Perineal powder use and risk of ovarian cancer

Serena C. Houghton, Katherine W. Reeves, Susan E. Hankinson, Lori Crawford, Dorothy Lane, Jean Wactawski-Wende, Cynthia Thomson, Judith K. Ockene, Susan R. Sturgeon

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

22 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Background: Case-control studies have reported an increased risk of ovarian cancer among talc users; however, the only cohort study to date found no association except for an increase in serous invasive ovarian cancers. The purpose of this analysis was to assess perineal powder use and risk of ovarian cancer prospectively in the Women's Health Initiative Observational Study cohort. Methods: Perineal powder use was assessed at baseline by self-report regarding application to genitals, sanitary napkins, or diaphragms and duration of use. The primary outcome was self-reported ovarian cancer centrally adjudicated by physicians. Cox proportional hazard regression was used to estimate risk, adjusting for covariates, including person-time until diagnosis of ovarian cancer (n = 429), death, loss to follow-up, or September 1 7, 2012. All statistical tests were two-sided. Results: Among 61 576 postmenopausal women, followed for a mean of 12.4 years without a history of cancer or bilateral oophorectomy, 52.6% reported ever using perineal powder. Ever use of perineal powder (hazard ratio [HR]<inf>adj</inf> = 1.06, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.87 to 1.28) was not associated with risk of ovarian cancer compared with never use. Individually, ever use of powder on the genitals (HR<inf>adj</inf> = 1.12, 95% CI = 0.92 to 1.36), sanitary napkins (HR<inf>adj</inf> = 0.95, 95% CI = 0.76 to 1.20), or diaphragms (HR<inf>adj</inf> = 0.92, 95% CI = 0.68 to 1.23) was not associated with risk of ovarian cancer compared with never use, nor were there associations with increasing durations of use. Estimates did not differ when stratified by age or tubal ligation status. Conclusion: Based on our results, perineal powder use does not appear to influence ovarian cancer risk.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Article number19
JournalJournal of the National Cancer Institute
Volume106
Issue number9
DOIs
StatePublished - Sep 1 2014

Fingerprint

Ovarian Neoplasms
Powders
Confidence Intervals
Diaphragm
Talc
Tubal Sterilization
Ovariectomy
Women's Health
Self Report
Observational Studies
Case-Control Studies
Cohort Studies
Physicians
Neoplasms

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Cancer Research
  • Oncology

Cite this

Houghton, S. C., Reeves, K. W., Hankinson, S. E., Crawford, L., Lane, D., Wactawski-Wende, J., ... Sturgeon, S. R. (2014). Perineal powder use and risk of ovarian cancer. Journal of the National Cancer Institute, 106(9), [19]. https://doi.org/10.1093/jnci/dju208

Perineal powder use and risk of ovarian cancer. / Houghton, Serena C.; Reeves, Katherine W.; Hankinson, Susan E.; Crawford, Lori; Lane, Dorothy; Wactawski-Wende, Jean; Thomson, Cynthia; Ockene, Judith K.; Sturgeon, Susan R.

In: Journal of the National Cancer Institute, Vol. 106, No. 9, 19, 01.09.2014.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Houghton, SC, Reeves, KW, Hankinson, SE, Crawford, L, Lane, D, Wactawski-Wende, J, Thomson, C, Ockene, JK & Sturgeon, SR 2014, 'Perineal powder use and risk of ovarian cancer', Journal of the National Cancer Institute, vol. 106, no. 9, 19. https://doi.org/10.1093/jnci/dju208
Houghton SC, Reeves KW, Hankinson SE, Crawford L, Lane D, Wactawski-Wende J et al. Perineal powder use and risk of ovarian cancer. Journal of the National Cancer Institute. 2014 Sep 1;106(9). 19. https://doi.org/10.1093/jnci/dju208
Houghton, Serena C. ; Reeves, Katherine W. ; Hankinson, Susan E. ; Crawford, Lori ; Lane, Dorothy ; Wactawski-Wende, Jean ; Thomson, Cynthia ; Ockene, Judith K. ; Sturgeon, Susan R. / Perineal powder use and risk of ovarian cancer. In: Journal of the National Cancer Institute. 2014 ; Vol. 106, No. 9.
@article{7d497a1082c34389885864cbb52edccf,
title = "Perineal powder use and risk of ovarian cancer",
abstract = "Background: Case-control studies have reported an increased risk of ovarian cancer among talc users; however, the only cohort study to date found no association except for an increase in serous invasive ovarian cancers. The purpose of this analysis was to assess perineal powder use and risk of ovarian cancer prospectively in the Women's Health Initiative Observational Study cohort. Methods: Perineal powder use was assessed at baseline by self-report regarding application to genitals, sanitary napkins, or diaphragms and duration of use. The primary outcome was self-reported ovarian cancer centrally adjudicated by physicians. Cox proportional hazard regression was used to estimate risk, adjusting for covariates, including person-time until diagnosis of ovarian cancer (n = 429), death, loss to follow-up, or September 1 7, 2012. All statistical tests were two-sided. Results: Among 61 576 postmenopausal women, followed for a mean of 12.4 years without a history of cancer or bilateral oophorectomy, 52.6{\%} reported ever using perineal powder. Ever use of perineal powder (hazard ratio [HR]adj = 1.06, 95{\%} confidence interval [CI] = 0.87 to 1.28) was not associated with risk of ovarian cancer compared with never use. Individually, ever use of powder on the genitals (HRadj = 1.12, 95{\%} CI = 0.92 to 1.36), sanitary napkins (HRadj = 0.95, 95{\%} CI = 0.76 to 1.20), or diaphragms (HRadj = 0.92, 95{\%} CI = 0.68 to 1.23) was not associated with risk of ovarian cancer compared with never use, nor were there associations with increasing durations of use. Estimates did not differ when stratified by age or tubal ligation status. Conclusion: Based on our results, perineal powder use does not appear to influence ovarian cancer risk.",
author = "Houghton, {Serena C.} and Reeves, {Katherine W.} and Hankinson, {Susan E.} and Lori Crawford and Dorothy Lane and Jean Wactawski-Wende and Cynthia Thomson and Ockene, {Judith K.} and Sturgeon, {Susan R.}",
year = "2014",
month = "9",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1093/jnci/dju208",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "106",
journal = "Journal of the National Cancer Institute",
issn = "0027-8874",
publisher = "Oxford University Press",
number = "9",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Perineal powder use and risk of ovarian cancer

