Long-acting contraceptives seem to be as safe as the pill when it comes to cancer risk

10almonds is reader-supported. We may, at no cost to you, receive a portion of sales if you purchase a product through a link in this article.

Many women worry hormonal contraceptives have dangerous side-effects including increased cancer risk. But this perception is often out of proportion with the actual risks.

So, what does the research actually say about cancer risk for contraceptive users?

And is your cancer risk different if, instead of the pill, you use long-acting reversible contraceptives? These include intrauterine devices or IUDs (such as Mirena), implants under the skin (such as Implanon), and injections (such as Depo Provera).

Our new study, conducted by the University of Queensland and QIMR Berghofer Medical Research Institute and published by the Journal of the National Cancer Institute, looked at this question.

We found long-acting contraceptives seem to be as safe as the pill when it comes to cancer risk (which is good news) but not necessarily any safer than the pill.

Peakstock/Shutterstock
A woman gets a hormonal birth control product implant
Some hormonal contraceptives take the form of implants under the skin. WiP-Studio/Shutterstock

How does the contraceptive pill affect cancer risk?

The International Agency for Research on Cancer, which compiles evidence on cancer causes, has concluded that oral contraceptives have mixed effects on cancer risk.

Using the oral contraceptive pill:

  • slightly increases your risk of breast and cervical cancer in the short term, but
  • substantially reduces your risk of cancers of the uterus and ovaries in the longer term.

Our earlier work showed the pill was responsible for preventing far more cancers overall than it contributed to.

In previous research we estimated that in 2010, oral contraceptive pill use prevented over 1,300 cases of endometrial and ovarian cancers in Australian women.

It also prevented almost 500 deaths from these cancers in 2013. This is a reduction of around 25% in the deaths that could have occurred that year if women hadn’t taken the pill.

In contrast, we calculated the pill may have contributed to around 15 deaths from breast cancer in 2013, which is less than 0.5% of all breast cancer deaths in that year.

A woman pops contraceptive pills from a pill pack.
Previous work showed the pill was responsible for preventing far more cancers overall than it contributed to. Image Point Fr

What about long-acting reversible contraceptives and cancer risk?

Long-acting reversible contraceptives – which include intrauterine devices or IUDs, implants under the skin, and injections – release progesterone-like hormones.

These are very effective contraceptives that can last from a few months (injections) up to seven years (intrauterine devices).

Notably, they don’t contain the hormone oestrogen, which may be responsible for some of the side-effects of the pill (including perhaps contributing to a higher risk of breast cancer).

Use of these long-acting contraceptives has doubled over the past decade, while the use of the pill has declined. So it’s important to know whether this change could affect cancer risk for Australian women.

Our new study of more than 1 million Australian women investigated whether long-acting, reversible contraceptives affect risk of invasive cancers. We compared the results to the oral contraceptive pill.

We used de-identified health records for Australian women aged 55 and under in 2002.

Among this group, about 176,000 were diagnosed with cancer between 2004 and 2013 when the oldest women were aged 67. We compared hormonal contraceptive use among these women who got cancer to women without cancer.

We found that long-term users of all types of hormonal contraception had around a 70% lower risk of developing endometrial cancer in the years after use. In other words, the risk of developing endometrial cancer is substantially lower among women who took hormonal contraception compared to those who didn’t.

For ovarian cancer, we saw a 50% reduced risk (compared to those who took no hormonal contraception) for women who were long-term users of the hormone-containing IUD.

The risk reduction was not as marked for the implants or injections, however few long-term users of these products developed these cancers in our study.

As the risk of endometrial and ovarian cancers increases with age, it will be important to look at cancer risk in these women as they get older.

What about breast cancer risk?

Our findings suggest that the risk of breast cancer for current users of long-acting contraceptives is similar to users of the pill.

However, the contraceptive injection was only associated with an increase in breast cancer risk after five years of use and there was no longer a higher risk once women stopped using them.

Our results suggested that the risk of breast cancer also reduces after stopping use of the contraceptive implants.

We will need to follow-up the women for longer to determine whether this is also the case for the IUD.

It is worth emphasising that the breast cancer risk associated with all hormonal contraceptives is very small.

About 30 in every 100,000 women aged 20 to 39 years develop breast cancer each year, and any hormonal contraceptive use would only increase this to around 36 cases per 100,000.

What about other cancers?

Our study did not show any consistent relationships between contraceptive use and other cancers types. However, we only at looked at invasive cancers (meaning those that start at a primary site but have the potential to spread to other parts of the body).

