Related Articles

Objective

To describe the long term effects of the use of oral contraceptives on mortality.

Design

Cohort study with 25 year follow up. Details of oral contraceptive use and of morbidity and mortality were reported six monthly by general practitioners. 75% of the original cohort was “flagged” on the NHS central registers.

Setting

1400 general practices throughout Britain.

Subjects

46 000 women, half of whom were using oral contraceptives at recruitment in 1968-9. Median age at end of follow up was 49 years.

Main outcome measures

Relative risks of death adjusted for age, parity, social class, and smoking.

Results

Over the 25 year follow up 1599 deaths were reported. Over the entire period of follow up the risk of death from all causes was similar in ever users and never users of oral contraceptives (relative risk=1.0, 95% confidence interval 0.9 to 1.1; P=0.7) and the risk of death for most specific causes did not differ significantly in the two groups. However, among current and recent (within 10 years) users the relative risk of death from ovarian cancer was 0.2 (0.1 to 0.8; P=0.01), from cervical cancer 2.5 (1.1 to 6.1; P=0.04), and from cerebrovascular disease 1.9 (1.2 to 3.1, P=0.009). By contrast, for women who had stopped use ⩾10 years previously there were no significant excesses or deficits either overall or for any specific cause of death.

Conclusion

Oral contraceptives seem to have their main effect on mortality while they are being used and in the 10 years after use ceases. Ten or more years after use ceases mortality in past users is similar to that in never users.

Key messagesThis 25 year follow up of 46 000 UK women found a decrease in mortality from ovarian cancer and an increase in mortality from circulatory diseases and cervical cancer among women were using oral contraceptives or had used them in the past 10 years10 or more years after stopping use mortality was similar in past users and never usersOral contraceptives seem to have their main effect on mortality mainly while they are being used and in the 10 years after stopping useThere is little evidence to suggest any persistent adverse effect 10 or more years after use of oral contraceptives ceases

Objective To examine the absolute risks or benefits on cancer associated with oral contraception, using incident data.

Design Inception cohort study.

Setting Royal College of General Practitioners' oral contraception study.

Participants Directly standardised data from the Royal College of General Practitioners' oral contraception study.

Main outcome measures Adjusted relative risks between never and ever users of oral contraceptives for different types of cancer, main gynaecological cancers combined, and any cancer. Standardisation variables were age, smoking, parity, social class, and (for the general practitioner observation dataset) hormone replacement therapy. Subgroup analyses examined whether the relative risks changed with user characteristics, duration of oral contraception usage, and time since last use of oral contraception.

Results The main dataset contained about 339 000 woman years of observation for never users and 744 000 woman years for ever users. Compared with never users ever users had statistically significant lower rates of cancers of the large bowel or rectum, uterine body, and ovaries, tumours of unknown site, and other malignancies; main gynaecological cancers combined; and any cancer. The relative risk for any cancer in the smaller general practitioner observation dataset was not significantly reduced. Statistically significant trends of increasing risk of cervical and central nervous system or pituitary cancer, and decreasing risk of uterine body and ovarian malignancies, were seen with increasing duration of oral contraceptive use. Reduced relative risk estimates were observed for ovarian and uterine body cancer many years after stopping oral contraception, although some were not statistically significant. The estimated absolute rate reduction of any cancer among ever users was 45 or 10 per 100 000 woman years, depending on whether the main or general practitioner observation dataset was used.

Conclusion In this UK cohort, oral contraception was not associated with an overall increased risk of cancer; indeed it may even produce a net public health gain. The balance of cancer risks and benefits, however, may vary internationally, depending on patterns of oral contraception usage and the incidence of different cancers.

