Oral contraception and eye disease: findings in two large cohort studies

AIM : To investigate the relation between oral contraceptive use and certain eye diseases. \ud \ud METHODS : Abstraction of the relevant data from the two large British cohort studies of the effects of oral contraception, the Royal College of General Practitioners' (RCGP) Oral Contraception Study and the Oxford-Family Planning Association (Oxford-FPA) Contraceptive Study. Both cohort studies commenced in 1968 and were organised on a national basis. Between them they have accumulated over 850 000 person years of observation involving 63 000 women. \ud \ud RESULTS : The conditions considered in the analysis were conjunctivitis, keratitis, iritis, lacrimal disease, strabismus, cataract, glaucoma, retinal detachment, and retinal vascular lesions. With the exception of retinal vascular lesions, there was no consistent evidence of important increases in risk of eye diseases in users of oral contraception. There was about a twofold increase in the risk of retinal vascular lesions in recent pill users in both studies (statistically significant only in the RCGP study). The increase was not limited to any specific type of lesion and may well reflect diagnostic bias. \ud \ud CONCLUSION : Oral contraceptive use does not appear to increase the risk of eye disease, with the possible exception of retinal vascular lesions. \ud \ud Keywords: oral contraception; eye disease; cohort studie

Benign breast disease and subsequent breast cancer: English record linkage studies

BACKGROUND: Benign breast disease (BBD) increases the risk of breast cancer, but details of the relationship would benefit from further study in the UK. METHODS: Analysis of linked statistical abstracts of hospital data, including a cohort of 20 976 women with BBD in an Oxford data set and 89 268 such women in an English national data set. RESULTS: Rate ratios (RRs) for breast cancer, comparing BBD and comparison cohorts in these two data sets, were 2.3 (95% CI: 2.2-2.5) and 3.2 (3.0-3.3), respectively. RRs rose with increasing age at BBD diagnosis and remained elevated for at least 20 years after diagnosis. RRs were particularly high for a relatively small number of cancers occurring in the first few months after BBD diagnosis. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings accord well with those in other large studies, mostly done in the USA, in showing a sustained long-term cancer risk after BBD. They also demonstrate that known long-term risks of disease can be reliably identified from linked routine administrative hospital statistics. Most other studies omit cancers in the first few months after BBD. Such cases-presumably either misdiagnosed or miscoded-merit further study to determine whether in fact they include diagnoses of cancer that were initially missed