ReviewCancers2021
Oral Contraceptive Use and Breast Cancer Risk Assessment: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Case-Control Studies, 2009-2020.
Review in Cancers, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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
16 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 42 citations in OpenAlex.
- Overweight and obesity increase breast cancer risk in postmenopausal women: a meta-analysis of 38 observational studies.GeroScience · 2026Pooled it
- Risk factors for breast cancer: an umbrella review of observational cohort studies and causal relationship analysis.Frontiers in oncology · 2025Pooled it
- Contraceptive use with breast cancer incidence in Indonesia.Breast disease · 2024Pooled it
- Oral Contraceptive Use and Assessment of Breast Cancer Risk among Premenopausal Women via Molecular Characteristics: Systematic Review with Meta-Analysis.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022Pooled it
- The role of probiotics in improving menstrual health in women with primary dysmenorrhoea: A randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial (the PERIOD study).Women's health (London, England)Trial
- Review
- Association of lifestyle factors with breast cancer incidence: An overview of systematic reviews.Chinese journal of cancer research = Chung-kuo yen cheng yen chiu · 2025Article
- Breast Cancer Risk After Hysterectomy: A Health Insurance Database-Based Analysis.Journal of breast cancer · 2025Article
- Spatial and temporal trend analysis of the burden of endocrine-related cancers among women of reproductive age in the Asia-Pacific region from 1990 to 2021: results based on the GBD study.Frontiers in oncology · 2025Article
- Review
- Impact of khat (Catha edulis) and oral contraceptive use on telomerase levels and tumor suppressor genes p53 and p21 in normal subjects and breast cancer patients.Scientific reports · 2024Article
- Epidemiological breast cancer prediction by country: A novel machine learning approach.PloS one · 2024Article
- Review
- Risk of Gynecological Cancers in Women With Polycystic Ovary Syndrome and the Pathophysiology of Association.Cureus · 2023Review
- Review
- Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
To perform a meta-analysis of case-control studies that addressed the association between oral contraceptive pills (OC) use and breast cancer (BrCa), PubMED (MEDLINE), Embase, and the Cochrane Library were searched to identify case-control studies of OC and BrCa published between 2009 and 2020. We used the DerSimonian-Laird method to compute pooled odds ratios (ORs) and confidence intervals (CIs), and the Mantel-Haenszel test to assess the association between OC use and cancer. Forty-two studies were identified that met the inclusion criteria and we included a total of 110,580 women (30,778 into the BrCa group and 79,802 into the control group, of which 15,722 and 38,334 were using OC, respectively). The conducted meta-analysis showed that the use of OC was associated with a significantly increased risk of BrCa in general, OR = 1.15, 95% CI: 1.01 to 1.31,
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.