Menopausal hormone therapy treatment options and ovarian cancer risk: A Swedish prospective population‐based matched‐cohort study

Although menopausal hormone therapy (MHT) seemingly increases the risk of ovarian cancer, evidence is insufficient whether the risk varies between various MHT formulations, regimens and administration modes. With the aim of filling these knowledge gaps, we investigated the effect of different MHT treatment options on the risk of ovarian cancer. This prospective Swedish population-based matched-cohort study included all women >= 40years having used systemic MHT between 2005 and 2012 (288,950 ever-users), group-level matched (1:3) to 866,546 nonusers. MHT use was ascertained from the Swedish Prescribed Drug Registry and data was linked to several national health data registries. Multivariable conditional logistic regression provided odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) adjusted for parity, and comorbidities. Current EP-MHT use was associated with a modestly increased risk of ovarian cancer (OR = 1.38, 95% CI 1.18-1.62), while no consistent risk was found among past users (OR = 1.00, 95% CI 0.84-1.18). Current continuous testosterone derived (OR = 1.50, 95% CI 1.15-1.96) regimens increased the risk whereas progesterone derived (OR = 1.48, 95% CI 1.00-2.21) regimens increased the risk marginally. Nonsignificant positive associations were observed for sequential regimens (OR = 1.87, 95% CI 0.70-5.08; OR = 1.54, 95% CI 0.96-2.47, respectively). An inverse relationship was observed for all E-MHT use (OR = 0.25, 95% CI 0.22-0.29), but this association might partly be explained by underreporting of oophorectomies or tubal ligations. Current cutaneous EP-MHT (OR = 1.28, 95% CI 0.81-2.02) suggested a possibly lower risk than oral MHT (OR = 1.48, 95% CI 1.25-1.75). In conclusion EP-MHT, notably continuous regimens, were associated with a modestly increased risk of ovarian cancer. The role of E-MHT requires further clarification. What's new? While menopausal hormone therapy (MHT) appears to influence ovarian cancer risk, whether the risk varies between various MHT treatment options remains unknown. In this Swedish population-based matched-cohort study, including all MHT receivers during 2005-2012, we found notable differences between MHT regimens. In addition, cutaneous EP-MHT suggested for less risk than the most commonly prescribed oral MHT. These findings are important for choosing a MHT treatment option, which involves less excess ovarian cancer risk.