Cancer Causes & Control

, Volume 17, Issue 9, pp 1155–1162 | Cite as

Oral contraceptive use and risk of breast carcinoma in situ (United States)

  • Jasmeet K. Gill
  • Michael F. Press
  • Alpa V. Patel
  • Leslie Bernstein
Original paper

Abstract

Objective

Our study assesses the impact of oral contraceptive use on breast carcinoma in-situ (BCIS) risk.

Methods

We conducted a population based case–control study of incident BCIS among black and white women ages 35–64 years residing in Los Angeles County. Case patients (n = 567) were newly diagnosed with BCIS and control participants (n = 614) were identified by random digit dialing between 1 March 1995 and 31 May 1998. All subjects were required to have had a mammogram in the 2 years before case diagnosis or control recruitment. Data were collected during in-person interviews. Multivariable logistic regression analyses provide estimates of odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (95% CIs).

Results

Oral contraceptive use was not associated with risk of BCIS (OR = 1.04, 95% CI (0.76–1.42)). Risk did not increase with longer periods of use. No associations with BCIS risk were observed for oral contraceptive use before first term pregnancy, age at first oral contraceptive use, or for time since last use. Risk was not modified by estrogen dose, age, race, or parity.

Conclusions

Our results are consistent with recent results on invasive breast cancer reported for the Women’s Contraceptive and Reproductive Experiences Study and show no association between oral contraceptive use and risk of BCIS.

Keywords

Breast carcinoma in situ Oral contraceptives Risk Case–control 

References

  1. 1.
    Mosher WD, Martinez GM, Chandra A, Abma JC, Willson SJ (12-10-2004) Use of contraception and use of family planning services in the United States: 1982–2002. Vital Health Stat. 23Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Henderson BE, Feigelson HS (2000) Hormonal carcinogenesis. Carcinogenesis 21:427–433PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Katzung BG (ed.) (2000) Basic and clinical pharmacology, 8th edn. McGraw-Hill, Appleton & LangeGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Collaborative Group on Hormonal Factors in Breast Cancer (1996) Breast cancer and hormonal contraceptives: collaborative reanalysis of individual data on 53,297 women with breast cancer and 100,239 women without breast cancer from 54 epidemiological studies. Collaborative Group on Hormonal Factors in Breast Cancer. Lancet 347:1713–1727CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Marchbanks PA, McDonald JA, Wilson HG, et al (2002) Oral contraceptives and the risk of breast cancer. N Engl J Med 346:2025–2032PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Page DL, Dupont WD, Rogers LW, Jensen RA, Schuyler PA (1995) Continued local recurrence of carcinoma 15–25 years after a diagnosis of low grade ductal carcinoma in situ of the breast treated only by biopsy. Cancer 76:1197–1200PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Eusebi V, Feudale E, Foschini MP, et al (1994) Long-term follow-up of in situ carcinoma of the breast. Semin Diagn Pathol 11:223–235PubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Ringberg A, Anagnostaki L, Anderson H, Idvall I, Ferno M (2001) Cell biological factors in ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) of the breast-relationship to ipsilateral local recurrence and histopathological characteristics. Eur J Cancer 37:1514–1522PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Farabegoli F, Champeme MH, Bieche I, et al (2002) Genetic pathways in the evolution of breast ductal carcinoma in situ. J Pathol 196:280–286PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Krishnamurthy S, Sneige N (2002) Molecular and biologic markers of premalignant lesions of human breast. Adv Anat Pathol 9:185–197PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Warnberg F, Nordgren H, Bergkvist L, Holmberg L (2001) Tumour markers in breast carcinoma correlate with grade rather than with invasiveness. Br J Cancer 85:869–874PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Claus EB, Stowe M, Carter D (2003) Oral contraceptives and the risk of ductal breast carcinoma in situ. Breast Cancer Res Treat 81:129–136PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Trentham-Dietz A, Newcomb PA, Storer BE, Remington PL (2000) Risk factors for carcinoma in situ of the breast. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 9:697–703PubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Marchbanks PA, McDonald JA, Wilson HG, et al (2002) The NICHD Women’s Contraceptive and reproductive experiences study: methods and operational results. Ann Epidemiol 12:213–221PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Kleinbaum DG (1994) Logistic regression : a self-learning text. New York, SpringerGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Meeske K, Press M, Patel A, Bernstein L (2004) Impact of reproductive factors and lactation on breast carcinoma in situ risk. Int J Cancer 110:102–109PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Patel AV, Press MF, Meeske K, Calle EE, Bernstein L (2003) Lifetime recreational exercise activity and risk of breast carcinoma in situ. Cancer 98:2161–2169PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Kleinbaum G, Kupper L., Morgenstern H. (1982) Epidemiologic research: principles and quantitative methods. Van Nostrand Reinhold, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Dumeaux V, Alsaker E, Lund E (2003) Breast cancer and specific types of oral contraceptives: a large Norwegian cohort study. Int J Cancer 105:844–850PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2006

Authors and Affiliations

  • Jasmeet K. Gill
    • 1
  • Michael F. Press
    • 2
  • Alpa V. Patel
    • 3
  • Leslie Bernstein
    • 4
  1. 1.Etiology Program, Cancer Research Center of HawaiiUniversity of HawaiiHonoluluUSA
  2. 2.Department of Pathology and Norris Comprehensive Cancer CenterKeck School of Medicine of the University of Southern CaliforniaLos AngelesUSA
  3. 3.Department of Epidemiology and Surveillance ResearchAmerican Cancer SocietyAtlantaUSA
  4. 4.Department of Preventive Medicine and Norris Comprehensive Cancer CenterKeck School of Medicine of the University of Southern CaliforniaLos AngelesUSA

Personalised recommendations