Skip to main content
Asian Pacific Journal of Cancer Prevention : APJCP logoLink to Asian Pacific Journal of Cancer Prevention : APJCP
. 2017;18(5):1429–1433. doi: 10.22034/APJCP.2017.18.5.1429

Relationship between Breast Cancer and Oral Contraceptive Use among Thai Premenopausal Women: a Case-Control Study

Wisit Chaveepojnkamjorn 1,*, Natchaporn Pichainarong 2, Rungsinoppadol Thotong 3, Pratana Sativipawee 4, Supachai Pitikultang 5
PMCID: PMC5555558  PMID: 28612598

Abstract

Background:

Breast cancer (BC) is an important issue both in medicine and public health as it is the leading malignancy with high incidence and mortality among women worldwide. The objective of this research was to determine the associations of BC with oral contraceptive (OC) use among Thai premenopausal women (TPW).

Materials and Methods:

A case-control study was conducted among TPW attending the National Cancer Institute, with 257 cases and 257 controls in 2013-2014. Cases and controls were matched by age (± 5 years), residential area and duration of attendance. Data were collected with a questionnaire that comprised 2 sections: part 1 socio-demographic characteristics, and part 2 health risk behavior and reproductive factors. The obtained data were analyzed using descriptive and analytic statistics with a computerized statistical package.

Results:

The study participants were mainly 40-44 years old (60 %) with an average age of 39 years. The major BC type was invasive ductal carcinoma (91.8%). Multiple unconditional logistic regression analysis, controlling for possible confounding factors, revealed that TPW with OC use increased the risk of BC by a factor of over 3 times (ORadj=3.39, 95%CI =1.99-5.75). In addition, the greater the duration of OC, the greater the risk (ORadj 6-10 yrs=3.91, 95%CI = 1.99-7.64, ORadj >10 yrs=4.23, 95%CI = 2.05-8.71).

Conclusions:

From our findings, a surveillance system of cancer risk with OC use should be conducted, accompanied by an exercise promotion campaign among risk groups, providing information and counseling for physical exercise and physical activities, weight control and basic adjustment for a healthy lifestyle to reduce BC.

Keywords: Breast cancer, oral contraceptive use, Thai premenopausal women

Introduction

Cancers are the top leading cause of death. According to estimates of The World Health Organization (WHO), approximately 8.2 million cancer deaths occurred in 2014 and mortality mainly occurred in developing countries. Of these, 3.4 million are male and female 3.3 million. Almost 70 % of all cancers was seen in underdeveloped and developing countries (Siegel et al., 2015). At present, it is well established that BC is the most commonly diagnosed invasive cancer and the leading cause of cancer death among women worldwide including in Thailand (Siegel et al., 2015; National Cancer Control Committee, 2013; Bureau of Policy and Strategies, 2011; Bureau of Policy and Strategies, 2015). Causes of being BC are likely to be multifactorial. Some studies found that OC use is one of the risk factors of BC (Soroush et al., 2016; Rosenberg et al., 2009). The association between OC use and BC risk has been examined in numerous studies, mainly in western countries. In Thailand, there are quite very few studies of this association among premenopausal women. The present study was carried out to assess the association between OC use and BC occurrence among TPW.

Materials and Methods

Study Design, Sample Size and Sampling Technique

A hospital based case-control study (1:1) was performed at the National Cancer Institute in Bangkok during November 2013 -December 2014 to determine the effect of OC use and BC risk among TPW. A total of 257 BC cases and 257 controls were included in the study. The cases were newly diagnosed with breast cancer by pathologists. The controls were healthy TPW who had annual health check-up. Cases and controls were matched (1:1) by age (±5 years), residential area and duration of attending. Of the 514 women were both premenopausal and aged <45 years at the time of study. Cases and controls used the same questionnaire to obtain data collection.

The sample size was calculated by the formula (Lwanga and Lemeshows, 1991). Where Po = proportion of exposure in controls = 0.32 (Umpan, 2004); P1 = proportion of exposure in cases = 0.68 (Umpan, 2004); Zα/2 = 1.96 at α = 0.05; Zβ = 0.84 at β = 0.20; and P = 0.5. The calculated sample size in each group was at least 256.

Tool and Measurements

Data collection was obtained by interviewing the study subjects by researcher and trained research assistants. The questionnaire comprised socio-demographic factors, health risk behaviors, reproductive factors, obesity and cancer status. While BC information was collected by laboratory and pathological results, namely, TNM classification, stage of disease, hormone receptor test, and date of diagnosis with BC.

Variable definitions

Premenopausal women were defined as those still having menstrual cycles at the time of study.