A recent French study found that prolonged use of the contraceptive injection increased the risk of meningioma (a type of benign brain tumour).

However, meningiomas are rare, especially in young women. There are around two cases in every 100,000 in women aged 20–39, so the extra number of cases linked to contraceptive injection use was small.

The French study found the hormonal IUD did not increase meningioma risk (and they did not investigate contraceptive implants).

Benefits and side-effects

There are benefits and side-effects for all medicines, including contraceptives, but it is important to know most very serious side-effects are rare.

A conversation with your doctor about the balance of benefits and side-effects for you is always a good place to start.

Susan Jordan, Professor of Epidemiology, The University of Queensland; Karen Tuesley, Postdoctoral Research Fellow, School of Public Health, The University of Queensland, and Penny Webb, Distinguished Scientist, Gynaecological Cancers Group, QIMR Berghofer Medical Research Institute

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

Don’t Forget…

Did you arrive here from our newsletter? Don’t forget to return to the email to continue learning!

Recommended

  • What is reformer pilates? And is it worth the cost?
  • Staring At The Sun – by Dr. Irvin Yalom
    Confront your fear of death head-on with “Staring At The Sun”. This book offers thought-provoking insights and practical strategies for managing mortality.

Learn to Age Gracefully

Join the 98k+ American women taking control of their health & aging with our 100% free (and fun!) daily emails:

  • Sometimes, Perfect Isn’t Practical!

    10almonds is reader-supported. We may, at no cost to you, receive a portion of sales if you purchase a product through a link in this article.

    It’s Q&A Day at 10almonds!

    Have a question or a request? We love to hear from you!

    In cases where we’ve already covered something, we might link to what we wrote before, but will always be happy to revisit any of our topics again in the future too—there’s always more to say!

    As ever: if the question/request can be answered briefly, we’ll do it here in our Q&A Thursday edition. If not, we’ll make a main feature of it shortly afterwards!

    So, no question/request too big or small

    ❝10 AM breakfast is not realistic for most. What’s wrong with 8 AM and Evening me at 6. Don’t quite understand the differentiation.❞

    (for reference, this is about our “Breakfasting For Health?” main feature)

    It’s not terrible to do it the way you suggest It’s just not optimal, either, that’s all!

    Breakfasting at 08:00 and then dining at 18:00 is ten hours apart, so no fasting benefits between those. Let’s say you take half an hour to eat dinner, then eat nothing again until breakfast, that’s 18:30 to 08:00, so that’s 13½ hours fasting. You’ll recall that fasting benefits start at 12 hours into the fast, so that means you’d only get 1½ hours of fasting benefits.

    As for breakfasting at 08:00 regardless of intermittent fasting considerations, the reason for the conclusion of around 10:00 being optimal, is based on when our body is geared up to eat breakfast and get the most out of that, which the body can’t do immediately upon waking. So if you wake and get sunlight at 08:30, get a little moderate exercise, then by 10:00 your digestive system will be perfectly primed to get the most out of breakfast.

    However! This is entirely based on you waking and getting sunlight at 08:30.

    So, iff you wake and get sunlight at 06:30, then in that case, breakfasting at 08:00 would give the same benefits as described above. What’s important is the 1½ hour priming-time.

    Writer’s note: our hope here is always to be informational, not prescriptive. Take what works for you; ignore what doesn’t fit your lifestyle.

    I personally practice intermittent fasting for about 21hrs/day. I breakfast (often on nuts and perhaps a little salad) around 16:00, and dine at around 18:00ish, giving myself a little wiggleroom. I’m not religious about it and will slide it if necessary.

    As you can see: that makes what is nominally my breakfast practically a pre-dinner snack, and I clearly ignore the “best to eat in the morning” rule because that’s not consistent with my desire to have a family dinner together in the evening while still practicing the level of fasting that I prefer.

    Science is science, and that’s what we report here. How we apply it, however, is up to us all as individuals!

    Enjoy!

    Share This Post

  • Pelvic Floor Exercises (Not Kegels!) To Prevent Urinary Incontinence

    10almonds is reader-supported. We may, at no cost to you, receive a portion of sales if you purchase a product through a link in this article.

    It’s a common threat, and if you think it couldn’t happen to you, then well, just wait. Happily, Dr. Christine Pieton, PT, DPT, a sport & women’s health physical therapist, has advice:

    On the ball!

    Or rather, we’re going to be doing ball-squeezing here, if you’ll pardon the expression. You will need a soccer-ball sized ball to squeeze.

