4.5 Article Proceedings Paper

Oral contraceptive use, reproductive factors, and colorectal cancer risk: Findings from Wisconsin

期刊

CANCER EPIDEMIOLOGY BIOMARKERS & PREVENTION
卷 14, 期 5, 页码 1212-1218

出版社

AMER ASSOC CANCER RESEARCH
DOI: 10.1158/1055-9965.EPI-04-0845

关键词

-

资金

  1. NCI NIH HHS [CA99504, CA47147, CA14520] Funding Source: Medline

向作者/读者索取更多资源

We investigated the association of oral contraceptive (OC) use and reproductive factors with colorectal cancer risk in a large population-based case-control study. Cases were women ages 20 to 74 years, living in Wisconsin, with a new diagnosis of colon (n = 1,122) or rectal (n = 366) cancer. Control participants were randomly selected from population lists of similarly aged female Wisconsin residents (n = 4,297). Risk factor information was collected through structured telephone interviews. Compared with never users, OC users had an odds ratio (OR) of 0.89 [95% confidence interval (95% CI), 0.75-1.06] for colorectal cancer. OC use associations did not differ significantly between colon and rectal cancer sites; however, when compared with never users, recent OC users (< 14 years) seemed at reduced risk of rectal cancer (OR, 0.53; 95% CI, 0.28-1.00). Women with age at first birth older than the median (23 years) had 0.83 times the risk of colon cancer compared with women with age at first birth below the median (95% CI, 0.70-0.98). We observed an inverse trend between increasing parity and rectal cancer risk (P = 0.05). Compared with nulliparous women, women with five or more births had 0.66 times the risk of rectal cancer (95% Cl, 0.43-1.02). Compared with postmenopausal women, premenopausal women were at reduced risk (OR, 0.67; 95% CI, 0.47-0.97) of colorectal cancer. No significant associations were observed between colorectal cancer risk and age at menarche or age at menopause. These findings suggest differential roles of reproductive factors in colon and rectal cancer etiology.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据