Ethical Considerations

The study was reviewed and approved by the Ethics Committee for research of National Cancer Institute, Ministry of Public Health (148/2556) and the Ethics Committee for Research in Human Subjects of the Faculty of Public Health, Mahidol University (Ref No. MuPH 2014-090) and agreed with the Helsinki declaration. All participants participated in this study are on a voluntary basis. Informed consent to participate in the study was obtained from participants after providing sufficient information. Information was collected by a self-administered questionnaire with the help and supervision of research assistants. Confidentiality was well kept throughout the study using anonymous technique (respondents were identified by code numbers to ensure confidentiality and the results were analyzed as a whole).

Statistical Analyses

The data were analyzed with SPSS version 18 (IBM, NY, USA). Categorical variables were given as a frequency and percentage, crude odds ratio, 95 % Confidence Interval (CI) of OR and p-value. The numerical variables were expressed as mean, minimum and maximum, and standard deviation (SD). Univariate analysis was performed using the chi-square test to differentiate proportional exposures between BC patents and controls for categorical variables. Adjusted odds ratio and the 95 % CI of OR were calculated from multiple unconditional logistic regression to examine associations between BC occurrence and BMI, adjusted for potential confounding factors of reproductive factors and health risk behaviors. A p-value of < 0.05 was considered to be statistically significant.

Results

Demographic Characteristics of Cases and Controls

A total of 514 TPW participated in the case-control study (1:1). The average age of subjects was 39 years. Table 1 outlines the socio-demographic characteristics of them. To summarize majority of them were aged 40-44 years (59.9%, 61.1%), married (61.8%, 60.7%), higher education (39.7%, 51.4%), buddhism (96.5%, 96.1%), living in central region (68.5%), office employee (35.8%, 33.8%), and had monthly family income of 15,000-30,000 baht (53.7%, 48.2%). There was no significant difference regarding demographics among cases and controls (p>0.05).

Table 1.

General Characteristics of Cases and Controls

Characteristics Cases No. % Controls No. % p valuea
Age gr. (yrs) 0.981
  ≤ 29 10 3.9 11 4.3
  30-34 30 11.7 28 10.9
  35-39 63 24.5 61 23.7
  40-44 154 59.9 157 61.1
Mean (SD) 39.20 (4.39) 39.30 (4.41)
Min-Max 25-44 25-44
Marital status 0.07
  Single 68 26.5 84 32.7
  Married 159 61.8 156 60.7
  Widowed/Divorced 30 11.7 17 6.6
Education 0.068
  No formal education 10 3.9 8 3.1
  Primary school 67 26.1 52 20.2
  Secondary school 78 30.3 65 25.3
  Higher education 102 39.7 132 51.4
Religion 0.689
  Buddhism 248 96.5 247 96.1
  Islam 7 2.7 6 2.3
  Christianity 2 0.8 4 1.6
Residence 1
  North 1 0.4 1 0.4
  Northeast 11 4.3 11 4.3
  Central 176 68.5 176 68.5
  East 16 6.2 16 6.2
  West 48 18.7 48 18.7
  South 5 1.9 5 1.9
Occupation 0.668
  Office employee 92 35.8 87 33.8
  Entrepreneur 77 30 85 33.1
  Government officer 73 28.4 75 29.2
  Agriculture 15 5.8 10 3.9
Monthly family income (baht) 0.066
  < 10,000 38 14.8 34 13.2
  10,000-15,000 52 20.2 48 18.7
  15,001-30,000 138 53.7 124 48.2
  >30,000 29 11.3 51 19.9
Mean(SD) 22,740.08 (9,311.92) 24,174.32 (13,541.38)
Min-Max 7,000-70,000 7,800-95,000
a

chi-square test

BC and Risk Factors

Using a univariate analysis, we found that risk factors of developing BC among TPW were family history of BC, history of benign breast tumor, younger age at menarche, parity, miscarriage, OC use, passive smoking, multivitamin use and BMI (p<0.05) as shown in Table 2. Using a multiple unconditional logistic regression analysis, OC use showed the association with BC occurrence after controlling for possible confounding factors (family history of BC, history of benign breast tumor, younger age at menarche, parity, miscarriage, BMI, passive smoking, and multivitamin use). Risk of developing BC with OC use was 3.39 and times (ORadj= 3.39, 95%CI=1.99-5.75), When considering the duration of OC use, the more exposed, the more being BC (ORadj 6-10 yrs=3.91, 95%CI = 1.99-7.64, ORadj >10 yrs=4.23, 95%CI = 2.05-8.71) as shown in Table 3.

