Counseling pregnant women on calcium: effects on calcium intake

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the effect of incorporating calcium advice into early pregnancy counseling on calcium intake during pregnancy in the Netherlands. METHODS: A multicenter prospective before-after cohort study was conducted introducing risk-based care including calculating individual pre-eclampsia risk. Part of the intervention was to incorporate calcium advice into routine counseling. We calculated individual daily calcium intake and adequacy of calcium intake (≥1,000 mg/day) at 16, 24 and 34 weeks of pregnancy. We performed a multiple logistic regression adjusting for covariates to identify any differences in the risk of inadequate calcium intake between RC and CAC. RESULTS: In regular care (RC, 2013-2015, n=2,477) 60% had inadequate calcium intake, compared to 49% during calcium advice care (CAC, 2017-2018, n=774) (aOR 0.75, 95% CI 0.64-0.88). Specific calcium supplements were used by 2% and 29% in RC and CAC, respectively (OR 25.1, 95% CI 17.8-36.0). Determinants of an inadequate calcium intake were lower age (aOR per additional year 0.96, 95% CI: 0.94-0.98), nulliparity (aOR 1.22, 95% CI: 1.03-1.45) and non-Caucasian origin (aOR 1.83, 95% CI 1.09-3.09). In CAC, risk of inadequate intake decreased with increasing predicted pre-eclampsia risk, which was a trend reversal compared to RC. CONCLUSIONS: Incorporating calcium advice into early pregnancy counseling was shown to lead to a decrease in the risk of inadequate calcium intake during pregnancy, but still inadequate intake in half of the women suggesting the need for further study on improving implementation. Awareness of individual increased PE risk had positive effect on calcium intake

Risk of Colorectal Cancer After Ovarian Stimulation for In Vitro Fertilization

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Apart from lifestyle factors, sex hormones also seem to have a role in the etiology of colorectal cancer. This raises interest in the possible effects of fertility drugs, especially because the use of ovarian stimulation for in vitro fertilization (IVF) has strongly increased over the past decades. METHODS: In 1996, a nationwide cohort study was set up to examine cancer risk in a population that included 19,158 women who received ovarian stimulation for IVF (IVF group) and 5950 women who underwent subfertility treatments other than IVF (non-IVF group). Cancer incidence was ascertained through linkage with the Netherlands Cancer Registry. Colorectal cancer risk in the IVF group was compared with those in the general population and in the non-IVF group. RESULTS: After a median follow-up of 21 years, 109 colorectal cancers were observed. Compared with the general population, risk of colorectal cancer was not increased in the IVF group (standardized incidence ratio, 1.00; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.80-1.23), and was significantly decreased in the non-IVF group (standardized incidence ratio, 0.58; 95% CI, 0.36-0.88). Women in the IVF group had a significant increase in risk compared with women in the non-IVF group (multivariable-adjusted hazard ratio, 1.80; 95% CI, 1.10-2.94). No trend emerged with more IVF cycles or more ampules of gonadotropins administered. Colorectal cancer risk did not increase with longer follow-up periods. CONCLUSIONS: Although women who receive ovarian stimulation for IVF do not have an increased risk for colorectal cancer compared with the general population, findings from our nationwide cohort study indicate that their risk is increased compared with women who received subfertility treatments other than IVF. Further research is warranted to examine whether ovarian stimulation for IVF contributes to development of colorectal cance

Editorial comment: Ovarian Stimulation for In Vitro Fertilization and Long-term Risk of Breast Cancer (JAMA 2016;316:300–312)