BACKGROUND: So far, no-one has attempted to evaluate the overall balance of serious, but not necessarily fatal, disease among a cohort of oral contraceptive users. AIM: To emprirically assess the balance of risk of serious illness among a cohort of oral contraceptive users followed up for up to 28 years. METHODS: Oral contraceptive-associated serious disease was defined as that which is often life-threatening and/or associated with long-term disability, and which has been found, or postulated, to be associated with use of combined oral contraceptives. Data from the Royal College of General Practitioners' (RCGP) Oral Contraception Study were examined to determine the rate of such conditions during 335,181 woman-years of observation in 'ever users' and 228,727 woman-years in 'never users'. The rates were standardized for age, parity, social class, and smoking. RESULTS: Compared with never users, ever users had a small increased risk of any serious disease (relative risk = 1.17; 95% confidence interval = 1.09-1.25). Ever users had an excess risk of cerebrovascular disease, pulmonary embolism, and venous thromboembolism, and reduced risk of ovarian and endometrial cancer. The increased risk was seen only in younger women; by the age of 50, ever users had the same risk as never users. The risk appeared to be confined to women using older oral contraceptives containing 50 micrograms or more of oestrogen. CONCLUSIONS: Past users of older, higher dose oral contraceptives can be reassured that the small increased risk of serious disease seen during current use does not persist after stopping, and that latent effects do not appear later in life. Currently available oral contraceptives, containing less than 50 micrograms of oestrogen accompanied by the progestogen, levonorgestrel, or norethisterone acetate, do not appear to be associated with an increased net risk of serious disease.

Several studies have suggested that prolonged use of oral contraceptives may increase a woman's risk of developing malignant melanoma. In the Royal College of General Practitioners' Oral Contraception Study, 31 cases of malignant melanoma (code 172--International Classification of Diseases, 8th Revision) have been reported among ever-users and 27 cases among never-users. The risk ratio (RR) (indirectly standardised for age, parity, social class and smoking) was 0.92 (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.55-1.54). There was no significant trend with duration of oral contraceptive use, although those women who had used the pill for at least 10 years had an elevated RR of 1.77 (95% CI 0.80-3.90). The Oxford/Family Planning Association Study has recorded 15 cases among ever-users and 17 cases among never-users; the standardised risk ratio was 0.85 (95% CI 0.42-1.70). None of the rates observed in any duration of use category was materially different from those observed in never-users. The results available so far from the two studies suggest that oral contraceptive use is probably not associated with an increased risk of malignant melanoma.

From data available at April 1987 it was found that the standardised risk ratio for rheumatoid arthritis between current users of oral contraceptives and never users was 0.82 (95% confidence interval 0.59 to 1.15); the ratio between former users and never users was 0.94 (95% confidence interval 0.72 to 1.22). Important secular trends have occurred within our study population. The incidence of rheumatoid arthritis among former and never users has declined over the past two decades. Current users have not experienced this temporal trend, and the ratio between current and never users has, therefore, approached unity. These secular changes may explain why some studies have found that oral contraceptives have a protective effect, while others have been unable to show such an effect.

A comparison has been made between the coding of the cause of death by (a) the Royal College of General Practitioners (RCGP) during the Oral Contraception Study and (b) the Office of Population Censuses and Surveys (OPCS) or the General Register Office for Scotland (GRO) on death certificates for the same subjects. Broad grouping of the International Classification of Diseases (ICD) showed close agreement between RCGP and OPCS or GRO coding for all deaths which occurred from the start of the Oral Contraception Study in 1968 up to December 1978. Moreover, where discrepancies occurred there were no systematic differences between ever-users of oral contraceptive and non-users. Detailed examinations of discrepancies in the coding of the causes of those deaths included in the RCGP publication of October 1977 shows that our previous estimate of mortality risk associated with oral contraceptives would not be materially altered by the use of death certificate information.

Background

Although many individuals have multiple lifestyle risk factors, few studies have investigated the impact of lifestyle risk factor combinations among women.

Aim

To investigate the relationship between individual and combinations of lifestyle risk factors in middle-aged women with subsequent mortality, and to estimate the associated population attributable risks.

Design of study

Prospective cohort study.

