Dataset Information

Oral contraceptives and colorectal cancer risk - A meta-analysis and systematic review.

ABSTRACT: There is limited understanding of the potential relationship between the risk of colorectal cancer and oral contraceptive use among women of different ages. Further investigation on the issue helps develop an informed choice of contraception. Data for this meta-analysis were derived from case-control and cohort studies of colorectal cancer and oral contraceptive use conducted between June 2000 and May 2022. The studies had a very high heterogeneity, as shown by an I² of 99%, and a confidence interval of 95% was considered significant. Other results from the meta-analysis were as follows; Heterogeneity: Chi² = 585.13, df = 6 (P < 0.00001). A test of the overall effect of ever use versus never use of oral contraceptives was Z = 21.85 (P < 0.00001). All the studies had a pooled risk ratio (RR) of 0.53. The use of oral contraceptives is associated with reduced risk of developing colorectal cancer. There is a need for further research into the biological mechanisms underlying these relationships, which may lead to insights into potential preventive interventions for colorectal carcinogenesis in women. The keywords used to locate studies included in this meta-analysis include Keywords targeting oral contraceptives included oral contraceptive pills, and birth control pills. Search keywords targeting colorectal carcinogenesis included neoplasms, tumors, or colon and rectal cancer.

SUBMITTER: Abusal F

PROVIDER: S-EPMC9661645 | biostudies-literature | 2022 Nov

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Oral contraceptives and colorectal cancer risk - A meta-analysis and systematic review.

Abusal Fadi F Aladwan Mohannad M Alomari Yazan Y Obeidat Saja S Abuwardeh Salah S AlDahdouh Haya H Al-Shami Qotada Q Odat Qusai Q

Annals of medicine and surgery (2012) 20221003

There is limited understanding of the potential relationship between the risk of colorectal cancer and oral contraceptive use among women of different ages. Further investigation on the issue helps develop an informed choice of contraception. Data for this meta-analysis were derived from case-control and cohort studies of colorectal cancer and oral contraceptive use conducted between June 2000 and May 2022. The studies had a very high heterogeneity, as shown by an I<sup>2</sup> of 99%, and a con ...[more]

PMID: 36389202

Similar Datasets

Project description:ObjectiveTo provide a comprehensive overview of the risk of venous thrombosis in women using different combined oral contraceptives.DesignSystematic review and network meta-analysis.Data sourcesPubMed, Embase, Web of Science, Cochrane, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, Academic Search Premier, and ScienceDirect up to 22 April 2013.Review methodsObservational studies that assessed the effect of combined oral contraceptives on venous thrombosis in healthy women. The primary outcome of interest was a fatal or non-fatal first event of venous thrombosis with the main focus on deep venous thrombosis or pulmonary embolism. Publications with at least 10 events in total were eligible. The network meta-analysis was performed using an extension of frequentist random effects models for mixed multiple treatment comparisons. Unadjusted relative risks with 95% confidence intervals were reported. The requirement for crude numbers did not allow adjustment for potential confounding variables.Results3110 publications were retrieved through a search strategy; 25 publications reporting on 26 studies were included. Incidence of venous thrombosis in non-users from two included cohorts was 1.9 and 3.7 per 10,000 woman years, in line with previously reported incidences of 1-6 per 10,000 woman years. Use of combined oral contraceptives increased the risk of venous thrombosis compared with non-use (relative risk 3.5, 95% confidence interval 2.9 to 4.3). The relative risk of venous thrombosis for combined oral contraceptives with 30-35 µg ethinylestradiol and gestodene, desogestrel, cyproterone acetate, or drospirenone were similar and about 50-80% higher than for combined oral contraceptives with levonorgestrel. A dose related effect of ethinylestradiol was observed for gestodene, desogestrel, and levonorgestrel, with higher doses being associated with higher thrombosis risk.ConclusionAll combined oral contraceptives investigated in this analysis were associated with an increased risk of venous thrombosis. The effect size depended both on the progestogen used and the dose of ethinylestradiol.

