Skip Navigation

This Article
Right arrow FREE Full Text (PDF) Freely available
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow Search for citing articles in:
ISI Web of Science (33)
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Kreiger, N
Right arrow Articles by Parsons, P
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Kreiger, N
Right arrow Articles by Parsons, P
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

International Journal of Epidemiology, Vol 26, 710-715, Copyright © 1997 by International Epidemiological Association


ARTICLES

Surgical procedures associated with risk of ovarian cancer

N Kreiger, M Sloan, M Cotterchio and P Parsons
Division of Preventive Oncology, Ontario Cancer Treatment and Research Foundation, Toronto, Canada.

BACKGROUND: This historical cohort study was conducted to examine the relationship between gynaecological surgery and ovarian cancer risk. METHODS: Women were included if they had had tubal ligation, hysterectomy, or unilateral ovariectomy in Ontario between March 1979 and April 1993. The cohort was linked to the Ontario Cancer Registry and the Ontario mortality file. Person-years in the cohort were accumulated until death, the removal of both ovaries, a diagnosis of ovarian cancer, or the end of the study period 31 December 1993. Observed cancers were compared to expected based on Ontario age- and calendar period-specific incidence rates. RESULTS: For tubal ligation and hysterectomy, fewer ovarian cancers were observed than were expected by age, calendar year of procedure, and length of follow-up; the observed/expected ratios were generally statistically significant. In contrast, no protective effect was evident for unilateral ovariectomy; in fact statistically significant excess cancers were seen in early follow-up periods. Observed/expected ratios were nearly identical and somewhat protective for the two strata defined by whether or not the ovaries were visualized. Disruption of the ovarian pathway conferred a protective effect, while no disruption significantly increased risk. CONCLUSIONS: The data do not support screening bias although short-term follow-up data indicate the possibility of detection bias. The long-term follow-up data, as well as the data on pathway disruption, are consistent with the hypothesis that the surgical procedures themselves may produce a protective effect against ovarian cancer, through alteration of the hormonal environment and/or by physical destruction of a carcinogen's route to the ovary.
Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
Cancer Epidemiol. Biomarkers Prev.Home page
M. H. Greene, M. Piedmonte, D. Alberts, M. Gail, M. Hensley, Z. Miner, P. L. Mai, J. Loud, G. Rodriguez, J. Basil, et al.
A Prospective Study of Risk-Reducing Salpingo-oophorectomy and Longitudinal CA-125 Screening among Women at Increased Genetic Risk of Ovarian Cancer: Design and Baseline Characteristics: A Gynecologic Oncology Group Study
Cancer Epidemiol. Biomarkers Prev., March 1, 2008; 17(3): 594 - 604.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Am J EpidemiolHome page
S. S. Tworoger, K. M. Fairfield, G. A. Colditz, B. A. Rosner, and S. E. Hankinson
Association of Oral Contraceptive Use, Other Contraceptive Methods, and Infertility with Ovarian Cancer Risk
Am. J. Epidemiol., October 15, 2007; 166(8): 894 - 901.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Obstet GynecolHome page
W. H. Parker, M. S. Broder, Z. Liu, D. Shoupe, C. Farquhar, and J. S. Berek
Ovarian Conservation at the Time of Hysterectomy for Benign Disease
Obstet. Gynecol., August 1, 2005; 106(2): 219 - 226.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Int J EpidemiolHome page
S. K Kjaer, L. Mellemkjaer, L. A Brinton, C. Johansen, G. Gridley, and J. H Olsen
Tubal sterilization and risk of ovarian, endometrial and cervical cancer. A Danish population-based follow-up study of more than 65 000 sterilized women
Int. J. Epidemiol., June 1, 2004; 33(3): 596 - 602.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Int J EpidemiolHome page
D. M Purdie
Commentary: Does tubal sterilization reduce the risk of gynaecological cancers?
Int. J. Epidemiol., June 1, 2004; 33(3): 603 - 604.
[Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
JNCI J Natl Cancer InstHome page
J. L. Rutter, S. Wacholder, A. Chetrit, F. Lubin, J. Menczer, S. Ebbers, M. A. Tucker, J. P. Struewing, and P. Hartge
Gynecologic Surgeries and Risk of Ovarian Cancer in Women With BRCA1 and BRCA2 Ashkenazi Founder Mutations: An Israeli Population-Based Case-Control Study
J Natl Cancer Inst, July 16, 2003; 95(14): 1072 - 1078.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Am J EpidemiolHome page
T. Riman, P. W. Dickman, S. Nilsson, N. Correia, H. Nordlinder, C. M. Magnusson, and I. R. Persson
Risk Factors for Invasive Epithelial Ovarian Cancer: Results from a Swedish Case-Control Study
Am. J. Epidemiol., August 15, 2002; 156(4): 363 - 373.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
JNCI J Natl Cancer InstHome page
R. B. Ness and C. Cottreau
Possible Role of Ovarian Epithelial Inflammation in Ovarian Cancer
J Natl Cancer Inst, September 1, 1999; 91(17): 1459 - 1467.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]



Disclaimer:
Please note that abstracts for content published before 1996 were created through digital scanning and may therefore not exactly replicate the text of the original print issues. All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, but the Publisher will not be held responsible for any remaining inaccuracies. If you require any further clarification, please contact our Customer Services Department.