Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33331993›Full record

ArticleEuropean journal of epidemiology2021

Oral contraceptive use by formulation and endometrial cancer risk among women born in 1947-1964: The Nurses' Health Study II, a prospective cohort study.

Norah A Burchardt, Amy L Shafrir, Rudolf Kaaks, Shelley S Tworoger, Renée T Fortner

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in European journal of epidemiology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing papers in PubMed, 4 pooled it
2.3field-weighted citation impact, top 10% 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

11 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 23 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Review
  11. 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

5 authors at 5 institutions in 2 countries.

Norah A BurchardtDivision of Cancer Epidemiology, German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), Heidelberg, Germany.
Amy L ShafrirDivision of Adolescent/Young Adult Medicine, Department of Pediatrics, Boston Children's Hospital and Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA.
Rudolf KaaksDivision of Cancer Epidemiology, German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), Heidelberg, Germany.
Shelley S TworogerDepartment of Cancer Epidemiology, Moffitt Cancer Center and Research Institute, Tampa, FL, USA.
Renée T FortnerDivision of Cancer Epidemiology, German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), Heidelberg, Germany. r.fortner@dkfz.de.
Brigham and Women's Hospital · USGerman Cancer Research Center · DEHeidelberg University · DEMoffitt Cancer Center · USUniversity Hospital Heidelberg · DE

Funding

Statistical MethodsP01CA087969 · NCI · BRIGHAM AND WOMEN'S HOSPITAL · PI ROSNER, BERNARD A · 2000 to 2019
$77.8M
Life Course Cancer Epidemiology Cohort in WomenU01CA176726 · NCI · HARVARD UNIVERSITY D/B/A HARVARD SCHOOL OF PUBLIC HEALTH · PI ELIASSEN, A. HEATHER, WILLETT, WALTER C. · 2018 to 2025
$22.4M
NCI NIH HHS P01 CA087969NCI NIH HHS U01 CA176726NIH HHS P01 CA87969NIH HHS U01 CA176726
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Oral contraceptives (OCs) have been associated with long-term lower endometrial cancer risk; relatively little is known about associations with more recent OC formulations and associations with longer-term risk. A total of 107,069 women from the Nurses' Health Study II recalled OC use from age 13 to baseline (1989); biennial questionnaires updated data on OC use until 2009. OCs were classified by estrogen and progestin type, dose, and potency based on reported brand. 864 incident endometrial cancer cases were identified through 2017. Multivariable Cox proportional hazards models estimated hazard ratios (HR) and 95% confidence intervals [95% CI] for the association of OC use with endometrial cancer risk. OC use was associated with lower endometrial cancer risk (ever use, HR 0.77 [95% CI 0.65-0.91]; >10 years of use, 0.43 [0.32-0.58] vs. never OC use). Inverse associations for duration were evident regardless of time since last use. Longer durations (> 5 years) of ethinyl estradiol (0.52 [0.41-0.67]) and second-generation progestins (0.43 [0.30-0.61]), both versus never use, were more strongly associated with lower risk than mestranol (0.66 [0.50-0.88], p-het = 0.01) and first-generation progestins (0.62 [0.49-0.78], p-het = 0.03). Inverse associations were generally observed for cross-classified cumulative average estrogen and progestin dose and potency (< vs. ≥ median; ever use vs. never OC use), with the exception of high estrogen and low progestin dose. OCs were associated with lower endometrial cancer risk, independent of time since last use. Use of ethinyl estradiol and second-generation progestins were more strongly inversely associated with risk compared with older formulations.

Indexed as

AdultAgedCohort StudiesContraceptives, Oral, HormonalEndometrial NeoplasmsEstrogensEthinyl EstradiolFemaleHumansMestranolMiddle AgedProgestinsProspective StudiesContraceptives, Oral, HormonalEstrogensEthinyl EstradiolMestranolProgestinsEndometrial cancerHormonal contraceptivesOral contraceptives

Identifiers

PMID33331993
PMCPMC8416825
OpenAlexW3112233359

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.