Dataset Information

Association of Hormonal Contraceptive Use With Adverse Health Outcomes: An Umbrella Review of Meta-analyses of Randomized Clinical Trials and Cohort Studies.

ABSTRACT:

Importance

Meta-analyses have reported conflicting data on the safety of hormonal contraception, but the quality of evidence for the associations between hormonal contraceptive use and adverse health outcomes has not been quantified in aggregate.

Objective

To grade the evidence from meta-analyses of randomized clinical trials (RCTs) and cohort studies that assessed the associations between hormonal contraceptive use and adverse health outcomes among women.

Data sources

MEDLINE, Embase, and the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews were searched from database inception to August 2020. Search terms included hormonal contraception, contraceptive agents, progesterone, desogestrel, norethindrone, megestrol, algestone, norprogesterones, and levonorgestrel combined with terms such as systematic review or meta-analysis.

Evidence review

The methodological quality of each meta-analysis was graded using the Assessment of Multiple Systematic Reviews, version 2, which rated quality as critically low, low, moderate, or high. The Grading of Recommendation, Assessment, Development and Evaluations approach was used to assess the certainty of evidence in meta-analyses of RCTs, with evidence graded as very low, low, moderate, or high. Evidence of associations from meta-analyses of cohort studies was ranked according to established criteria as nonsignificant, weak, suggestive, highly suggestive, or convincing.

Results

A total of 2996 records were screened; of those, 310 full-text articles were assessed for eligibility, and 58 articles (13 meta-analyses of RCTs and 45 meta-analyses of cohort studies) were selected for evidence synthesis. Sixty associations were described in meta-analyses of RCTs, and 96 associations were described in meta-analyses of cohort studies. Among meta-analyses of RCTs, 14 of the 60 associations were nominally statistically significant (P ≤ .05); no associations between hormonal contraceptive use and adverse outcomes were supported by high-quality evidence. The association between the use of a levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine system and reductions in endometrial polyps associated with tamoxifen use (odds ratio [OR], 0.22; 95% CI, 0.13-0.38) was graded as having high-quality evidence, and this evidence ranking was retained in the subgroup analysis. Among meta-analyses of cohort studies, 40 of the 96 associations were nominally statistically significant; however, no associations between hormonal contraceptive use and adverse outcomes were supported by convincing evidence in the primary and subgroup analyses. The risk of venous thromboembolism among those using vs not using oral contraception (OR, 2.42; 95% CI, 1.76-3.32) was initially supported by highly suggestive evidence, but this evidence was downgraded to weak in the sensitivity analysis.

Conclusions and relevance

The results of this umbrella review supported preexisting understandings of the risks and benefits associated with hormonal contraceptive use. Overall, the associations between hormonal contraceptive use and cardiovascular risk, cancer risk, and other major adverse health outcomes were not supported by high-quality evidence.

SUBMITTER: Brabaharan S

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8760614 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:ImportanceThe association between the use of hormonal contraceptive and pancreatic cancer among premenopausal women has until now been unclear. This is the first study to investigate the risk of pancreatic cancer in pre-menopausal women.ObjectiveTo determine whether hormonal contraception increases the risk of developing pancreatic cancer in pre-menopausal women.DesignA nationwide prospective cohort study followed all women in Denmark in the age range of 15-49 years without previous cancer or venous thrombosis from 1995 to 2014. The Danish National Prescription Registry provided individually updated exposure information on use of hormonal contraception. The Danish Cancer Registry provided cancer diagnoses, and the Danish National Patient Register containing clinical diagnoses and surgical codes at discharge from public and private hospitals.SettingPopulation-based cohort study.ParticipantsAll women living in Denmark aged 15-49 years at January 1st, 1995, and those subsequently reaching age 15 years up to December 31st, 2014 were eligible for the study.ResultsAmong 1.9 million women who were followed on average for 11.4 years, 235 pancreatic cancers occurred. Compared to never users, ever users of any type of hormonal contraception had a relative risk (RR) of pancreatic cancer of 0.90 (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.68-1.19). No overall association between duration of hormonal contraceptive use and pancreatic cancer risk was found. Neither was long-term use of hormonal contraception associated with pancreas cancer, RR 0.83 (95% CI 0.47-1.50). The risk did not vary between users of combined and progestogen-only products. All models were adjusted for age, completed or ongoing education, polycystic ovary syndrome, endometriosis and among parous women; parity, age at first birth, smoking and body mass index.Conclusions and relevanceCompared to never users the risk of pancreatic cancer is not significantly higher among current and recent users of contemporary hormonal contraception and does not vary between users of combined and progestogen-only products. In conclusion, our study suggests no risk of pancreatic cancer with use of any type of hormonal contraception.

Project description:BackgroundThe evidence from epidemiological research into whether use of hormonal contraception increases women's risk of HIV acquisition is inconsistent. We did a robust meta-analysis of existing data to provide summary estimates by hormonal contraceptive method which can be used to inform contraceptive guidelines, models, and future studies.MethodsWe updated a recent systematic review to identify and describe studies that met inclusion criteria. To ensure inclusion of more recent research, we searched PubMed for articles published after December, 2011, using the terms "hormonal contraception", "HIV/acquisition", "injectables", "progestin", and "oral contraceptive pills". We assessed statistical heterogeneity for these studies, and, when appropriate, combined point estimates by hormonal contraception formulation using random-effects models. We assessed publication bias and investigated heterogeneity through subgroup and stratified analyses according to study population and design features.FindingsWe identified 26 studies, 12 of which met inclusion criteria. There was evidence of an increase in HIV risk in the ten studies of depot medroxyprogesterone acetate (pooled hazard ratio [HR] 1·40, 95% CI 1·16-1·69). This risk was lower in the eight studies done in women in the general population (pooled HR 1·31, 95% CI 1·10-1·57). There was substantial between-study heterogeneity in secondary analyses of trials (n=7, I(2) 51·1%, 95% CI 0-79·3). Although individual study estimates suggested an increased risk, substantial heterogeneity between two studies done in women at high risk of HIV infection (I(2) 54%, 0-88·7) precluded pooling estimates. There was no evidence of an increased HIV risk in ten studies of oral contraceptive pills (pooled HR 1·00, 0·86-1·16) or five studies of norethisterone enanthate (pooled HR 1·10, 0·88-1·37).InterpretationOur findings show a moderate increased risk of HIV acquisition for all women using depot medroxyprogesterone acetate, with a smaller increase in risk for women in the general population. Whether the risks of HIV observed in our study would merit complete withdrawal of depot medroxyprogesterone acetate needs to be balanced against the known benefits of a highly effective contraceptive.FundingNone.

Project description:ImportanceAntidepressant use is increasing worldwide. Yet, contrasting evidence on the safety of antidepressants is available from meta-analyses, and the credibility of these findings has not been quantified.ObjectiveTo grade the evidence from published meta-analyses of observational studies that assessed the association between antidepressant use or exposure and adverse health outcomes.Data sourcesPubMed, Scopus, and PsycINFO were searched from database inception to April 5, 2019.Evidence reviewOnly meta-analyses of observational studies with a cohort or case-control study design were eligible. Two independent reviewers recorded the data and assessed the methodological quality of the included meta-analyses. Evidence of association was ranked according to established criteria as follows: convincing, highly suggestive, suggestive, weak, or not significant.ResultsForty-five meta-analyses (17.9%) from 4471 studies identified and 252 full-text articles scrutinized were selected that described 120 associations, including data from 1012 individual effect size estimates. Seventy-four (61.7%) of the 120 associations were nominally statistically significant at P ≤ .05 using random-effects models. Fifty-two associations (43.4%) had large heterogeneity (I2 > 50%), whereas small-study effects were found for 17 associations (14.2%) and excess significance bias was found for 9 associations (7.5%). Convincing evidence emerged from both main and sensitivity analyses for the association between antidepressant use and risk of suicide attempt or completion among children and adolescents, autism spectrum disorders with antidepressant exposure before and during pregnancy, preterm birth, and low Apgar scores. None of these associations remained supported by convincing evidence after sensitivity analysis, which adjusted for confounding by indication.Conclusions and relevanceThis study's findings suggest that most putative adverse health outcomes associated with antidepressant use may not be supported by convincing evidence, and confounding by indication may alter the few associations with convincing evidence. Antidepressant use appears to be safe for the treatment of psychiatric disorders, but more studies matching for underlying disease are needed to clarify the degree of confounding by indication and other biases. No absolute contraindication to antidepressants emerged from this umbrella review.

Project description:OBJECTIVE:To evaluate the breadth, validity, and presence of biases of the associations of vitamin D with diverse outcomes. DESIGN:Umbrella review of the evidence across systematic reviews and meta-analyses of observational studies of plasma 25-hydroxyvitamin D or 1,25-dihydroxyvitamin D concentrations and randomised controlled trials of vitamin D supplementation. DATA SOURCES:Medline, Embase, and screening of citations and references. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA:Three types of studies were eligible for the umbrella review: systematic reviews and meta-analyses that examined observational associations between circulating vitamin D concentrations and any clinical outcome; and meta-analyses of randomised controlled trials assessing supplementation with vitamin D or active compounds (both established and newer compounds of vitamin D). RESULTS:107 systematic literature reviews and 74 meta-analyses of observational studies of plasma vitamin D concentrations and 87 meta-analyses of randomised controlled trials of vitamin D supplementation were identified. The relation between vitamin D and 137 outcomes has been explored, covering a wide range of skeletal, malignant, cardiovascular, autoimmune, infectious, metabolic, and other diseases. Ten outcomes were examined by both meta-analyses of observational studies and meta-analyses of randomised controlled trials, but the direction of the effect and level of statistical significance was concordant only for birth weight (maternal vitamin D status or supplementation). On the basis of the available evidence, an association between vitamin D concentrations and birth weight, dental caries in children, maternal vitamin D concentrations at term, and parathyroid hormone concentrations in patients with chronic kidney disease requiring dialysis is probable, but further studies and better designed trials are needed to draw firmer conclusions. In contrast to previous reports, evidence does not support the argument that vitamin D only supplementation increases bone mineral density or reduces the risk of fractures or falls in older people. CONCLUSIONS:Despite a few hundred systematic reviews and meta-analyses, highly convincing evidence of a clear role of vitamin D does not exist for any outcome, but associations with a selection of outcomes are probable.

Project description:ObjectiveTo evaluate the existing meta-analytic evidence of associations between exposure to ultra-processed foods, as defined by the Nova food classification system, and adverse health outcomes.DesignSystematic umbrella review of existing meta-analyses.Data sourcesMEDLINE, PsycINFO, Embase, and the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, as well as manual searches of reference lists from 2009 to June 2023.Eligibility criteria for selecting studiesSystematic reviews and meta-analyses of cohort, case-control, and/or cross sectional study designs. To evaluate the credibility of evidence, pre-specified evidence classification criteria were applied, graded as convincing ("class I"), highly suggestive ("class II"), suggestive ("class III"), weak ("class IV"), or no evidence ("class V"). The quality of evidence was assessed using the GRADE (Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluations) framework, categorised as "high," "moderate," "low," or "very low" quality.ResultsThe search identified 45 unique pooled analyses, including 13 dose-response associations and 32 non-dose-response associations (n=9 888 373). Overall, direct associations were found between exposure to ultra-processed foods and 32 (71%) health parameters spanning mortality, cancer, and mental, respiratory, cardiovascular, gastrointestinal, and metabolic health outcomes. Based on the pre-specified evidence classification criteria, convincing evidence (class I) supported direct associations between greater ultra-processed food exposure and higher risks of incident cardiovascular disease related mortality (risk ratio 1.50, 95% confidence interval 1.37 to 1.63; GRADE=very low) and type 2 diabetes (dose-response risk ratio 1.12, 1.11 to 1.13; moderate), as well as higher risks of prevalent anxiety outcomes (odds ratio 1.48, 1.37 to 1.59; low) and combined common mental disorder outcomes (odds ratio 1.53, 1.43 to 1.63; low). Highly suggestive (class II) evidence indicated that greater exposure to ultra-processed foods was directly associated with higher risks of incident all cause mortality (risk ratio 1.21, 1.15 to 1.27; low), heart disease related mortality (hazard ratio 1.66, 1.51 to 1.84; low), type 2 diabetes (odds ratio 1.40, 1.23 to 1.59; very low), and depressive outcomes (hazard ratio 1.22, 1.16 to 1.28; low), together with higher risks of prevalent adverse sleep related outcomes (odds ratio 1.41, 1.24 to 1.61; low), wheezing (risk ratio 1.40, 1.27 to 1.55; low), and obesity (odds ratio 1.55, 1.36 to 1.77; low). Of the remaining 34 pooled analyses, 21 were graded as suggestive or weak strength (class III-IV) and 13 were graded as no evidence (class V). Overall, using the GRADE framework, 22 pooled analyses were rated as low quality, with 19 rated as very low quality and four rated as moderate quality.ConclusionsGreater exposure to ultra-processed food was associated with a higher risk of adverse health outcomes, especially cardiometabolic, common mental disorder, and mortality outcomes. These findings provide a rationale to develop and evaluate the effectiveness of using population based and public health measures to target and reduce dietary exposure to ultra-processed foods for improved human health. They also inform and provide support for urgent mechanistic research.Systematic review registrationPROSPERO CRD42023412732.

Project description:BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVES:Experiments in animal models have shown a positive association between in utero exposure to pharmacologic sex hormones and offspring obesity. The developmental effects of such hormones on human obesity are unknown. SUBJECTS/METHODS:Using data from a large, prospective pregnancy cohort study (n=19?652), with linkage to a national prescription registry, we evaluated the association between use of hormonal contraceptives before and after conception (defined from dispensed prescription data and characterized by last date of use relative to conception, 12 to >4 months before (n=3392), 4 to >1 months before (n=2541), 1 to >0 months before (n=2997) and 0-12 weeks after (n=567)) in relation to offspring overweight or obesity at age 3 years. RESULTS:We observed a weak, inverse association between early pregnancy use of a combination oral contraceptive and offspring overweight or obesity at age 3 (adjusted odds ratio (OR): 0.75, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.53, 1.08) and a positive, but imprecise, association with use of a progestin-only oral contraceptive in early pregnancy (adjusted OR: 1.26, 95% CI: 0.79, 2.02). In general, no association was observed between the use of a hormonal contraceptive before conception and offspring overweight or obesity. A sensitivity analysis comparing combination oral contraceptive users in early pregnancy to other unplanned pregnancies without hormonal contraceptive use further strengthened the inverse association (adjusted OR: 0.70, 95% CI: 0.48, 1.02). Other sensitivity analyses were conducted to evaluate the robustness of the associations observed given varying assumptions. CONCLUSIONS:Pharmacologic sex hormones in early pregnancy may be inversely or positively associated with offspring overweight or obesity at age 3, depending on the specific formulation used. The present study provides support for the potential for environmental sources of hormonally active agents to exert developmental effects.