Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36383189›Full record

SynthesisHuman reproduction update2023

Contraceptives and cancer risks in BRCA1/2 pathogenic variant carriers: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Majke H D van Bommel, Joanna IntHout, Guus Veldmate, C Marleen Kets, Joanne A de Hullu, Anne M van Altena, Marline G Harmsen

Open access · bronzeAbstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Human reproduction update, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
15citing papers in PubMed
4.7field-weighted citation impact, top 5% 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

15 citing papers in PubMed, 29 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Safety of hormonal IUD in breast cancer patients.European journal of obstetrics & gynecology and reproductive biology: X · 2025
    Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Hormonal Contraception and Breast Cancer Risk for Carriers of Germline Mutations inJournal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology · 2025
    Observational
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Global epidemiology of epithelial ovarian cancer.Nature reviews. Clinical oncology · 2024
    Review
  15. Article
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

7 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Majke H D van BommelDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Radboud University Medical Center, Radboud Institute for Health Sciences, Nijmegen, the Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0002-7562-9861
Joanna IntHoutDepartment for Health Evidence, Radboud University Medical Center, Radboud Institute for Health Sciences, Nijmegen, the Netherlands.
Guus VeldmateDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Gelderse Vallei Hospital, Ede, the Netherlands.
C Marleen KetsDepartment of Human Genetics, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, the Netherlands.
Joanne A de HulluDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Radboud University Medical Center, Radboud Institute for Health Sciences, Nijmegen, the Netherlands.
Anne M van AltenaDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Radboud University Medical Center, Radboud Institute for Health Sciences, Nijmegen, the Netherlands.
Marline G HarmsenDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Radboud University Medical Center, Radboud Institute for Health Sciences, Nijmegen, the Netherlands.
Radboud University Nijmegen · NLZiekenhuis Gelderse Vallei · NL

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundIncreasing numbers of BReast CAncer (BRCA) 1 or 2 pathogenic variant (PV) carriers, who have an inherited predisposition to breast and ovarian cancer, are being identified. Among these women, data regarding the effects of contraception on cancer risks are unclear and various guidelines provide various recommendations. OBJECTIVE AND RATIONALE: We aim to optimize counselling regarding contraception for BRCA1/2-PV carriers. Therefore, we performed a systematic review and meta-analysis. We investigated the risk ratio for developing breast cancer or ovarian cancer in BRCA1/2-PV carriers who have used any form of contraception versus non-users. Second, we analysed breast and ovarian cancer risk among BRCA1/2-PV carriers as influenced by the duration of contraceptive use and by the time since last use. In addition, we provide an overview of all relevant international guidelines regarding contraceptive use for BRCA1/2-PV carriers. SEARCH

methodsA systematic search in the Medline database and Cochrane library identified studies describing breast and/or ovarian cancer risk in BRCA1/2-PV carriers as modified by contraception until June 2021. The search included medical subject headings, keywords and synonyms related to BRCA and contraceptives (any kind). PRISMA guidance was followed. Risk Of Bias In Non-randomized Studies of Interventions and Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluations assessments were performed. Random-effects meta-analyses were used to estimate pooled effects for breast and ovarian cancer risk separately. Subgroup analyses were conducted for BRCA1 versus BRCA2 and for the various contraceptive methods. OUTCOMES: Results of the breast cancer risk with oral contraceptive pill (OCP) analysis depended on the outcome measure. Meta-analyses of seven studies with 7525 women revealed a hazard ratio (HR) of 1.55 (95% CI: 1.36-1.76) and of four studies including 9106 women resulted in an odds ratio (OR) of 1.06 (95% CI: 0.90-1.25), heterogeneity (I2) 0% and 52%, respectively. Breast cancer risk was still increased in ever-users compared with never-users >10 years after last OCP use. In contrast, ovarian cancer risk was decreased among OCP users: HR 0.62 (95% CI: 0.52-0.74) based on two studies including 10 981 women (I2: 0%), and OR 0.49 (95% CI: 0.38-0.63) based on eight studies including 10 390 women (I2: 64%). The protective effect vanished after cessation of use. Tubal ligation also protects against ovarian cancer: one study including 3319 women (I2: 0%): HR: 0.44 (95% CI: 0.26-0.74) and three studies with 7691 women (I2: 44%): OR: 0.74 (95% CI: 0.53-1.03). Data regarding other contraceptives were unavailable. No differences were observed between BRCA1 and BRCA2-PV carriers. The quality of evidence was either low or very low. WIDER IMPLICATIONS: The OCP potentially increases breast cancer risk, while ovarian cancer risk decreases with either the OCP and tubal ligation in BRCA1/2-PV carriers. Counselling of BRCA1/2-PV carriers should be personalized; the genetic and non-genetic factors (like prior risk-reducing surgeries, prior breast cancer and age) and patients' preferences (reversibility, ease of use, reliability and effect on menstrual cycle) should be balanced. To further optimize counselling for high-risk women, future research should focus on other (commonly used) contraceptive methods and cancer risks in this specific population, and on the potential impact of changing formulations over time.

Indexed as

Breast NeoplasmsOvarian NeoplasmsBRCA1 ProteinBRCA2 ProteinContraceptive AgentsFemaleGenetic Predisposition to DiseaseHumansMutationReproducibility of ResultsBRCA1 ProteinBRCA1 protein, humanBRCA2 ProteinBRCA2 protein, humanContraceptive AgentsBRCA1 geneBRCA2 genebreast cancercontraceptionoral contraceptive pillovarian cancertubal ligation

Identifiers

PMID36383189
PMCPMC9976973
OpenAlexW4309157098

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.