PubMed · 762781
The source did not provide an abstract. Follow the original record for more information.
Explore connections, maps & timelines
L A Morris. 1979-03-23. Patient package inserts.. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/762781/
Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.
KEEP EXPLORING
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
Desogestrel, gestodene, and norgestimate represent a new generation of progestins designed for use in oral contraceptives. A high degree of efficacy has been retained in these progestins, and the adverse metabolic impact exhibited by older progestins has been reduced considerably. The clinical profile of each progestin, as it is marketed in Europe in combination with ethinyl estradiol, is reviewed. Direct comparisons are made whenever applicable. The major advantages of these formulations over the older combined oral contraceptives are that they have less effect on lipid metabolism and on carbohydrate metabolism, and they are less androgenic. The clinical implications of these findings are discussed.
OBJECTIVE: To provide a quantitative assessment of the association between oral contraceptive (OC) use and ovarian cancer using results from the published literature. DATA SOURCES: We conducted a MEDLINE literature search for all epidemiologic studies of OC and ovarian cancer published in English between 1970-1991. The reference list for each article was reviewed to locate additional published articles. METHODS OF STUDY SELECTION: We included 20 studies in which a relative risk and either a standard error, confidence interval, or P value was reported, or sufficient data were presented to allow us to calculate these measures. DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS: We summarized the findings using weighted averages and regression analyses. We found a summary relative risk of 0.64 (95% confidence interval 0.57-0.73) associated with ever-use of OC, indicating a 36% reduction in ovarian cancer risk. The risk of ovarian cancer decreased with increasing duration of OC use; we noted a 10-12% decrease in risk with 1 year of use and approximately a 50% decrease after 5 years of use. The reduced risk was present among both nulliparous and parous women and it appeared to last for at least 10 years after cessation of use. Although most studies assessed the use of cessation of use. Although most studies assessed the use of OC formulations from the 1960s and 1970s, data from the Cancer and Steroid Hormone Study indicate that the decreased ovarian cancer risk may also be present with current lower-dose formulations. CONCLUSION: The protective effect of OC against ovarian cancer risk should be considered in a woman's decision to use OC.