    Ball-squeeze breathing: lie on your back, ball between your knees, and inhale deeply, expanding your torso. Exhale, pressing your knees into the ball, engaging your abdominal muscles from lower to upper. Try to keep your spine long and avoid your pelvis tucking under during the exhalation.

    Ball-squeeze bridge: lie on your back, ball between your knees, inhale to prepare, and then exhale, pressing up into a bridge, maintaining a firm pressure on the ball. Inhale as you lower yourself back down.

    Ball-squeeze side plank: lie on your side this time, ball between your knees, supporting forearm under your shoulder, as in the video thumbnail. Inhale to prepare, and then exhale, lifting your hip a few inches off the mat. Inhale as you lower yourself back down.

    Ball-squeeze bear plank: get on your hands and knees, ball between your thighs. Lengthen your spine, inhale to prepare, and exhale as you bring your knees just a little off the floor. Inhale as you lower yourself back down.

    For more details and tips on each of these, plus a visual demonstration, plus an optional part 2 video with more exercises that aren’t ball-squeezes this time, enjoy:

    Click Here If The Embedded Video Doesn’t Load Automatically!

    Want to learn more?

    You might also like to read:

    Psst… A Word To The Wise About UTIs

    Take care!

    Share This Post

  • Rebuilding Milo – by Dr. Aaron Horschig

    10almonds is reader-supported. We may, at no cost to you, receive a portion of sales if you purchase a product through a link in this article.

    The author, a doctor of physical therapy, also wrote another book that we reviewed a while ago, “The Squat Bible” (which is also excellent, by the way). This time, it’s all about resistance training in the context of fixing a damaged body.

    Resistance training is, of course, very important for general health, especially as we get older. However, it’s easy to do it wrongly and injure oneself, and indeed, if one is carrying some injury and/or chronic pain, it becomes necessary to know how to fix that before continuing—without just giving up on training, because that would be a road to ruin in terms of muscle and bone maintenance.

    The book explains all the necessary anatomy, with clear illustrations too. He talks equipment, keeping things simple and practical, letting the reader know which things actually matter in terms of quality, and what things are just unnecessary fanciness and/or counterproductive.

    Most of the book is divided into chapters per body part, e.g. back pain, shoulder pain, ankle pain, hip pain, knee pain, etc; what’s going on, and how to fix it to rebuild it stronger.

    The style is straightforward and simple, neither overly clinical nor embellished with overly casual fluff. Just, clear simple explanations and instructions.

    Bottom line: if you’d like to get stronger and/or level up your resistance training, but are worried about an injury or chronic condition, this book can set you in good order.

    Click here to check out Rebuilding Milo, and rebuild yourself!

    Share This Post

Related Posts

  • What is reformer pilates? And is it worth the cost?
  • Survival of the Prettiest – by Dr. Nancy Etcoff

    10almonds is reader-supported. We may, at no cost to you, receive a portion of sales if you purchase a product through a link in this article.

    Beauty is in the eye of the beholder, right? And what does it matter, in this modern world, especially if we are already in a happy stable partnership?

    The science of it, as it turns out, is less poetic. Not only is evolutionary psychology still the foundation of our perception of human beauty (yes, even if we have zero possibility of further procreation personally), but also, its effects are far, far wider than partner selection.

    From how nice people are to you, to how much they trust you, to how easily they will forgive a (real or perceived) misdeed, to what kind of medical care you get (or don’t), your looks shape your experiences.

    In this very easy-reading work that nevertheless contains very many references, Dr. Etcoff explores the science of beauty. Not just what traits are attractive and why, but also, what they will do for (or against) us—in concrete terms, with numbers.

    Bottom line: if you’d like to better understand the subconscious biases held by yourself and others, this book is a top-tier primer.

    Click here to check out Survival of the Prettiest, and learn more about how this blessing/curse affects you and those around you!

    Don’t Forget…

    Did you arrive here from our newsletter? Don’t forget to return to the email to continue learning!

    Learn to Age Gracefully

    Join the 98k+ American women taking control of their health & aging with our 100% free (and fun!) daily emails:

  • The Calorie Myth – by Jonathan Bailor

    10almonds is reader-supported. We may, at no cost to you, receive a portion of sales if you purchase a product through a link in this article.

    First we’ll mention: the author is not a doctor, but the book is endorsed by assorted well-known doctors in the field, and the science described is consistent with current scientific consensus (and, for that matter, consistent with what we wrote in our mythbusting feature: Are You A Calorie-Burning Machine?).

