Skip to main content
  • AACR Publications
    • Blood Cancer Discovery
    • Cancer Discovery
    • Cancer Epidemiology, Biomarkers & Prevention
    • Cancer Immunology Research
    • Cancer Prevention Research
    • Cancer Research
    • Clinical Cancer Research
    • Molecular Cancer Research
    • Molecular Cancer Therapeutics

AACR logo

  • Register
  • Log in
  • My Cart
Advertisement

Main menu

  • Home
  • About
    • The Journal
    • AACR Journals
    • Subscriptions
    • Permissions and Reprints
    • Reviewing
  • Articles
    • OnlineFirst
    • Current Issue
    • Past Issues
    • CEBP Focus Archive
    • Meeting Abstracts
    • Progress and Priorities
    • Collections
      • COVID-19 & Cancer Resource Center
      • Disparities Collection
      • Editors' Picks
      • "Best of" Collection
  • For Authors
    • Information for Authors
    • Author Services
    • Best of: Author Profiles
    • Informing Public Health Policy
    • Submit
  • Alerts
    • Table of Contents
    • Editors' Picks
    • OnlineFirst
    • Citation
    • Author/Keyword
    • RSS Feeds
    • My Alert Summary & Preferences
  • News
    • Cancer Discovery News
  • COVID-19
  • Webinars
  • Search More

    Advanced Search

  • AACR Publications
    • Blood Cancer Discovery
    • Cancer Discovery
    • Cancer Epidemiology, Biomarkers & Prevention
    • Cancer Immunology Research
    • Cancer Prevention Research
    • Cancer Research
    • Clinical Cancer Research
    • Molecular Cancer Research
    • Molecular Cancer Therapeutics

User menu

  • Register
  • Log in
  • My Cart

Search

  • Advanced search
Cancer Epidemiology, Biomarkers & Prevention
Cancer Epidemiology, Biomarkers & Prevention
  • Home
  • About
    • The Journal
    • AACR Journals
    • Subscriptions
    • Permissions and Reprints
    • Reviewing
  • Articles
    • OnlineFirst
    • Current Issue
    • Past Issues
    • CEBP Focus Archive
    • Meeting Abstracts
    • Progress and Priorities
    • Collections
      • COVID-19 & Cancer Resource Center
      • Disparities Collection
      • Editors' Picks
      • "Best of" Collection
  • For Authors
    • Information for Authors
    • Author Services
    • Best of: Author Profiles
    • Informing Public Health Policy
    • Submit
  • Alerts
    • Table of Contents
    • Editors' Picks
    • OnlineFirst
    • Citation
    • Author/Keyword
    • RSS Feeds
    • My Alert Summary & Preferences
  • News
    • Cancer Discovery News
  • COVID-19
  • Webinars
  • Search More

    Advanced Search

Research Articles

Gender of Offspring and Maternal Risk of Invasive Epithelial Ovarian Cancer

Inkyung Baik, Mats Lambe, Qin Liu, Sven Cnattingius, Lorelei A. Mucci, Tomas Riman, Anders Ekbom, Hans-Olov Adami and Chung-Cheng Hsieh
Inkyung Baik
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Mats Lambe
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Qin Liu
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Sven Cnattingius
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Lorelei A. Mucci
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Tomas Riman
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Anders Ekbom
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Hans-Olov Adami
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Chung-Cheng Hsieh
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
DOI: 10.1158/1055-9965.EPI-07-0645 Published November 2007
  • Article
  • Figures & Data
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF
Loading

Abstract

Gender of a fetus is associated with maternal hormonal milieu and may therefore modify maternal risk of ovarian cancer following a birth. We evaluated the relation between gender of offspring and maternal risk of epithelial ovarian cancer in a large case-control study nested within a nationwide cohort. Cohort members were identified in the Swedish Fertility Register. Cases of invasive epithelial ovarian cancer were identified in the Swedish National Cancer Register from 1961 to 2001. Five controls were matched by age to each case. A total of 7,407 cases and 37,658 controls with only singleton births were included in the analysis. We fit logistic regression models to study the association between gender of offspring and ovarian cancer risk, controlling for covariates. Maternal risk of ovarian cancer was reduced with increasing numbers of male offspring and increased with number of female offspring. Compared with women who gave birth to only girls, multivariate odds ratios (95% confidence interval) of invasive epithelial ovarian cancer were 0.92 (0.87-0.98) for those who gave birth to one boy, 0.87 (0.80-0.94) for two boys, and 0.82 (0.73-0.94) for three or more boys (P value test for trend < 0.001). There was a positive but nonsignificant association with number of girls. Similar results were observed when restricting the analysis to women born before 1935. Our findings suggest that hormonal and physiologic conditions in pregnancy with male, but not with female, offspring are associated with a lowered maternal risk of invasive epithelial ovarian cancer. (Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 2007;16(11):2314–20)

  • offspring gender
  • invasive epithelial ovarian cancer

Introduction

Epidemiologic studies have provided consistent evidence on the protective role of increasing parity in ovarian carcinogenesis (1-10), and different mechanisms have been postulated to explain the effect of childbirth on this carcinoma (9). However, childbirth-related factors other than parity have not been extensively explored to provide further information on the potential mechanisms. Maternal hormonal milieu during normal pregnancy may differ by gender of the fetus; more notable examples include that women carrying a male fetus are exposed to lower levels of human chorionic gonadotropin (hCG) and estriol and higher levels of α-fetoprotein than those carrying a female fetus (11-13). Very few studies have examined the association between gender of offspring and maternal risk of ovarian cancer. A population-based case-control study from Delaware Valley examined the association between gender of offspring and maternal risk of ovarian cancer and found that bearing only female offspring might be associated with an increased risk (14). A population-based cohort study from Norway, on the other hand, found no association between offspring gender and maternal risk of ovarian cancer, although those with twin girls had a nonsignificant increased risk than those with singleton births (15). We have conducted a large case-control study nested within a nationwide cohort of Swedish women to better document the association between gender of offspring and maternal risk of invasive epithelial ovarian cancer.

Materials and Methods

Study Population

Members of the study cohort were identified from women who were born from 1925 and alive at the 1960 Census and listed in the Swedish Fertility Register, a nationwide population-based register including >3.4 million female resident citizens of Sweden. The Register contains information on number, gender, and dates of live births for registered women. Vital and emigration status of women in the Fertility Register is updated annually based on information obtained from a National Population Register.

We used a nested case-control sampling design to allow more efficient analyses. Ovarian cancer cases were ascertained by linkage with the records of the Swedish National Cancer Register, which receives reports on newly diagnosed malignant tumors from both the diagnosing physician and the confirming pathologist/cytologist since 1958 and has a near complete list of all cancer cases. Case subjects were cohort members diagnosed from 1961 to 2001 with histologically verified invasive epithelial ovarian cancer (International Classification of Diseases, seventh revision code 175.0 with pathologic anatomic diagnosis codes, such as 096 for adenocarcinoma, 196 for undifferentiated carcinoma, and 146 for squamous cell tumor; ref. 16). During the follow-up, 10,200 case subjects were diagnosed with a first invasive epithelial ovarian cancer. For each case subject, five control women were randomly selected from the eligible cohort members who had the same birth year with the index case, were alive in Sweden at least to the date of the diagnosis for the index case, and had not been previously diagnosed with ovarian cancer before this date. For both cases and controls, the highest attained educational level was obtained from a nationwide Register on Education.

To minimize the possible effect of multiple birth pregnancies on the relation between gender of offspring and ovarian cancer risk, we excluded 147 cases and 735 matched controls as well as 790 additional control subjects who had ever had such pregnancies. Among the 59,528 women (10,053 cases and 49,475 controls) without a multiple birth pregnancy, we further excluded 13,178 nulliparous women (2,534 cases and 10,644 controls) and 1,285 parous women (112 cases and 1,173 controls) who had missing information on gender of any offspring. Thus, a total of 45,065 women (7,407 cases and 37,658 controls) were available for this analysis. For both cases and controls, only live births before the index case's date of diagnosis were included in the analyses.

Statistical Analyses

We conducted unconditional logistic regression analyses to estimate odds ratio (OR; relative risk) of invasive epithelial ovarian cancer and its 95% confidence interval (95% CI), controlling for potential confounding variables. Variables included in the analyses were gender of offspring, attained age (age at diagnosis for cases or age at identification for controls), age at first childbirth, parity, attained educational level by age 40, and area of residence at age 40. Age at diagnosis and age at first childbirth were adjusted for as continuous variables in the models, whereas parity, educational level, and area of residence were adjusted for as categorical indicator variables. We presented OR estimates for categories of numbers of boys and girls (1, 2, 3, or more) using all girls (no boy) or all boys (no girl) as reference group. We tested for linear trend in OR estimates by treating number of boys and number of girls as ordinal variables. For uniparous, biparous, and triparous women, the effect of bearing a boy on the risk of invasive epithelial ovarian cancer was evaluated for each birth order using bearing a girl as the reference. The effect of fetal gender was further analyzed for uniparous, biparous, and triparous women together using bearing two girls in biparous women as the reference.

Information on use of oral contraceptives was unavailable in the registry data. To minimize the potential confounding effect, if any, of oral contraceptives on the association between gender of offspring and invasive epithelial ovarian cancer risk, we conducted further analyses among women who were born before 1935 because oral contraceptive use was limited in the older cohort (17). Statistical Analysis System procedures (SAS 8.0, SAS Institute) were used to conduct the analyses.

Results

Characteristics of the study subjects are shown in Table 1 . Compared with control women, case women were more likely to be uniparous, reside in rural area, and bear only girls.

View this table:
  • View inline
  • View popup
Table 1.

Characteristics of the study subjects (n = 45,065)

Table 2 displays, by birth order and among all children, the distribution of offspring gender for the cases and controls. Case women were more likely to give birth to a girl for the first to fourth children than the controls. The sex ratio (number of boys/number of girls) of all children was 1.03 for cases and 1.07 for controls.

View this table:
  • View inline
  • View popup
Table 2.

Gender distribution of the offspring by birth order

Table 3 presents multivariate ORs of maternal ovarian cancer associated with numbers of boys and numbers of girls. The risk decreased with increasing numbers of boys: compared with women who gave birth to only girls, the ORs (95% CI) were 0.92 (0.87-0.98) for those who gave birth to one boy, 0.87 (0.80-0.94) for two boys, and 0.82 (0.73-0.94) for three or more boys (P value test for trend < 0.001). In contrast, there was a positive association between number of girls and maternal risk of ovarian cancer: multivariate ORs (95% CI) were 1.00 (0.94-1.06) for one girl, 1.03 (0.95-1.11) for two girls, and 1.13 (0.99-1.28) for three or more girls compared with women with only boys (P value test for trend = 0.16). Restricting the analysis to the 21,932 women (3,585 cases and 18,347 controls, all parities) born before 1935, when oral contraceptive use was unlikely, we found a similar inverse association for boys (P value from test for trend = 0.004) and a stronger positive association for girls (P value test for trend = 0.006; Table 3).

View this table:
  • View inline
  • View popup
Table 3.

Number of boys and girls among ovarian cancer cases and control subjects and the associated OR with 95% CI

We examined further the effect of offspring gender on ovarian cancer risk, separately for each birth order, among uniparous, biparous, and triparous women (Table 4 ). There was a consistent reduction in risk associated with having a boy rather than having a girl at each birth order for each group. For example, among triparous women in the full cohort, multivariate ORs (95% CI) associated with having a boy were 0.95 (0.85-1.06) for the first birth, 0.89 (0.80-1.00) for the second birth, and 0.94 (0.84-1.06) for the third birth. Risk reduction was also observed with distinct pattern of offspring gender, with male offspring (boy/boy for biparous women and all boys for triparous women) associated with the lowest risk and female offspring (girl/girl or all girls) having the highest risk.

View this table:
  • View inline
  • View popup
Table 4.

Relation between gender of offspring and maternal risk of ovarian cancer in uniparous, biparous, triparous, and all women

Among women born before 1935, the pattern of risk reduction at each birth was similar (Table 4). Graphically, for this older cohort, using the middle category of biparous women with only girls as the reference, Fig. 1 summarizes the effect of offspring gender on maternal risk of invasive epithelial ovarian cancer among uniparous, biparous, and triparous women. Compared with biparous women who had only girls, multivariate ORs (95% CI) were 1.11 (0.95-1.28) for uniparous women with one girl, 1.04 (0.90-1.21) for uniparous women with one boy, 0.87 (0.76-1.00) for biparous women with one boy and one girl, 0.84 (0.71-0.98) with two boys, 0.87 (0.67-1.11) for triparous women with three girls, 0.67 (0.56-0.81) for two girls and one boy, 0.66 (0.55-0.79) for two boys and one girl, and 0.63 (0.49-0.80) for three boys (Fig. 1).

Figure 1.
  • Download figure
  • Open in new tab
  • Download powerpoint
Figure 1.

Relation between gender of offspring and maternal risk of ovarian cancer in uniparous, biparous, and triparous women born before 1935 (3,219 cases and 15,810 controls for the three parities). Data are adjusted for age at diagnosis or enrollment, age at first childbirth, education level closest to age 40, and area of residence closest to age 40.