Project description:BackgroundOral contraceptive pills (OCPs) are double agents, which downregulate endogenous concentrations of oestradiol and progesterone whilst simultaneously providing daily supplementation of exogenous oestrogen and progestin during the OCP-taking days. This altered hormonal milieu differs significantly from that of eumenorrheic women and might impact exercise performance, due to changes in ovarian hormone-mediated physiological processes.ObjectiveTo explore the effects of OCPs on exercise performance in women and to provide evidence-based performance recommendations to users.MethodsThis review complied with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. A between-group analysis was performed, wherein performance of OCP users was compared with naturally menstruating women, and a within-group analysis was conducted, wherein performance during OCP consumption was compared with OCP withdrawal. For the between-group analysis, women were phase matched in two ways: (1) OCP withdrawal versus the early follicular phase of the menstrual cycle and (2) OCP consumption versus all phases of the menstrual cycle except for the early follicular phase. Study quality was assessed using a modified Downs and Black Checklist and a strategy based on the recommendations of the Grading of Recommendations Assessment Development and Evaluation working group. All meta-analyses were conducted within a Bayesian framework to facilitate probabilistic interpretations.Results42 studies and 590 participants were included. Most studies (83%) were graded as moderate, low or very low quality, with 17% achieving high quality. For the between-group meta-analysis comparing OCP users with naturally menstruating women, posterior estimates of the pooled effect were used to calculate the probability of at least a small effect (d ≥ 0.2). Across the two between-group comparison methods, the probability of a small effect on performance favouring habitual OCP users was effectually zero (p < 0.001). In contrast, the probability of a small effect on performance favouring naturally menstruating women was moderate under comparison method (1) (d ≥ 0.2; p = 0.40) and small under comparison method (2) (d ≥ 0.2; p = 0.19). Relatively large between-study variance was identified for both between-group comparisons ([Formula: see text]0.5 = 0.16 [95% credible interval (CrI) 0.01-0.44] and [Formula: see text]0.5 = 0.22 [95% CrI 0.06-0.45]). For the within-group analysis comparing OCP consumption with withdrawal, posterior estimates of the pooled effect size identified almost zero probability of a small effect on performance in either direction (d ≥ 0.2; p ≤ 0.001).ConclusionsOCP use might result in slightly inferior exercise performance on average when compared to naturally menstruating women, although any group-level effect is most likely to be trivial. Practically, as effects tended to be trivial and variable across studies, the current evidence does not warrant general guidance on OCP use compared with non-use. Therefore, when exercise performance is a priority, an individualised approach might be more appropriate. The analysis also indicated that exercise performance was consistent across the OCP cycle.

Project description:Background The incidence of early-onset colorectal cancer (EOCRC), which means colorectal cancer diagnosed in patients under 50 years, has been increasing around the world. However, the etiology remains unclear. This study aims to identify risk factors for EOCRC. Methods This systematic review was conducted in PubMed, Embase, Scopus, and Cochrane Library databases from inception to November 25, 2022. We examined risk factors for EOCRC, including demographic factors, chronic conditions, and lifestyle behaviors or environmental factors. Random-effects/fixed-effects meta-analysis was adopted to combine effect estimates from published data. Study quality was evaluated with the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS). Statistical analysis was performed Revman5.3. Studies not suitable for the meta-analysis were analyzed by a systematic review. Results A total of 36 studies were identified for this review, and 30 studies were included in the meta-analysis. Significant risk factors for EOCRC included male (OR=1.20; 95% CI, 1.08-1.33), Caucasian (OR=1.44; 95% CI, 1.15-1.80), a family history of CRC (OR=5.90; 95% CI, 3.67-9.48), inflammatory bowel disease (OR=4.43; 95% CI, 4.05-4.84), obesity (OR=1.52; 95%CI, 1.20-1.91), overweight (OR=1.18; 95% CI, 1.12-1.25), triglycerides (OR=1.12; 95% CI, 1, 08-1.18), hypertension (OR=1.16; 95% CI, 1.12-1.21), metabolic syndrome (OR=1.29; 95% CI, 1.15-1.45), smoking (OR=1.44; 95% CI, 1.10-1.88), alcohol consumption (OR=1.41; 95% CI, 1.22-1.62), a sedentary lifestyle (OR=1.24; 95% CI, 1.05-1.46), red meat (OR=1.10; 95% CI, 1.04-1.16), processed meat (OR=1.53; 95% CI, 1.13-2.06), Western dietary patterns (OR=1.43; 95% CI, 1.18-1.73) and sugar-sweetened beverages (OR=1.55; 95% CI, 1.23-1.95). However, no statistical differences were found for hyperlipidemia and hyperglycemia. Vitamin D may be a protective factor (OR=0.72; 95% CI, 0.56-0.92). There was considerable heterogeneity among studies (I2>60%). Conclusions The study provides an overview of the etiology and risk factors of EOCRC. Current evidence can provide baseline data for risk prediction models specific to EOCRC and risk-tailored screening strategies.