    It’s often (correctly) said that “not all calories are created equal”, but how should we quantify them? He proposes his “SANE solution”, which is based around the ideas of:

    • Satiety: how quickly calories fill us up
    • Aggression: how likely calories are to be stored as fat
    • Nutrition: how many micronutrients calories bring with them, and how much
    • Efficiency: how easily calories are converted

    To this end, he recommends a diet high in foods that score well on his “SANE” factors, and provides such things as recipes, meal plans etc to help, as well principles for exercising more usefully in the context of metabolic base rate, and moving (rather than fighting) one’s “set point”, which is usually associated with one’s weight but it really has more to do with metabolic base rate. In fact, Bailor recommends throwing out the bathroom scale and focusing on pursuing good health itself, rather than obsessing over changing one’s relationship with the Earth’s gravitational field.

    Yes, it says “lose weight” in the subtitle, but the idea is that this will be a by-product rather than the thing actively pursued. After all, we can control our actions, so that input variable is where we should put our focus, not the output variable of the numbers on the scale which can often be misleading (muscle weighing more than fat, tendency to water weight fluctuations, etc).

    The style is a little flashy and salesy for this reviewer’s personal taste (a lot of references to his own businesses and neologisms associated with such), but it doesn’t take away from the quality of the content, and in terms of science, study references come at a rate of about one per page on average.

    Bottom line: if you’d like to rethink your relationship with calories, then this book can help give you a much more practical angle.

    Click here to check out The Calorie Myth, and take control of your metabolic base rate!

    Don’t Forget…

    Did you arrive here from our newsletter? Don’t forget to return to the email to continue learning!

    Learn to Age Gracefully

    Join the 98k+ American women taking control of their health & aging with our 100% free (and fun!) daily emails:

  • Three Critical Kitchen Prescriptions

    10almonds is reader-supported. We may, at no cost to you, receive a portion of sales if you purchase a product through a link in this article.

    Three Critical Kitchen Prescriptions

    This is Dr. Saliha Mahmood-Ahmed. She’s a medical doctor—specifically, a gastroenterologist. She’s also a chef, and winner of the BBC’s MasterChef competition. So, from her gastroenterology day-job and her culinary calling, she has some expert insights to share on eating well!

    ❝Food and medicine are inextricably linked to one another, and it is an honour to be a doctor who specialises in digestive health and can both cook, and teach others to cook❞

    ~ Dr. Saliha Mahmood-Ahmed, after winning MasterChef and being asked if she’d quit medicine to be a full-time chef

    Dr. Mahmood-Ahmed’s 3 “Kitchen Prescriptions”

    They are:

    1. Cook, cook, cook
    2. Feed your gut bugs
    3. Do not diet

    Let’s take a look at each of those…

    Cook, cook, cook

    We’re the only species on Earth that cooks food. An easy knee-jerk response might be to think maybe we shouldn’t, then, but… We’ve been doing it for at least 30,000 years, which is about 1,500 generations, while a mere 100 generations is generally sufficient for small evolutionary changes. So, we’ve evolved this way now.

    More importantly in this context: we, ourselves, should cook our own food, at least per household.

    Not ready meals; we haven’t evolved for those (yet! Give it another few hundred generations maybe)

    Feed your gut bugs

    The friendly ones. Enjoy prebiotics, probiotics, and plenty of fiber—and then be mindful of what else you do or don’t eat. Feeding the friendly bacteria while starving the unfriendly ones may seem like a tricky task, but it actually can be quite easily understood and implemented. We did a main feature about this a few weeks ago:

    Making Friends With Your Gut (You Can Thank Us Later)

    Do not diet

    Dr. Mahmood-Ahmed is a strong critic of calorie-counting as a weight-loss strategy:

    Rather than focusing on the number of calories consumed, try focusing on introducing enough variety of food into your daily diet, and on fostering good microbial diversity within your gut.

    It’s a conceptual shift from restrictive weight loss, to prescriptive adding of things to one’s diet, with fostering diversity of microbiota as a top priority.

    This, too, she recommends be undertaken gently, though—making small, piecemeal, but sustainable improvements. Nobody can reasonably incorporate, say, 30 new fruits and vegetables into one’s diet in a week; it’s unrealistic, and more importantly, it’s unsustainable.

    Instead, consider just adding one new fruit or vegetable per shopping trip!

    Don’t Forget…

    Did you arrive here from our newsletter? Don’t forget to return to the email to continue learning!

    Learn to Age Gracefully

    Join the 98k+ American women taking control of their health & aging with our 100% free (and fun!) daily emails: