A meta-analysis of estrogen replacement therapy and risk of epithelial ovarian cancer

被引:84
作者
Coughlin, SS
Giustozzi, A
Smith, SJ
Lee, NC
机构
[1] Ctr Dis Control & Prevent, Div Canc Prevent & Control, Natl Ctr Chron Dis Prevent & Hlth Promot, Atlanta, GA 30341 USA
[2] Univ Med & Dent New Jersey, Newark, NJ 07103 USA
[3] Ctr Dis Control & Prevent, Div Environm Hlth Lab Sci, Natl Ctr Environm Hlth, Atlanta, GA 30341 USA
关键词
estrogen; meta-analysis; ovarian neoplasms;
D O I
10.1016/S0895-4356(99)00179-1
中图分类号
R19 [保健组织与事业(卫生事业管理)];
学科分类号
摘要
Estrogen replacement therapy (ERT) has not been associated with epithelial ovarian cancer in most reported epidemiologic studies that have looked for an association. Some studies may have found weak statistically nonsignificant associations because the number of cases or number of women who reported estrogen use was small. We performed a meta-analysis of data from 15 case-control studies that provided data on ERT and risk of epithelial ovarian cancer. The 15 combined studies were statistically heterogeneous (chi(2) (14) = 26.3, P < 0.05) in terms of the effect they found. When we combined these studies using a random effects model, we did not End a significant association of ERT with ovarian cancer (odds ratio = 1.1, 95% confidence interval = 0.9-1.3). There was no clear evidence of a dose-response relation with increasing duration of estrogen use in a subset of five studies that reported estrogen use by duration (overall slope = 0.0012, 95% confidence interval = -0.0055 to 0.0080). The influences of statistical outliers, study design (hospital or clinic controls vs. community controls), and location (U.S. and Canada vs. Europe and Australia) were examined. The odds ratio was 1.3 (95% confidence interval = 1.0-1.6) in the relatively homogeneous subset of four U.S. case-control studies with community controls, but we cannot rule out the possibility of uncontrolled confounding. The odds ratios for estrogen use for other subgroups defined by geographic location and type of control group were not significantly different from one. (C) 2000 Elsevier Science Inc. All rights reserved.
引用
收藏
页码:367 / 375
页数:9
相关论文
共 42 条
[1]  
American Cancer Society Inc., 1999, CANC FACTS FIG 1999
[2]  
ANNEGERS JF, 1979, CANCER, V43, P723, DOI 10.1002/1097-0142(197902)43:2<723::AID-CNCR2820430248>3.0.CO
[3]  
2-1
[4]   METAANALYSIS OF EPIDEMIOLOGIC DOSE-RESPONSE DATA [J].
BERLIN, JA ;
LONGNECKER, MP ;
GREENLAND, S .
EPIDEMIOLOGY, 1993, 4 (03) :218-228
[5]   RISK-FACTORS FOR OVARIAN-CANCER - A CASE CONTROL STUDY [J].
BOOTH, M ;
BERAL, V ;
SMITH, P .
BRITISH JOURNAL OF CANCER, 1989, 60 (04) :592-598
[6]  
CASAGRANDE JT, 1979, LANCET, V2, P170
[7]   BRCA1 and BRCA2 gene mutations and risk of breast cancer public health perspectives [J].
Coughlin, SS ;
Khoury, MJ ;
Steinberg, KK .
AMERICAN JOURNAL OF PREVENTIVE MEDICINE, 1999, 16 (02) :91-98
[8]  
CRAMER DW, 1983, JNCI-J NATL CANCER I, V71, P711
[9]   METAANALYSIS IN CLINICAL-TRIALS [J].
DERSIMONIAN, R ;
LAIRD, N .
CONTROLLED CLINICAL TRIALS, 1986, 7 (03) :177-188
[10]  
FATHALLA MF, 1971, LANCET, V2, P163