Setting

Royal College of General Practitioners' (RCGP) Oral Contraception Study, UK.

Method

In 1994–1995, women remaining under follow-up in the RCGP Oral Contraception Study were sent a lifestyle survey, from which modifiable risk factors were identified: pack-years smoked, physical inactivity, never drinking versus consuming at least 7 units of alcohol weekly, and being underweight, overweight, or obese. The cohort was followed to December 2006 or death. Population attributable risks were calculated.

Results

Of 10 059 women studied, 896 died. Pack-years smoked (11–20 years: adjusted hazard ratio [HR] = 1.82, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.46 to 2.27; >20 years: adjusted HR = 2.34, 95% CI = 2.00 to 2.74); never drinking alcohol (adjusted HR = 1.66, 95% CI = 1.34 to 2.05); being underweight (adjusted = HR 1.66, 95% CI = 1.03 to 2.68); and physical inactivity (<15 hours/week: adjusted HR = 1.73, 95% CI = 1.46 to 2.04) were significantly associated with mortality compared with their respective reference group. Women with multiple lifestyle risk factors had higher mortality risks than those reporting one factor. The population attributable risk of the combination of smoking, physical inactivity, body mass index outside normal range, and alcohol (never drinking or excess intake) was 59% (95% CI = 31% to 78%).

Conclusion

Assuming a causal relationship between lifestyle and mortality, avoidance of four lifestyle risk factors would have prevented 60% of the deaths. The importance of avoiding smoking and undertaking physical inactivity during midlife should continue to be emphasised.

OBJECTIVE--To see whether the use of oral contraceptives influences mortality. DESIGN--Non-randomised cohort study of 17,032 women followed up on an annual basis for an average of nearly 16 years. SETTING--17 Family planning clinics in England and Scotland. SUBJECTS--Women recruited during 1968-74. At the time of recruitment each woman was aged 25-39, married, a white British subject, willing to participate, and either a current user of oral contraceptives or a current user of a diaphragm or intrauterine device (without previous exposure to the pill). MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES--Overall mortality and cause specific mortality. RESULTS--238 Deaths occurred during the follow up period. The main analyses concerned women entering the study while using either oral contraceptives or a diaphragm or intrauterine device. The overall relative risk of death in the oral contraceptive users was 0.9 (95% confidence interval 0.7 to 1.2). Though the numbers of deaths were small in most individual disease categories, the trends observed were generally consistent with findings in other reports. Thus the relative risk of death in the oral contraceptive users was 4.9 (95% confidence interval 0.7 to 230) for cancer of the cervix, 3.3 (95% confidence interval 0.9 to 17.9) for ischaemic heart disease, and 0.4 (95% confidence interval 0.1 to 1.2) for ovarian cancer. There was a linear trend in the death rates from cervical cancer and ovarian cancer (in opposite directions) with total duration of oral contraceptive use. Death rates from breast cancer (relative risk 0.9; 95% confidence interval 0.5 to 1.4) and suicide and probable suicide (relative risk 1.1; 95% confidence interval 0.3 to 3.6) were much the same in the two contraceptive groups. In 1981 the relative risk of death in oral contraceptive users from circulatory diseases as a group was reported to be 4.2 (95% confidence interval 2.3 to 7.7) in the Royal College of General Practitioners oral contraception study. The corresponding relative risk in this study was only 1.5 (95% confidence interval 0.7 to 3.0). CONCLUSIONS--These findings contain no significant evidence of any overall effect of oral contraceptive use on mortality. None the less, only small numbers of deaths occurred during the study period and a significant adverse (or beneficial) overall effect might emerge in the future. Interestingly, the mortality from circulatory disease associated with oral contraceptive use was substantially less than that found in the Royal College of General Practitioners study.