Previous studies have shown that both exogenous and endogenous estrogens and progestogens increase the risk of breast cancer. it has been suggested that in vitro fertilization (IVF) procedures may increase breast cancer risk. This risk could be could be due to a temporary decrease in estradiol and progesterone levels (during down-regulation of the natural cycle), as well as strongly elevated levels (during stimulation phase). Results of previous studies investigating breast cancer risk after IVF treatment were inconclusive because of limited follow-up. Recent studies have reported no increased risk of this cancer after IVT at a mean follow-up of 8 and 16 years. This historical cohort (OMEGA) study quantified long-term risk of breast cancer after ovarian stimulation for IVF. The aim of the study was to compare the long-term risk of breast cancer among a nationwide cohort of women receiving ovarian stimulation for IVF with that of women receiving other fertility treatments and those in the general population. The study was conducted in 12 IVF clinics in the Netherlands. The cohort was composed of 19,158 women who started IVF treatment between 1983 and 1995 (IVF group) and 5950 women who started other fertility treatments between 1980 and 1995 (non-IVF group) Data were obtained from all 12 IVF clinics. There was complete follow-up through December 2013 for 96% of the cohort. At end of follow-up, the median age was 53.8 years in the IVF group and 55.3 years in the non-IVF group. Information on ovarian stimulation for IVF, other fertility treatments, and potential confounders was obtained from medical records and mailed questionnaires. First invasive and in situ breast cancer incidence among women who underwent fertility treatments was obtained through linkage with the Netherlands Cancer Registry (1989-2013). Risk of breast cancer in the IVF group was compared with risk in the non-IVF group (hazard ratios [HRs]) and the general population (standardized incidence ratios [SIRs]). In the total cohort, the mean age at baseline was 32.8 years, and the mean number of IVF cycles was 3.6. After a median follow-up of 21.1 years, 839 of the cohort had invasive breast cancer, and 109 had in situ breast cancer. Compared with the general population, breast cancer risks were not increased either in the IVF group (SIR, 1.01; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.93-1.09) or the non-IVF group (SIR, 1.00; 95% CI, 0.88-1.15). At the age of 55 years, cumulative incidence rates of breast cancer were 3.0% in the IVF group and 2.9% in the non-IVF group (P = 0.85). With longer time since treatment (>= 20 years), the SIR did not increase in the IVF group (SIR, 0.92; 95% CI, 0.73-1.15) or in the non-IVF group (SIR, 1.03; 95% CI, 0.82-1.29). Women with 7 or more IVF cycles had a significantly decreased risk of breast cancer than did women who were treated with 1 to 2 IVF cycles; the HR was 0.55, with a 95% CI of 0.39 to 0.77. The risk was also significantly lower (HR, 0.77; 95% CI, 0.61-0.96) after poor response to the first IVF cycle (<4 collected oocytes) versus normal response (>= 4 collected oocytes). These data show that IVT treatment did not increase the risk of breast cancer in a cohort of women undergoing fertility treatment in the Netherlands between 1980 and 1995 when compared with women who received non-IVF treatment or those in the general population after a median follow-up of 21 years. These findings are consistent with those from recent reviews showing no significant increase in long-term risk of breast cancer among IVF-treated women

Ovarian Stimulation for In Vitro Fertilization and Long-term Risk of Breast Cancer

IMPORTANCE Previous studies of breast cancer risk after in vitro fertilization (IVF) treatment were inconclusive due to limited follow-up. OBJECTIVE To assess long-term risk of breast cancer after ovarian stimulation for IVF. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS Historical cohort (OMEGA study) with complete follow-up through December 2013 for 96% of the cohort. The cohort included 19 158 women who started IVF treatment between 1983 and 1995 (IVF group) and 5950 women starting other fertility treatments between 1980 and 1995 (non-IVF group) from all 12 IVF clinics in the Netherlands. The median age at end of follow-up was 53.8 years for the IVF group and 55.3 years for the non-IVF group. EXPOSURES Information on ovarian stimulation for IVF, other fertility treatments, and potential confounders was collected from medical records and through mailed questionnaires. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES Incidence of invasive and in situ breast cancers in women who underwent fertility treatments was obtained through linkage with the Netherlands Cancer Registry (1989-2013). Breast cancer risk in the IVF group was compared with risks in the general population (standardized incidence ratios [SIRs]) and the non-IVF group (hazard ratios [HRs]). RESULTS Among 25 108 women (mean age at baseline, 32.8 years; mean number of IVF cycles, 3.6), 839 cases of invasive breast cancer and 109 cases of in situ breast cancer occurred after a median follow-up of 21.1 years. Breast cancer risk in IVF-treated women was not significantly different from that in the general population (SIR, 1.01 [95% CI, 0.93-1.09]) and from the risk in the non-IVF group (HR, 1.01 [95% CI, 0.86-1.19]). The cumulative incidences of breast cancer at age 55 were 3.0% for the IVF group and 2.9% for the non-IVF group (P = .85). The SIR did not increase with longer time since treatment (>= 20 years) in the IVF group (0.92 [95% CI, 0.73-1.15]) or in the non-IVF group (1.03 [95% CI, 0.82-1.29]). Risk was significantly lower for those who underwent 7 or more IVF cycles (HR, 0.55 [95% CI, 0.39-0.77]) vs 1 to 2 IVF cycles and after poor response to the first IVF cycle (HR, 0.77 [95% CI, 0.61-0.96] for = 4 collected oocytes). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE Among women undergoing fertility treatment in the Netherlands between 1980 and 1995, IVF treatment compared with non-IVF treatment was not associated with increased risk of breast cancer after a median follow-up of 21 years. Breast cancer risk among IVF-treated women was also not significantly different from that in the general population. These findings are consistent with absence of a significant increase in long-term risk of breast cancer among IVF-treated women

Long-Term Risk of Ovarian Cancer and Borderline Tumors After Assisted Reproductive Technology

BACKGROUND: Long-term effects of assisted reproductive technology (ART) on ovarian tumor risk are unknown. METHODS: This nationwide cohort study comprises 30 625 women who received ovarian stimulation for ART in 1983-2000 and 9988 subfertile women not treated with ART. Incident invasive and borderline ovarian tumors were ascertained through linkage with the Netherlands Cancer Registry and the Dutch Pathology Registry until July 2018. Ovarian tumor risk in ART-treated women was compared with risks in the general population and the subfertile non-ART group. Statistical tests were 2-sided. RESULTS: After a median follow-up of 24 years, 158 invasive and 100 borderline ovarian tumors were observed. Ovarian cancer risk in the ART group was increased compared with the general population (standardized incidence ratio [SIR] = 1.43, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.18 to 1.71) but not when compared with the non-ART group (age- and parity-adjusted hazard ratio [HR] = 1.02, 95% CI = 0.70 to 1.50). Risk decreased with higher parity and with a larger number of successful ART cycles (resulting in childbirth, Ptrend = .001) but was not associated with the number of unsuccessful ART cycles. Borderline ovarian tumor risk was increased in ART-treated women compared with the general population (SIR = 2.20, 95% CI = 1.66 to 2.86) and with non-ART women (HR = 1.84, 95% CI = 1.08 to 3.14). Risk did not increase with more ART cycles or longer follow-up time. CONCLUSIONS: Increased ovarian cancer risk in ART-treated women compared with the general population is likely explained by nulliparity rather than ART treatment. The increased risk of borderline ovarian tumors after ART must be interpreted with caution because no dose-response relationship was observed

Long-Term Risk of Ovarian Cancer and Borderline Tumors After Assisted Reproductive Technology

BACKGROUND: Long-term effects of assisted reproductive technology (ART) on ovarian tumor risk are unknown. METHODS: This nationwide cohort study comprises 30 625 women who received ovarian stimulation for ART in 1983-2000 and 9988 subfertile women not treated with ART. Incident invasive and borderline ovarian tumors were ascertained through linkage with the Netherlands Cancer Registry and the Dutch Pathology Registry until July 2018. Ovarian tumor risk in ART-treated women was compared with risks in the general population and the subfertile non-ART group. Statistical tests were 2-sided. RESULTS: After a median follow-up of 24 years, 158 invasive and 100 borderline ovarian tumors were observed. Ovarian cancer risk in the ART group was increased compared with the general population (standardized incidence ratio [SIR] = 1.43, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.18 to 1.71) but not when compared with the non-ART group (age- and parity-adjusted hazard ratio [HR] = 1.02, 95% CI = 0.70 to 1.50). Risk decreased with higher parity and with a larger number of successful ART cycles (resulting in childbirth, Ptrend = .001) but was not associated with the number of unsuccessful ART cycles. Borderline ovarian tumor risk was increased in ART-treated women compared with the general population (SIR = 2.20, 95% CI = 1.66 to 2.86) and with non-ART women (HR = 1.84, 95% CI = 1.08 to 3.14). Risk did not increase with more ART cycles or longer follow-up time. CONCLUSIONS: Increased ovarian cancer risk in ART-treated women compared with the general population is likely explained by nulliparity rather than ART treatment. The increased risk of borderline ovarian tumors after ART must be interpreted with caution because no dose-response relationship was observed