4.5 Article

Pregnancy Loss in Relation to the Risks of Female-Specific Cancers in a Population-Based Cohort and Mendelian Randomization Study-China, 2004-2017

Journal

CHINA CDC WEEKLY
Volume 5, Issue 19, Pages 413-+

Publisher

Chinese Center for Disease Control and Prevention
DOI: 10.46234/ccdcw2023.078

Keywords

-

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Limited evidence exists on the relationship between pregnancy loss and female-specific cancers in the Chinese population. This report found that terminations were associated with a lower risk of endometrial cancer, while stillbirths were related to a higher risk of cervical cancer. Rural residents with a history of pregnancy loss had increased risks of breast and cervical cancers compared to urban counterparts. A positive graded relationship between live births and pregnancy loss on cervical cancer was observed.
What is already known about this topic? Limited evidence exists regarding the relationship between pregnancy loss and female-specific cancers within the Chinese population from prospective cohort studies.What is added by this report? Terminations were associated with a 13% lower risk of endometrial cancer, whereas stillbirths were related to an 18% higher risk of cervical cancer. Rural residents with a history of pregnancy loss experienced a 19% and 38% increased risk of breast and cervical cancers, respectively, compared to their urban counterparts. Moreover, a positive graded relationship between live births and pregnancy loss on cervical cancer was observed.What are the implications for public health practice? This study has significant implications for identifying women at an increased risk for breast and genital cancers and contributes to the development of effective public health strategies for female cancer prevention. Future research on reproductive history, particularly in rural areas, should be given priority in efforts to improve female cancer screening and early detection.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available