Project description:ObjectivesOral cancer (OC) is the most common malignant tumor of the head and neck (HN) and ranks 16th among the most frequently diagnosed cancers worldwide. A systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to provide an evidence-based analysis of the relationship between polyomaviruses and oral cancer.MethodsThe global online databases was used to identify relevant studies published between January 2000 and September 2024. The quality of each article was assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS) checklist. Data analysis was performed using STATA Ver. 11 software, and the standard error was calculated using the binomial distribution formula. The heterogeneity of the study results was assessed using the I-square and Q index, while publication bias was examined using the Begg's test. In addition, a random effects model was used to determine the risk difference (RD), and a forest plot diagram was used to present the results with 95% confidence intervals. The Trim and Fill test was applied to estimate publication bias, and sensitivity analysis was performed to assess the influence of individual studies on the overall estimate.ResultsOf the nine studies, the relationship between BK virus (BKV) and the Merkel cell polyomavirus (MCV) and oral cancer was investigated. In five primary studies, and by combining the results of these studies, the risk of oral cancer in MCV and BKV-positive individuals was significantly higher than in the negative groups by 13% (RD: 0.13, 95% CI: 0.00, 0.26) and 2% (RD: 0.02, 95% CI: -0.03, 0.07), respectively. In addition, the association between JC virus (JCV) and oral cancer was investigated in six primary studies. By combining the results of these studies, the risk of oral cancer in JCV-positive individuals was 1% higher than that in JCV-negative individuals (RD: 0.01, 95% CI: -0.02, 0.06).DiscussionThis meta-analysis showed that there was a significant association between MCV and oral cancer, and the risk of oral cancer in MCV- positive individuals was 13% higher than that in MCV- negative individuals. More preliminary studies are needed on the association between BKV and JCV and the risk of oral cancer.

Project description:To perform a systematic review and meta-analysis of published studies assessing the sensitivity of both computed tomographic (CT) colonography and optical colonoscopy (OC) for colorectal cancer detection.Analysis followed Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses recommendations. The primary data source was the results of a detailed PubMed search from 1994 to 2009. Diagnostic studies evaluating CT colonography detection of colorectal cancer were assessed by using predefined inclusion and exclusion criteria, in particular requiring both OC and histologic confirmation of disease. Studies that also included a mechanism to assess true-positive versus false-negative diagnoses at OC (eg, segmental unblinding) were used to calculate OC sensitivity. Assessment and data extraction were performed independently by two authors. Potential bias was ascertained by using Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies guidelines. Specific CT colonography techniques were cataloged. Forest plots of per-patient sensitivity were produced on the basis of random-effect models. Potential bias across primary studies was assessed by using the I(2) statistic. Original study authors were contacted for data clarification when necessary.Forty-nine studies provided data on 11,151 patients with a cumulative colorectal cancer prevalence of 3.6% (414 cancers). The sensitivity of CT colonography for colorectal cancer was 96.1% (398 of 414; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 93.8%, 97.7%). No heterogeneity (I(2) = 0%) was detected. No cancers were missed at CT colonography when both cathartic and tagging agents were combined in the bowel preparation. The sensitivity of OC for colorectal cancer, derived from a subset of 25 studies including 9223 patients, was 94.7% (178 of 188; 95% CI: 90.4%, 97.2%). A moderate degree of heterogeneity (I(2) = 50%) was present.CT colonography is highly sensitive for colorectal cancer, especially when both cathartic and tagging agents are combined in the bowel preparation. Given the relatively low prevalence of colorectal cancer, primary CT colonography may be more suitable than OC for initial investigation of suspected colorectal cancer, assuming reasonable specificity.http://radiology.rsna.org/lookup/suppl/doi:10.1148/radiol.11101887/-/DC1.

Dataset Information

Oral contraceptives and colorectal cancer risk - A meta-analysis and systematic review.

Publications

Oral contraceptives and colorectal cancer risk - A meta-analysis and systematic review.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets