Oral contraceptive use and risk of breast carcinoma in situ (United States)
Our study assesses the impact of oral contraceptive use on breast carcinoma in-situ (BCIS) risk.
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).
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.
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.
KeywordsBreast carcinoma in situ Oral contraceptives Risk Case–control
The authors thank Jane Sullivan-Halley for her programming assistance and all of the women who participated in the study. The following grants and contracts supported this research effort: Department of Defense U.S. Army Medical Research and Materiel Command Grant number: DAMD17-96-6156; National Institute of Child Health and Human Development Contract number: N01-HD-3-3175; National Cancer Institute Contract numbers: N01-CN-67010 and N01-PC-35139; California Department of Health Services Grant number: 050Q-8709-S1528. The collection of cancer incidence data used in this publication was supported by the California Department of Health Services as part of the statewide cancer reporting program mandated by California Health and Safety Code Section 103885. The ideas and opinions expressed herein are those of the authors, and no endorsement by the State of California, Department of Health Services is intended or should be inferred.
- 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
- 3.Katzung BG (ed.) (2000) Basic and clinical pharmacology, 8th edn. McGraw-Hill, Appleton & LangeGoogle Scholar
- 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
- 15.Kleinbaum DG (1994) Logistic regression : a self-learning text. New York, SpringerGoogle Scholar
- 18.Kleinbaum G, Kupper L., Morgenstern H. (1982) Epidemiologic research: principles and quantitative methods. Van Nostrand Reinhold, New YorkGoogle Scholar