Depot-Medroxyprogesterone Acetate Use Is Associated with Decreased Risk of Ovarian Cancer: The Mounting Evidence of a Protective Role of Progestins
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Combined oral contraceptive use is associated with a decreased risk of invasive epithelial ovarian cancer (ovarian cancer). There is suggestive evidence of an inverse association between progestin-only contraceptive use and ovarian cancer risk, but previous studies have been underpowered. METHODS: The current study used primary data from 7,977 women with ovarian cancer and 11,820 control women in seven case-control studies from the Ovarian Cancer Association Consortium to evaluate the association between use of depot-medroxyprogesterone acetate (DMPA), an injectable progestin-only contraceptive, and ovarian cancer risk. Logistic models were fit to determine the association between ever use of DMPA and ovarian cancer risk overall and by histotype. A systematic review of the association between DMPA use and ovarian cancer risk was conducted. RESULTS: < 0.001). The systematic review yielded six studies, four of which showed an inverse association and two showed increased risk. CONCLUSIONS: DMPA use appears to be associated with a decreased risk of ovarian cancer in a duration-dependent manner based on the preponderance of evidence. Further study of the mechanism through which DMPA use is associated with ovarian cancer is warranted. IMPACT: The results of this study are of particular interest given the rise in popularity of progestin-releasing intrauterine devices that have a substantially lower progestin dose than that in DMPA, but may have a stronger local effect.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.006 | 0.033 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".