Table 2.

Crude Analysis of Characteristics associated with BC among TPW

Characteristics Cases No. % Controls No. % ORc 95%CI p-valuea
Family history of BC
  No 211 82.1 249 96.9 1.00
  Yes 46 17.9 8 3.1 6.79 3.13-14.69 < 0.001*
History of benign breast tumor
  No 209 81.3 235 91.3 1.00
  Yes 48 18.7 22 8.6 2.45 1.43-4.20 0.001*
Age at menarche (yrs)
  ≥14 83 32.3 140 54.5 1.00
  <14 174 67.7 117 45.5 2.51 1.75-3.59 < 0.001*
Parity
  No 193 75.1 172 66.9 1.00
  Yes 64 24.9 85 33.1 0.67 0.45-0.99 0.041*
Miscarriage
  No 186 72.4 214 83.3 1.00
  Yes 71 27.6 43 16.7 1.90 1.21-2.98 0.003*
OC use
  No 90 35 162 63.0 1.00
  Yes 167 65 95 37.0 3.16 2.21-4.54 < 0.001*
Duration of OC use (yrs)
  0 90 35 162 63.0 1.00
  1-5 42 16.3 44 17.1 1.72 1.01-2.90 0.031*
  6-10 70 27.2 30 11.7 4.2 2.48-7.17 < 0.001*
  >10 55 21.5 21 8.2 4.71 2.59-8.72 < 0.001*
Active smoking
  No 248 96.5 251 97.7 1.00
  Yes 9 3.5 6 2.3 1.52 0.53-4.33 0.432
Passive smoking
  No 153 59.5 198 77.1 1.00
  Yes 104 40.5 59 22.9 2.28 1.53-3.41 < 0.001*
Alcohol consumption
  No 251 97.7 252 98.1 1.00
  Yes 6 2.3 5 1.9 1.20 0.32-4.61 0.761
Multivitamin use
  No 227 88.3 168 65.4 1
  Yes 30 11.7 89 34.6 0.25 0.15-0.40 < 0.001*
Body mass index (kg/m2)
  18.5-22.9 89 34.7 122 47.4 1.00
  23.0-24.9 44 17.1 54 21.0 1.12 0.67-1.86 0.629
  25.0-29.9 88 34.2 41 16.0 2.94 1.81-4.79 < 0.001*
  ≥30.0 26 10.1 10 3.9 3.56 1.55-8.38 < 0.001*
  <18.5 10 3.9 30 11.7 0.46 0.20-1.05 0.056
a

chi-square test, ORc= crude odds ratio, CI= confidence interval;

*

significant at p-value <0.05.

Table 3.

Multivariable Logistic Regression Analysis of OC use associated with BC among TPW

Variables ORc 95%CI ORadj 95%CI p-value
OC use
  No 1 1
  Yes 3.16 2.21-4.54 3.39 1.99-5.75 <0.001*
Duration of OC use (yrs)
  0 1 1
  1-5 1.72 1.01-2.90 1.72 0.90-3.25 0.099
  6-10 4.2 2.48-7.17 3.91 1.99-7.64 <0.001*
  >10 4.71 2.59-8.72 4.23 2.05-8.71 <0.001*

ORc, crude OR; ORadj, adjusted OR for family history of BC; history of benign breast tumor, age at menarche, parity, miscarriage, passive smoking, multivitamin use and BMI;

*

significant at p-value <0.05

BC Patients’ Characteristics

Cases were newly patients with BC diagnosed by pathological confirmation and laboratory testing during November 2013-December 2014. Majority of them were 55-64 kg (40.5%) and 150-159 cm (65.7%). Focusing on body size, 60.7% showed obesity and overweight. Location of BC, mostly in both sides (52.2%). Most of study cases were IDC-NOS (91.8%), stage II (45.5%). For OC use group, duration for OC use, mostly 6-10 yr. (41.9%).

Discussion

Study participants were the TPW, mostly aged 40-44 years (60%). Socio-demographic characteristics of cases and controls were quite alike. When controlled by health risk behaviors and reproductive factors, found that TPW with OC use was being BC risks. Our findings indicated that women with OC use were about 3 times risk to develop BC. It was consistent with the previous studies (Soroush et al., 2016; Rosenberg et al., 2009; Nyante et al., 2008; Kahlenborn et al., 2006; Newcomer et al., 2003; Hemminki et al., 2002; Grabrick et al., 2000), meanwhile some studies showed the contrary results (Haile et al., 2006; Silvera et al., 2005; Mine et al., 2005; Jernstrom et al., 2005; Tessaro et al., 2001; Van Hoften et al., 2000).

The reason to support the association owing to estrogen hormone in OC pills, therefore it will have a cohesion with specific receptor on cancer cell’s surface and then it will send the biochemical signals and activate cell multiplication (Howlader et al., 2016). The association had no evidence in OC use with only progesterone (McNaught et al., 2006). In addition, the present studies revealed the risk of BC had increased according to duration of OC use and it’s consistent with some studies (Howlader et al., 2016; Collaborative Group on Hormonal Factors in Breast Cancer, 1996). Therefore, birth control with BC patients should be namely, contraceptive pills with progesterone, depot medroxyprogesterone acetate injection, intrauterine device (IUD) with progesterone, and so on (Kabos and Borges, 2011). In addition, breast self examination is very necessary, so women should be done correctly (Smith et al., 2003). For women ≥ 40 years should be checked up with mammogram annually (Smith et al., 2003; American College of Radiology, 2013). There are a lot of tools for BC risk evaluation, such as the Gail Model, the Claus Model, the Tyree-Cuzick Model and the BRCAPRO model (Santen et al., 2007; Hollingsworth et al., 2004). For Thais, campaign of women aged ≥ 20 years to examine by themselves, they should be aware of advantages and limitations of this technique, support breast feeding after give birth 6 months, reduce alcohol consumption and reduce obesity (National Cancer Control Committee, 2013). Therefore, the surveillance of cancer risk and contraceptive use is the crucial measure to reduce BC risks.

Advantages and limitation of the Study

There are some advantages of this case-control study. First, the National Cancer Institute is the specialized hospital for cancer patients. Second, they are easily identified, and provide sufficient numbers. Finally, cases are newly BC patients diagnosed and confirmed by pathologists, which lead to the reduction in classification bias. Some limitations of this study should be noted. First, the study was a hospital based case-control study, therefore, the representative of target population couldn’t be mentioned. Second, it was very difficult to select the suitable controls. However, we matched cases and controls by age, residence and duration of attending. In summary, it should be the surveillance system of cancer risks and OC use and campaign of cancer prevention such as proper exercise, healthy diet, weight control and basic methods for health lifestyle among risk groups (National Cancer Control Committee, 2013), it will minimize and reduce risks of developing BC.

Acknowledgements

We would like to express sincere thanks to the participants and staff for their valuable participation in the study. We also wish to extend our deep appreciations to those who are not mentioned here for their kindness and encouragement. This study was supported for publication by the China Medical Board (CMB) Faculty of Public Health, Mahidol University, Bangkok, Thailand.

References

  1. American college of radiology. ACR practice parameter for the performance of screening and diagnostic mammography:revised 2013. 2013. Available from https://www.acr.org/~/media/3484ca30845348359bad4684779d492d.pdf .
  2. Bureau of policy and strategies, Ministry of public health. Thailand health profile 2008-2010. Bangkok: The war Veterans organization of Thailand; 2011. [Google Scholar]
  3. Bureau of policy and strategies, Ministry of public health. Public health statistics 2014. Bangkok: The war Veterans organization of Thailand; 2015. [Google Scholar]
  4. Collaborative group on hormonal factors in breast cancer. Breast cancer and hormonal contraceptives:collaborative reanalysis of individual data on 53297 women with breast cancer and 100239 women without breast cancer from 54 epidemiological studies. Lancet. 1996;347:1713–27. doi: 10.1016/s0140-6736(96)90806-5. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  5. Grabrick DM, Hartmann LC, Cerhan JR, et al. Risk of breast cancer with oral contraceptive use in women with a family history of breast cancer. JAMA. 2000;284:1791–8. doi: 10.1001/jama.284.14.1791. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  6. Haile RW, Thomas DC, McGuire V, et al. BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers, oral contraceptive use, and breast cancer before age 50. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev. 2006;15:1863–70. doi: 10.1158/1055-9965.EPI-06-0258. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  7. Hemminki E, Luostarinen T, Pukkala E, et al. Oral contraceptive use before first birth and risk of breast cancer:a case control study. BMC Women’s Health. 2002;2:9. doi: 10.1186/1472-6874-2-9. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  8. Hollingsworth AB, Singletary SE, Morrow M, et al. Current comprehensive assessment and management of women at increased risk for breast cancer. Am J Surg. 2004;187:349–62. doi: 10.1016/j.amjsurg.2003.12.025. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  9. Howlader N, Noone AM, Krapcho M, et al. SEERcancer statistics review 1975-2013, National cancer institute. Bethesda, MD: 2016. http://seer.cancer.gov/csr/1975_2013/ based on November 2015 SEER data submission, posted to the SEER web site, April 2016. [Google Scholar]
  10. Jernstrom H, Loman N, Johannsson OT, et al. Impact of teenage oral contraceptive use in a population-based series of early-onset breast cancer cases who have undergone BRCA mutation testing. Eur J Cancer. 2005;41:2312–20. doi: 10.1016/j.ejca.2005.03.035. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  11. Kabos P, Borges VF. Surveillance and detection of recurrence of breast cancer. In: Jacobs L, Finlayson CA, editors. Early diagnosis and treatment of cancer:breast cancer. Philadelphia: Saunders Elsevier; 2011. pp. 307–18. [Google Scholar]
  12. Kahlenborn C, Modugno F, Potter DM, et al. Oral contraceptive use as a risk factor for premenopausal breast cancer:a meta-analysis. Mayo Clin Proc. 2006;81:1290–302. doi: 10.4065/81.10.1290. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  13. Lwanga SK, Lemeshow S. Sample size determination in health studies:a practical manual. Geneva: World Health Organization; 1991. [Google Scholar]
  14. McNaught J, Reid RL, Provencher DM, et al. Progesterone-only and non-hormonal contraception in the breast cancer survivor. Joint review and committee opinion of the society of obstetricians and gynaecologists of Canada and the society of gynecologic oncologists of Canada. J Obstet Gynaecol Can. 2006;28:616–39. doi: 10.1016/S1701-2163(16)32195-8. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  15. Milne RL, Knight JA, John EM, et al. Oral contraceptive use and risk of early-onset breast cancer in carriers and noncarriers of BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutations. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev. 2005;14:350–6. doi: 10.1158/1055-9965.EPI-04-0376. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  16. National cancer control committee, Department of health, ministry of public pealth. National cancer control programmes 2013-2017. Bangkok: The agricultural cooperative printing of Thailand; 2013. [Google Scholar]
  17. Newcomer LM, Newcomb PA, Trentham-Dietz A, et al. Oral contraceptive use and risk of breast cancer by histologic type. Int J Cancer. 2003;106:961–4. doi: 10.1002/ijc.11307. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  18. Nyante SJ, Gammon MD, Malone KE, et al. The association between oral contraceptive use and lobular and ductal breast cancer in young women. Int J Cancer. 2008;122:936–41. doi: 10.1002/ijc.23163. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  19. Rosenberg L, Zhang Y, Coogan PF, et al. A case-control study of oral contraceptive use and incident breast cancer. Am J Epidemiol. 2009;169:473–9. doi: 10.1093/aje/kwn360. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  20. Santen RJ, Boyd NF, Chlebowski RT, et al. Critical assessment of new risk factors for breast cancer:considerations for development of an improved risk prediction model. Endocr Relat Cancer. 2007;14:169–87. doi: 10.1677/ERC-06-0045. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  21. Siegel RL, Miller KD, Jemal A. Cancer statistics. CA Cancer J Clin. 2015;65:5–29. doi: 10.3322/caac.21254. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  22. Silvera SA, Miller AB, Rohan TE. Oral contraceptive use and risk of breast cancer among women with a family history of breast cancer:a prospective cohort study. Cancer Causes Control. 2005;16:1059–63. doi: 10.1007/s10552-005-0343-1. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  23. Smith RA, Saslow D, Sawyer KA, et al. American cancer society guidelines for breast cancer screening:update 2003. CA Cancer J Clin. 2003;53:141–69. doi: 10.3322/canjclin.53.3.141. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  24. Soroush A, Farshchian N, Komasi S, et al. The role of oral contraceptive pills on increased risk of breast cancer in Iranian populations:a meta-analysis. J Cancer Prev. 2016;21:294–301. doi: 10.15430/JCP.2016.21.4.294. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  25. Tessaro S, Beria JU, Tomasi E, et al. Oral contraceptive and breast cancer:a case-control study. Revista de saude publica. 2001;35:32–8. doi: 10.1590/s0034-89102001000100005. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  26. Umpan W. Relation between oral contraceptive use and breast cancer in women [Thesis] Bangkok: Mahidol University; 2004. [Google Scholar]
  27. Van Hoften C, Burger H, Peeters PH, et al. Long-term oral contraceptive use increases breast cancer risk in women over 55 years of age:the DOM cohort. Int J Cancer. 2000;87:591–4. doi: 10.1002/1097-0215(20000815)87:4<591::aid-ijc20>3.0.co;2-c. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Articles from Asian Pacific Journal of Cancer Prevention : APJCP are provided here courtesy of West Asia Organization for Cancer Prevention

RESOURCES