In a case-control study, we investigated 169 women aged 15-49 years with malignant melanoma notified to the Oxford and South Western cancer registries during the years 1971-1976, together with 507 matched controls. Data about medical, reproductive, drug and smoking histories were obtained both by reviewing general practitioner (GP) records and from the women themselves by postal questionnaires. There was no significant evidence of any overall increase in the risk of melanoma in oral contraceptive (OC) users (data from GP records-ever use vs never use, relative risk (RR) 1.34, 95% confidence limits 0.92-1.96; corresponding data from postal questionnaires-RR 1.13, limits 0.73-1.75). However, although not significant, the risk estimated from data in the postal questionnaires was higher in women who had used OCs for 5 years or more (use greater than or equal to 5 years vs never use, RR 1.57, limits 0.83-3.03). Previously demonstrated risk factors for melanoma, such as fair skin, blond or red hair and Celtic origin were found to be commoner in the cases than in the controls. Data from the Oxford/Family Planning Association contraceptive study were also examined. Unexpectedly there was a strong suggestion of a negative association between OC use and melanoma risk, but the analysis was based on only 12 women with the disease.

Recent research suggested associations between pain and subsequent all-cause and cancer-specific mortality. This study examined death and cancer development within six years of reporting pain, among women in the Royal College of General Practitioners Oral Contraception Study. We found no associations between 'any' or 'chronic' pain and subsequent all-cause mortality or cancer. We found a higher risk of death from respiratory disease among women reporting pain (adjusted odds ratio [AOR] = 2.5), a higher mortality among women reporting chronic chest pain (AOR = 1.75), and a higher risk of subsequent cancer among women reporting head or abdomen pain. Given the high prevalence of pain symptoms, these findings may be important, and warrant further research.

As a preliminary to a new large cohort study of steroidal contraception, two pilot studies have been carried out. The first estimated that the prevalence of never-use of oral contraceptives among sexually active women aged 16 to 29 years was only 5.1% which means it will be impractical to recruit never-user controls for the main study. The prevalence of cigarette smoking in ever-users of oral contraceptives was 37% in contrast to never-users of whom only 20% smoked.

The second pilot study tested the acceptability of a new recruitment procedure. Two hundred and seventy doctors recruited 1574 women — 98% of these women understood and accepted the need to record their National Health Service number. The mean age of this patient cohort was 22.5 years, 65% were single and 37% were cigarette smokers. One-tenth of women had had coitus before the age of 16 years, but only 4% had started using oral contraceptives before that age.

To determine the pattern of risk factors for acute myocardial infarction associated solely with women a nested case-control study was carried out on cohort data collected during the Royal College of General Practitioners' oral contraception study. Smoking (adjusted relative risk 1.7 for light smokers and 4.3 for heavy smokers), hypertension (2.4), toxaemia of pregnancy (2.8), and diabetes mellitus (6.9) were associated with a significantly increased risk of myocardial infarction. There was no significant trend of risk with social class. Current use of the pill increased the risk only among women who also smoked (relative risk 20.8 for heavy smokers). Previous use of the pill did not influence the risk of myocardial infarction. If heavy smokers also had a history of toxaemia of pregnancy their risk of myocardial infarction was further increased (relative risk 41.0). Other variables associated solely with women, such as parity, hysterectomy, and hormone replacement therapy, had little effect on the risk of having a myocardial infarction. Overall, smoking was the most important independent risk factor and had a strong influence on risks associated with other factors.

Objective To assess the risk of venous thromboembolism from use of combined oral contraceptives according to progestogen type and oestrogen dose.

Design National historical registry based cohort study.

Setting Four registries in Denmark.

Participants Non-pregnant Danish women aged 15-49 with no history of thrombotic disease and followed from January 2001 to December 2009.

Main outcome measures Relative and absolute risks of first time venous thromboembolism.