Discussion

Our results show a dose-response relationship between increasing number of male offspring and reduced maternal risk of invasive epithelial ovarian cancer. In contrast, mothers with only female offspring were at a higher risk of ovarian cancer than those with at least one male offspring. These data agreed with the study from Delaware Valley and the findings on twin girls in the Norwegian study (14, 15).

Strengths of our study include the population-based nature of the study, the largest sample size thus far on this study question, and the histologically verified cases. A potential limitation is the lack of information on family history of ovarian cancer and oral contraceptive use. However, sex ratio is unlikely to be associated with mutations in BRCA1 and BRCA2 (18-20) and with use of oral contraceptives (21). Thus, the association between gender of offspring and ovarian cancer is unlikely to be confounded by these factors. Furthermore, separate analyses were conducted among women born before 1935 among which use of oral contraceptive has been very limited.

The protective role of pregnancy on the development of ovarian cancer can be explained by several biological mechanisms (9). Physiologic conditions related to ovulatory trauma (22) and gonadotropin stimulation (23), both among the most recognized etiologic hypotheses on ovarian cancer, are inhibited by childbearing (24). Moreover, it has been suggested that pregnancy confers additional protection through clearance effects on premalignant epithelial ovarian cells (3) and that hormonal changes during pregnancy may be responsible for this mechanism (25-28).

Pregnancies with male or female offspring should have equivalent benefits from anovulation and suppressed secretion of gonadotropins. We explored potential differences in hormones that may underlie the observed difference in maternal ovarian cancer risk between bearing male and female offspring. Table 5 summarizes—from a review of epidemiologic and experimental studies—the association between hormone levels and ovarian cancer risk as well as hormonal differences during pregnancy associated with fetal gender. Estradiol, estrone, and their metabolites stimulate proliferation of malignant and normal ovarian cell lines (29, 30). A role for estrogen in increasing ovarian cancer risk is supported by epidemiologic evidence on long-term use of unopposed estrogen (31). However, no association was found between circulating estrogen levels and ovarian cancer risk (32, 33).

View this table:
  • View inline
  • View popup
Table 5.

Associations between pregnancy-related hormones, offspring gender, and ovarian cancer risk

Because pregnancy increases the production of estrogen but plays a protective role in the risk, additional hormones are likely to be involved in the etiology of ovarian cancer (25). Potential candidates include androgens; results from animal studies indicate that testosterone can act as a stimulus in epithelial proliferation of ovary and lead to adenomas in the ovarian parenchyma and papillomas on the surface (34). In humans, circulating androstenedione was found to be positively associated with ovarian cancer risk (32). Several experimental studies indicate a protective effect for progesterone on ovarian carcinogenesis through apoptotic mechanisms (35-37).

Epidemiologic investigation on oral contraceptives provides indirect evidence on the protective potential of progesterone against ovarian cancer. Women who used oral contraceptives containing high-potency progesterone are at a lower risk of ovarian cancer than those using oral contraceptives of low progesterone potency (38). Information is limited on the relation of hCG with ovarian cancer. hCG is elevated during the early period of pregnancy, functions in continued production of progesterone, and regulates the secretion of testosterone by the fetal testes (39). In vitro studies showed that medium containing hCG significantly inhibits growth of benign, borderline, and malignant epithelial cell lines of the ovary (40). Tumorigenic effects of insulin-like growth factor-I (IGF-I) in breast, prostate, and colon cancers have been supported by experimental and epidemiologic studies (41). Higher levels of IGF-I have been found to be associated with ovarian cancer risk, particularly among younger women (42). The first column of Table 5 summarizes the above observations.

Maternal and fetal hormone concentrations during normal pregnancy may differ by gender of the fetus. Women carrying a male fetus have lower levels of hCG (11, 43-46) and estriol (12) than those carrying a female fetus. Findings on testosterone have been less consistent: levels in maternal and cord serum at term were not shown to be significantly different by offspring gender in some studies (43, 47), whereas higher maternal and amniotic fluid levels in male bearers were found in others (48, 49). Progesterone levels in maternal and fetal blood tend to be higher in male bearers than female bearers, although the difference was not significant (43, 50). Studies that measured 17-hydroxyprogesterone, a metabolite of progesterone, have found significantly higher blood levels in males than in female newborns (51), particularly among the full-term deliveries (52). Whereas IGF-I plays an important role in fetal growth and development and has a strong positive association with birth weight of newborns (53, 54), gender difference in maternal and fetal levels of IGF-I has not been consistently observed (55, 56). However, in a study that adjusted for maternal factors and ponderal index, higher levels of IGF-I were found in cord blood of female offspring (56). The second column of Table 5 summarizes these findings.

Thus, if these hormones are involved in the pathway for the association between bearing male offspring and ovarian cancer risk, the expected association between hormone and ovarian cancer risk would be null or inverse for estrogen, positive or null for testosterone, inverse or null for progesterone, positive for chorionic gonadotropin, and inverse or null for IGF-I (the third column of Table 5). Our findings on offspring gender agree with expected associations for progesterone and IGF-I.

In addition to differences in pregnancy-related hormones, male bearers have higher serum levels of α-fetoprotein than female bearers (13, 57, 58). However, there is currently no information on whether α-fetoprotein levels can modify ovarian cancer risk in adult women.

In conclusion, we found that women with male offspring were at a lower risk of invasive epithelial ovarian cancer than those with only female offspring. Further investigations into the effect of progesterone, IGF-I, and α-fetoprotein on ovarian cancer risk are warranted, if the protective effect of bearing male offspring against ovarian cancer is mediated by hormonal and proteomic milieu above and beyond pregnancy-derived benefits of anovulation and gonadotropin suppression.

Acknowledgments

We thank Lotta Persson at the Statistics Sweden for expert assistance in compiling the original data set.

Footnotes

  • Grant support: NIH, USPHS grant R01CA95112.

  • The costs of publication of this article were defrayed in part by the payment of page charges. This article must therefore be hereby marked advertisement in accordance with 18 U.S.C. Section 1734 solely to indicate this fact.

    • Accepted September 7, 2007.
    • Received July 17, 2007.
    • Revision received August 31, 2007.

References

  1. ↵
    Negri E, Franceschi S, Tzonou A, et al. Pooled analysis of 3 European case-control studies. I. Reproductive factors and risk of epithelial ovarian cancer. Int J Cancer 1991;49:50–6.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  2. Whittemore AS, Harris R, Itnyre J. Characteristics relating to ovarian cancer risk: collaborative analysis of 12 US case-control studies. II. Invasive epithelial ovarian cancers in white women. Collaborative Ovarian Cancer Group. Am J Epidemiol 1992;136:1184–203.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  3. ↵
    Adami HO, Hsieh CC, Lambe M, et al. Parity, age at first childbirth, and risk of ovarian cancer. Lancet 1994;344:1250–4.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  4. Risch HA, Marrett LD, Howe GR. Parity, contraception, infertility, and the risk of epithelial ovarian cancer. Am J Epidemiol 1994;140:585–97.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  5. Purdie D, Green A, Bain C, et al. Reproductive and other factors and risk of epithelial ovarian cancer: an Australian case-control study. Survey of Women's Health Study Group. Int J Cancer 1995;62:678–84.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  6. Hankinson SE, Colditz GA, Hunter DJ, et al. A prospective study of reproductive factors and risk of epithelial ovarian cancer. Cancer 1995;76:284–90.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  7. Wittenberg J, Cook LS, Rossing MA, Weiss NS. Reproductive risk factors for mucinous and non-mucinous epithelial ovarian cancer. Epidemiology 1999;10:761–3.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  8. Titus-Ernstoff L, Perez K, Cramer DW, Harlow BL, Baron JA, Greenberg ER. Menstrual and reproductive factors in relation to ovarian cancer risk. Br J Cancer 2001;84:714–21.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  9. ↵
    Riman T, Dickman PW, Nilsson S, et al. Risk factors for invasive epithelial ovarian cancer: results from a Swedish case-control study. Am J Epidemiol 2002;156:363–73.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  10. ↵
    Tung KH, Goodman MT, Wu AH, et al. Reproductive factors and epithelial ovarian cancer risk by histologic type: a multiethnic case-control study. Am J Epidemiol 2003;158:629–38.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  11. ↵
    Obiekwe BC, Chard T. Human chorionic gonadotropin levels in maternal blood in late pregnancy: relation to birthweight, sex and condition of the infant at birth. Br J Obstet Gynaecol 1982;89:543–6.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  12. ↵
    Troisi R, Potischman N, Roberts J, et al. Association of maternal and umbilical cord hormone concentrations with maternal, gestational and neonatal factors (United States). Cancer Causes Control 2003;14:347–55.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  13. ↵
    Sowers SG, Reish RL, Burton BK. Fetal sex-related differences in maternal serum α-fetoprotein during the second trimester of pregnancy. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1983;146:786–9.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  14. ↵
    Gierach GL, Modugno F, Ness RB. Gender of offspring and maternal ovarian cancer risk. Gynecol Oncol 2006;101:476–80.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  15. ↵
    Albrektsen G, Heuch I, Thoresen S, Kvale G. Twin births, sex of children and maternal risk of ovarian cancer: a cohort study in Norway. Br J Cancer 2007;96:1433–5.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  16. ↵
    Liu Q, Lambe M, Baik I, et al. A prospective study of the transient decrease in ovarian cancer risk following childbirth. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 2006;15:2508–13.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  17. ↵
    Kumle M, Weiderpass E, Braaten T, Adami HO, Lund E. Risk for invasive ovarian cancer and borderline ovarian tumours following use of hormonal contraceptives: the Norwegian-Swedish Women's Lifestyle and Health Cohort Study. Br J Cancer 2004;90:1386–91.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  18. ↵
    Balmana J, Diez O, Campos B, et al. Sex ratio distortion in offspring of families with BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutant alleles: an ascertainment bias phenomenon? Breast Cancer Res Treat 2005;92:273–7.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  19. Chenevix-Trench G, Sinilnikova OM, Suthers G, et al. kConFab Investigators. Ratio of male to female births in the offspring of BRCA1 and BRCA2 carriers. Fam Cancer 2005;4:73–5.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  20. ↵
    Gronwald J, Byrski T, Huzarski T, Narod SA, Lubinski J. Male to female ratio among offspring of BRCA1 mutation carriers. Breast Cancer Res Treat 2006;97:113–4.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  21. ↵
    Rothman KJ, Liess J. Gender of offspring after oral-contraceptive use. N Engl J Med 1976;295:859–61.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  22. ↵
    Fathalla MF. Incessant ovulation—a factor in ovarian neoplasia? Lancet 1971;2:163.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  23. ↵
    Stadel BV. The etiology and prevention of ovarian cancer. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1975;123:772–4.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  24. ↵
    Kelsey JL, Whittemore AS. Epidemiology and primary prevention of cancers of the breast, endometrium, and ovary. A brief overview. Ann Epidemiol 1994;4:89–95.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  25. ↵
    Risch HA. Hormonal etiology of epithelial ovarian cancer, with a hypothesis concerning the role of androgens and progesterone. J Natl Cancer Inst 1998;90:1774–86.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  26. Lambe M, Wuu J, Rossing MA, Hsieh CC. Twinning and maternal risk of ovarian cancer. Lancet 1999;353:1941.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  27. Riman T, Nilsson S, Persson IR. Review of epidemiological evidence for reproductive and hormonal factors in relation to the risk of epithelial ovarian malignancies. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand 2004;83:783–95.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  28. ↵
    Lukanova A, Kaaks R. Endogenous hormones and ovarian cancer: epidemiology and current hypotheses. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 2005;14:98–107.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  29. ↵
    Syed V, Ulinski G, Mok SC, Yiu GK, Ho SM. Expression of gonadotropin receptor and growth responses to key reproductive hormones in normal and malignant human ovarian surface epithelial cells. Cancer Res 2001;61:6768–76.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  30. ↵
    Seeger H, Wallwiener D, Kraemer E, Mueck AO. Estradiol metabolites are potent mitogenic substances for human ovarian cancer cells. Eur J Gynaecol Oncol 2005;26:383–5.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  31. ↵
    Lacey JV, Jr., Brinton LA, Leitzmann MF, et al. Menopausal hormone therapy and ovarian cancer risk in the National Institutes of Health-AARP Diet and Health Study Cohort. J Natl Cancer Inst 2006;98:1397–405.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  32. ↵
    Helzlsouer KJ, Alberg AJ, Gordon GB, et al. Serum gonadotropins and steroid hormones and the development of ovarian cancer. JAMA 1995;274:1926–30.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  33. ↵
    Lukanova A, Lundin E, Akhmedkhanov A, et al. Circulating levels of sex steroid hormones and risk of ovarian cancer. Int J Cancer 2003;104:636–42.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  34. ↵
    Silva EG, Tornos C, Fritsche HA, Jr., et al. The induction of benign epithelial neoplasms of the ovaries of guinea pigs by testosterone stimulation: a potential animal model. Mod Pathol 1997;10:879–83.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  35. ↵
    Bu SZ, Yin DL, Ren XH, et al. Progesterone induces apoptosis and up-regulation of p53 expression in human ovarian carcinoma cell lines. