The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Characteristics Relating to ovarian Cancer Risk: Collaborative Analysis of 12 US case-Control Studies
Abstract
Two hypotheses have been proposed to explain the reduced risk of epithelial ovarian cancer associated with pregnancy and oral contraceptive use. The first states that some sequelae of ovulation increase the likelihood of malignancy and that pregnancies and oral contraceptives protect by suppressing ovulation. The second hypothesis states that circulating levels of pituitary gonadotropins increase the risk of malignancy and that pregnancies and oral contraceptives protect by suppressing secretion of these hormones. The authors evaluate the two hypotheses in light of combined data from 12 United States case-control studies of epithelial ovarian cancer in white women conducted from 1956 to 1986. While a number of observations support both hypotheses, there are exceptions. Differential risk reduction associated with pregnancy and oral contraceptive use (pregnancy being the more effective in young women and the less effective in older women) conflicts with the first "ovulation" hypothesis, while reduced risk associated with breast feeding and absence of altered risk associated with estrogen replacement therapy conflicts with the second "gonadotropin" hypothesis. Several findings would not have been predicted by either hypothesis, e.g., only weak trends relate cancer risk to age at menarche, and, among older women, no clear trends relate risk to age at menopause. Odds ratio attenuation due to errors in reporting personal characteristics may be responsible for some of these inconsistencies. Multidisciplinary research is needed to clarify the etiologic roles of ovulation and gonadotropin stimulation, both of which may enhance carcinogenesis in the ovarian epithelium.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cited by
Breastfeeding and maternal health outcomes: A systematic review and meta-analysis
Chowdhury, R., Sinha, B., Sankar, M. J., Taneja, S., Bhandari, N., Rollins, N., Bahl, R., & Martines, J. (2015) · Acta Paediatrica · doi:10.1111/apa.13102 · Cited by 1,143
The distal fallopian tube: a new model for pelvic serous carcinogenesis
Crum, C. P., Drapkin, R., Miron, A., Ince, T. A., Muto, M., Kindelberger, D. W., & Lee, Y. (2007) · Current Opinion in Obstetrics & Gynecology · doi:10.1097/gco.0b013e328011a21f · Cited by 512
Ovarian Cancer: Etiology, Risk Factors, and Epidemiology
HUNN, J., & RODRIGUEZ, G. C. (2012) · Clinical Obstetrics & Gynecology · doi:10.1097/grf.0b013e31824b4611 · Cited by 324
Mishra, B., Lawson, G. W., Ripperdan, R., Ortiz, L., & Luderer, U. (2018) · Radiation Research · doi:10.1667/rr15028.1 · Cited by 18
Metadata
- Authors
- Whittemore, A. S., Harris, R., & ltnyre, J.
- Venue
- American Journal of Epidemiology
- Publisher
- Oxford University Press (OUP)
- Published
- 1992-11-15
- Volume
- 136
- Issue
- 10
- Pages
- 1212-1220
- ISSN
- 0002-9262 (ISSN-L)
- 1476-6256
- OpenAlex
- W2734846420
- Cited by
- 264
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 2.97
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Characteristics Relating to ovarian Cancer Risk: Collaborative Analysis of 12 US case-Control Studies. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1093/oxfordjournals.aje.a116429
- The paper
- Whittemore, A. S., Harris, R., & ltnyre, J. (1992). Characteristics Relating to ovarian Cancer Risk: Collaborative Analysis of 12 US case-Control Studies. American Journal of Epidemiology. https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordjournals.aje.a116429
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.