Results Within 8 010 290 women years of observation, 4307 first ever venous thromboembolic events were recorded and 4246 included, among which 2847 (67%) events were confirmed as certain. Compared with non-users of hormonal contraception, the relative risk of confirmed venous thromboembolism in users of oral contraceptives containing 30-40 µg ethinylestradiol with levonorgestrel was 2.9 (95% confidence interval 2.2 to 3.8), with desogestrel was 6.6 (5.6 to 7.8), with gestodene was 6.2 (5.6 to 7.0), and with drospirenone was 6.4 (5.4 to 7.5). With users of oral contraceptives with levonorgestrel as reference and after adjusting for length of use, the rate ratio of confirmed venous thromboembolism for users of oral contraceptives with desogestrel was 2.2 (1.7 to 3.0), with gestodene was 2.1 (1.6 to 2.8), and with drospirenone was 2.1 (1.6 to 2.8). The risk of confirmed venous thromboembolism was not increased with use of progestogen only pills or hormone releasing intrauterine devices. If oral contraceptives with desogestrel, gestodene, or drospirenone are anticipated to increase the risk of venous thromboembolism sixfold and those with levonorgestrel threefold, and the absolute risk of venous thromboembolism in current users of the former group is on average 10 per 10 000 women years, then 2000 women would need to shift from using oral contraceptives with desogestrel, gestodene, or drospirenone to those with levonorgestrel to prevent one event of venous thromboembolism in one year.

Conclusion After adjustment for length of use, users of oral contraceptives with desogestrel, gestodene, or drospirenone were at least at twice the risk of venous thromboembolism compared with users of oral contraceptives with levonorgestrel.

An analysis of the occurrence of breast cancer in this long-term prospective cohort study shows a significant relative risk (RR) in women who have ever used oral contraceptives (OC) of 3.33 in women age 30 to 34 years at diagnosis and an RR of 5.88 (P = 0.0011) in women who were parity 1 at the time of diagnosis. In women below the age of 35 years the RR of 2.38 was not significant. There was no increased risk in women over the age of 35 years. A significant trend relating to duration of use was demonstrable in women who were parity 1 in the analysis of both current and ever-users. An analysis by time since stopping OC use revealed a significant trend in all ever-users, but the trends were much steeper in women of parity 1 or aged 30 to 34 years at diagnosis. There was no evidence that the increased rates in OC users were related to the oestrogen or progestogen dose. The 5 year survival rate in users diagnosed under the age of 35 years was significantly poorer than in comparable non-users. It is possible that the increased rates in younger OC users might be due to an accelerated presentation of breast cancer in those women who would otherwise have been diagnosed at a later time. The non-significant excess risk in users under 35 years of age was approximately 1 in 7,000 users per year. The unresolved discrepancies between the results of the published studies make it impossible at the present time to decide whether or not OC use is associated with an increased risk of breast cancer.

Objective

To compare the risk of idiopathic venous thromboembolism among women taking third generation oral contraceptives (with gestodene or desogestrel) with that among women taking oral contraceptives with levonorgestrel.

Design

Cohort and case-control analyses derived from the General Practice Research Database.

Setting

UK general practices, January 1993 to December 1999.

Participants

Women aged 15-39 taking third generation oral contraceptives or oral contraceptives with levonorgestrel.

Main outcome measures

Relative incidence (cohort study) and odds ratios (case-control study) as measures of the relative risk of venous thromboembolism.

Results

The adjusted estimates of relative risk for venous thromboembolism associated with third generation oral contraceptives compared with oral contraceptives with levonorgestrel was 1.9 (95% confidence interval 1.3 to 2.8) in the cohort analysis and 2.3 (1.3 to 3.9) in the case-control study. The estimates for the two types of oral contraceptives were similar before and after the warning issued by the Committee on Safety of Medicines in October 1995. A shift away from the use of third generation oral contraceptives after the scare was more pronounced among younger women (who have a lower risk of venous thromboembolism) than among older women. Fewer cases of venous thromboembolism occurred in 1996 and later than would have been expected if the use of oral contraceptives had remained unchanged.

Conclusions

These findings are consistent with previously reported studies, which found that compared with oral contraceptives with levonorgestrel, third generation oral contraceptives are associated with around twice the risk of venous thromboembolism.

AIM—To investigate the relation between oral contraceptive use and certain eye diseases.
METHODS—Abstraction of the relevant data from the two large British cohort studies of the effects of oral contraception, the Royal College of General Practitioners' (RCGP) Oral Contraception Study and the Oxford-Family Planning Association (Oxford-FPA) Contraceptive Study. Both cohort studies commenced in 1968 and were organised on a national basis. Between them they have accumulated over 850 000 person years of observation involving 63 000 women.
RESULTS—The conditions considered in the analysis were conjunctivitis, keratitis, iritis, lacrimal disease, strabismus, cataract, glaucoma, retinal detachment, and retinal vascular lesions. With the exception of retinal vascular lesions, there was no consistent evidence of important increases in risk of eye diseases in users of oral contraception. There was about a twofold increase in the risk of retinal vascular lesions in recent pill users in both studies (statistically significant only in the RCGP study). The increase was not limited to any specific type of lesion and may well reflect diagnostic bias.
CONCLUSION—Oral contraceptive use does not appear to increase the risk of eye disease, with the possible exception of retinal vascular lesions.

 Keywords: oral contraception; eye disease; cohort studies

The effects of cigarette smoking and parity on the development of symptomatic gall bladder disease remain controversial. These relations have been examined in a cohort of 46,000 women followed for up to 19 years during the Royal College of General Practitioners' (RCGP) oral contraception study. During follow up, 1087 women were recorded as experiencing their first ever episode of symptomatic cholelithiasis (International Classification of Diseases, 8th revision (ICD-8) 574) or cholecystitis (ICD-8 575). Smokers were more likely to develop symptomatic gall bladder disease than non-smokers (relative risk 1.19; 95% confidence intervals (95% CI) 1.06 to 1.34) and there was a significant trend with the number of cigarettes smoked daily (test for trend chi 2 = 7.58, p < 0.01). This relation was most apparent among never users of oral contraceptives, although similar trends were found among current and former users. A significant direct relation between symptomatic gall bladder disease and parity was also found (test for trend chi 2 = 21.89, p < 0.001). When all were examined together a trend of increasing risk with lower social class was also found (test for trend chi 2 = 5.72, p = 0.02). Current users of oral contraceptives had a moderately increased risk of symptomatic gall bladder disease (relative risk 1.15; 95% CI 0.99 to 1.34), unlike former users (relative risk 1.03; 95% CI 0.90 to 1.18). These results suggest that smoking and parity are important risk factors for the development of symptomatic gall bladder disease in women.

Many case-control studies have shown that oral contraceptives protect against endometrial cancer and epithelial ovarian cancer, but little information is available from cohort studies. The findings from the Oxford Family Planning Association contraceptive study are reported here; the relative risks for ever users of oral contraceptives in comparison with never users were 0.1 (95% confidence interval 0.0-0.7) for endometrial cancer and 0.4 (95% confidence interval 0.2-0.8) for ovarian cancer. There was a strong negative relationship between duration of oral contraceptive use and ovarian cancer risk. Thus, in comparison with never users of oral contraceptives, the relative risk for users of up to 48 months' duration was 1.0 (95% confidence interval 0.4-2.5), while the relative risk for users of 97 months' duration or more was only 0.3 (95% confidence interval 0.1-0.7).

STUDY OBJECTIVE: To determine whether changes in smoking status among women recruited for the Royal College of General Practitioners' Oral Contraception Study affected previous risk estimates for myocardial infarction. DESIGN: (1) Postal survey between November 1994 and July 1995 of women still under general practitioner observation. Validation of the smoking information supplied by the women on the questionnaire by comparison with that reported by the general practitioner at recruitment to the main study. (2) Nested case-control study of 103 cases of myocardial infarction, matched with 309 controls, to see if different risk estimates were obtained when smoking status at recruitment or smoking status at time of event were used in the analysis. SETTING: 650 general practices throughout the United Kingdom. PARTICIPANTS: 10,073 women who responded to the questionnaire (85.4% of 11,797 sent out). MAIN RESULTS: There was good agreement between smoking information recorded by the general practitioner at recruitment and that supplied retrospectively by respondents to the questionnaire. The risk estimates for myocardial infarction associated with use of combined oral contraceptives (COCs) were almost identical irrespective of whether smoking status at recruitment or at time of event was used for the statistical adjustment. This was because few women stopped smoking while also using COCs. In fact, fewer regular smokers who have ever used COCs reported stopping smoking than never users. The risk estimates for myocardial infarction associated with smoking were smaller when smoking habits at recruitment was used than when smoking habits at time of event was used. CONCLUSIONS: Previous results from the Oral Contraception Study regarding the effects of COCs are unlikely to have been biased by changes in the smoking habits of the cohort, but the effects of smoking have probably been underestimated. There is still a need for effective health education regarding the risks associated with smoking, particularly among users of COCs.

 

The incidence of breast cancer was studied among women taking part in the continuing cohort study organised by the Royal College of General Practitioners. An overall relative risk of 1.19 (not significant) was found in those who had used oral contraceptives. The risk ratio in women under 35 years old was 2.81, but this too was not significant. There was evidence that the estimated increased risk for younger women could be a chance occurrence. No convincing evidence of any adverse effects of oral contraceptives on breast cancer has been shown, but because of the long latent period of this tumour there is a need for longer observation.

Summary

Background

Hormonal contraceptives are used widely but their effects on HIV-1 risk are unclear.

Methods

We followed 3790 heterosexual HIV-1 serodiscordant couples from seven African countries participating in two longitudinal HIV-1 incidence studies. Among hormonal contraceptive users (including injectable and oral contraceptive users) and nonusers, we compared rates of HIV-1 acquisition in women and HIV-1 transmission from women to men.

Findings

Among 1314 couples in which the HIV-1 seronegative partner was female, HIV-1 acquisition rates were 6.61 and 3.78 per 100 person-years among hormonal contraceptive users and nonusers (adjusted hazard ratio [AHR]=1.98, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.06–3.68, p=0.03). Among 2476 couples in which the HIV-1 seronegative partner was male, HIV-1 transmission rates from women to men were 2.61 and 1.51 per 100 person-years in those whose partners currently used versus did not use hormonal contraception (AHR=1.97, 95% CI 1.12–3.45, p=0.02). In subgroup analysis, injectable contraceptive users had increased risk for acquiring and transmitting HIV-1 to their partner and HIV-1 seropositive women using injectable contraception had higher genital HIV-1 RNA concentrations, suggesting a mechanism for increased transmission risk. Oral contraceptives were used too infrequently to draw definitive conclusions about HIV-1 risk.

Interpretation

Women should be counseled about potentially increased risk of HIV-1 acquisition and transmission with hormonal contraception, particularly injectable methods, and about the importance of dual protection with condoms to decrease HIV-1 risk. Non-hormonal or lower-dose hormonal contraceptive methods should be considered for women with or at-risk for HIV-1.

Funding

National Institutes of Health (R03 HD068143, R01 AI083034, P30 AI027757, and T32 AI007140) and the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation (26469 and 41185).

We examined the association between NSAID use and ovarian cancer by potential effect modifiers, parity and oral contraceptive use, in a population-based case-control study conducted in Wisconsin and Massachusetts. Women reported prior use of NSAIDs and information on risk factors in a telephone interview. A total of 487 invasive ovarian cancer cases and 2653 control women aged 20–74 years were included in the analysis. After adjustment for age, state of residence and other covariates, ever use of NSAIDs was inversely associated with ovarian cancer in never users of oral contraceptives (odd ratio [OR]=0.58, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.42–0.80) but not for ever users (OR=0.98, 95% CI 0.71–1.35) (p-interaction=0.03). A reduced risk with NSAID use was also noted in nulliparous women (OR=0.47, 95% CI 0.27–0.82) but not among parous women (OR=0.81, 95% CI 0.64–1.04) (p-interaction=0.05). These results suggest that use of NSAIDs were beneficial to women at greatest risk for ovarian cancer.

