0.59 to 1.12) with ≤1 year use to 0.26 (0.16 to 0.43) with >10 years' use; P<0.001 for trend). Similar results were achieved among women followed up to their first switch in contraceptive type. Little evidence of major differences in risk estimates by tumour type or progestogen content of combined oral contraceptives was seen. Use of progestogen-only products were not associated with ovarian cancer risk. Among ever users of hormonal contraception, the reduction in the age standardised absolute rate of ovarian cancer was 3.2 per 100 000 person years. Based on the relative risk for the never use versus ever use categories of hormonal contraception (0.66), the population prevented fraction was estimated to be 21%-that is, use of hormonal contraception prevented 21% of ovarian cancers in the study population.

conclusionsUse of contemporary combined hormonal contraceptives is associated with a reduction in ovarian cancer risk in women of reproductive age-an effect related to duration of use, which diminishes after stopping use. These data suggest no protective effect from progestogen-only products.

Indexed as

AdolescentAdultAgedCohort StudiesContraceptionContraceptives, Oral, CombinedContraceptives, Oral, HormonalDenmarkFemaleHumansIncidenceMiddle AgedOvarian NeoplasmsProgestinsProspective StudiesRisk FactorsContraceptives, Oral, CombinedContraceptives, Oral, HormonalProgestins

Identifiers

PMID30257920
PMCPMC6283376
OpenAlexW2894340546

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.