Table 4.
Studies of PCOS and breast cancer risk
| Author | Year | Study design | Breast Cancer Cases (n) | Overall result RR (95% CI) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Gottschau | 2015 | Registry Cohort (Danish) | 59 | 1.1 (0.8–1.4)a |
| Shen | 2015 | Registry Cohort (Taiwan) | 44 | 1.6 (0.9–2.8)a |
| Barryb | 2014 | Meta-analysis | 3618 | 1.0 (0.6–1.4)a |
| Ghasemi | 2010 | Case–control (Iran) | 166 | 0.7 (0.3–1.5)a |
| Brintonc | 2010 | Cohort (US) | 89 | 1.3 (1.1–1.6)a |
| Terryd | 2006 | Cohort (US) | 2267 | 0.8 (0.6–1.0) |
| Wild | 2000 | Cohort (UK) | 49 | 1.3 (0.6–2.8) |
| Anderson | 1997 | Cohort (US) | 883 | 1.2 (0.7–2) |
| Talamini | 1997 | Case–control (Italy) | 2569 | 0.9 (0.4–1.8) |
| Gammon | 1991 | Case–control (US) | 4730 | 0.47 (0.3–0.9)a |
| Coulame | 1983 | Cohort (US) | 12 | 1.5 (0.8–2.6) |
a Effect estimate not adjusted for BMI
b This meta-analysis includes the studies by Ghasemi, Anderson, and Talamini
c In this study, androgen excess or menstrual disorders was evaluated rather than PCOS
d In this study, infertility due to ovulatory disorders was evaluated rather than PCOS
e In this study, chronic anovulation syndrome was evaluated rather than PCOS