We examined the association between non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug (NSAID) use and ovarian cancer by potential effect modifiers, parity and oral contraceptive use, in a population-based case–control study conducted in Wisconsin and Massachusetts. Women reported prior use of NSAIDs and information on risk factors in a telephone interview. A total of 487 invasive ovarian cancer cases and 2653 control women aged 20–74 years were included in the analysis. After adjustment for age, state of residence and other covariates, ever use of NSAIDs was inversely associated with ovarian cancer in never users of oral contraceptives (odds ratio (OR)=0.58, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.42–0.80) but not for ever users (OR=0.98, 95% CI 0.71–1.35) (P-interaction=0.03). A reduced risk with NSAID use was also noted in nulliparous women (OR=0.47, 95% CI 0.27–0.82) but not among parous women (OR=0.81, 95% CI 0.64–1.04) (P-interaction=0.05). These results suggest that use of NSAIDs were beneficial to women at greatest risk for ovarian cancer.

Background

during adulthood, most studies have reported that oral contraceptive (OC) pills had neutral, or possibly beneficial effect on bone health. We proposed this study of pre and post menopausal women assessing BMD, bone biochemical markers and physical performance among OC past users and comparable women who have never use Ocs.

Methods

A cross-sectional study comparing the bone density, bone biochemical markers (osteocalcin, CTX) and three measures to assess physical performance: timed get-up-and-go test "TGUG", five-times-sit-to-stand test "5 TSTS" and 8-feet speed walk "8 FSW" of users and never users OC. We were recruited 210 women who used OC for at least 2 years with that of 200 nonusers was carried out in pre and postmenopausal women (24-86 years).

Results

when analysing the whole population, BMD and biochemical markers values were similar for Ocs past users and control subjects. However when analysing the subgroup of premenopausal women, there was a statistically significant difference between users and never-users in osteocalcin (15,5 ± 7 ng/ml vs 21,6 ± 9 ng/ml; p = 0,003) and CTX (0,30 ± 0,1 ng/ml vs 0,41 ± 0,2 ng/ml; p = 0,025). This difference persisted after adjustment for age, BMI, age at menarche and number of pregnancies. In contrast, in post menopausal women, there was no difference in bone biochemical markers between OC users and the control. On the other hand OC past users had a significant greater performance than did the never users group. And when analysing the physical performance tests by quartile OC duration we found a significant negative association between the three tests and the use of OC more than 10 years.

Conclusion

the funding show no evidence of a significant difference in BMD between Ocs users and never user control groups, a decrease in bone turn over in OC pre menopausal users and a greater physical performances in patients who used OC up than 10 years.

Recently, a population-based case-control study observed a 60% increased odds ratio (OR) for cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma (SCC) among women who had ever used oral contraceptives (OCs) compared with non users (95% confidence interval (CI) = 1.0–2.5). To further characterize the putative association between OC use and SCC risk, we conducted a nested case-control study using a large retrospective cohort of 111,521 Kaiser Permanente Northern California members. Multivariable conditional logistic regression was used to estimate ORs and CIs adjusting for known and hypothesized SCC risk factors. Pre-diagnostic OC use was associated with a statistically significant increased OR for SCC in univariate analysis (OR = 2.4, CI = 1.2–4.8), with borderline statistical significance in multivariable analysis (CI = 2.0, CI = 0.91–4.5). Given the high incidence of SCC in the general population and the prevalent use of OCs among women in the United States, there is a need for more large, carefully designed epidemiologic studies to determine whether the observed association between OC use and SCC can be replicated and to better understand the etiologic basis of an association if one exists.