AU - Houghton, Serena C.

AU - Reeves, Katherine W.

AU - Hankinson, Susan E.

AU - Crawford, Lori

AU - Lane, Dorothy

AU - Wactawski-Wende, Jean

AU - Thomson, Cynthia

AU - Ockene, Judith K.

AU - Sturgeon, Susan R.

PY - 2014/9/1

Y1 - 2014/9/1

N2 - Background: Case-control studies have reported an increased risk of ovarian cancer among talc users; however, the only cohort study to date found no association except for an increase in serous invasive ovarian cancers. The purpose of this analysis was to assess perineal powder use and risk of ovarian cancer prospectively in the Women's Health Initiative Observational Study cohort. Methods: Perineal powder use was assessed at baseline by self-report regarding application to genitals, sanitary napkins, or diaphragms and duration of use. The primary outcome was self-reported ovarian cancer centrally adjudicated by physicians. Cox proportional hazard regression was used to estimate risk, adjusting for covariates, including person-time until diagnosis of ovarian cancer (n = 429), death, loss to follow-up, or September 1 7, 2012. All statistical tests were two-sided. Results: Among 61 576 postmenopausal women, followed for a mean of 12.4 years without a history of cancer or bilateral oophorectomy, 52.6% reported ever using perineal powder. Ever use of perineal powder (hazard ratio [HR]adj = 1.06, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.87 to 1.28) was not associated with risk of ovarian cancer compared with never use. Individually, ever use of powder on the genitals (HRadj = 1.12, 95% CI = 0.92 to 1.36), sanitary napkins (HRadj = 0.95, 95% CI = 0.76 to 1.20), or diaphragms (HRadj = 0.92, 95% CI = 0.68 to 1.23) was not associated with risk of ovarian cancer compared with never use, nor were there associations with increasing durations of use. Estimates did not differ when stratified by age or tubal ligation status. Conclusion: Based on our results, perineal powder use does not appear to influence ovarian cancer risk.

AB - Background: Case-control studies have reported an increased risk of ovarian cancer among talc users; however, the only cohort study to date found no association except for an increase in serous invasive ovarian cancers. The purpose of this analysis was to assess perineal powder use and risk of ovarian cancer prospectively in the Women's Health Initiative Observational Study cohort. Methods: Perineal powder use was assessed at baseline by self-report regarding application to genitals, sanitary napkins, or diaphragms and duration of use. The primary outcome was self-reported ovarian cancer centrally adjudicated by physicians. Cox proportional hazard regression was used to estimate risk, adjusting for covariates, including person-time until diagnosis of ovarian cancer (n = 429), death, loss to follow-up, or September 1 7, 2012. All statistical tests were two-sided. Results: Among 61 576 postmenopausal women, followed for a mean of 12.4 years without a history of cancer or bilateral oophorectomy, 52.6% reported ever using perineal powder. Ever use of perineal powder (hazard ratio [HR]adj = 1.06, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.87 to 1.28) was not associated with risk of ovarian cancer compared with never use. Individually, ever use of powder on the genitals (HRadj = 1.12, 95% CI = 0.92 to 1.36), sanitary napkins (HRadj = 0.95, 95% CI = 0.76 to 1.20), or diaphragms (HRadj = 0.92, 95% CI = 0.68 to 1.23) was not associated with risk of ovarian cancer compared with never use, nor were there associations with increasing durations of use. Estimates did not differ when stratified by age or tubal ligation status. Conclusion: Based on our results, perineal powder use does not appear to influence ovarian cancer risk.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84910006075&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84910006075&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1093/jnci/dju208

DO - 10.1093/jnci/dju208

M3 - Article

C2 - 25214560

AN - SCOPUS:84910006075

VL - 106

JO - Journal of the National Cancer Institute

JF - Journal of the National Cancer Institute

SN - 0027-8874

IS - 9

M1 - 19

ER -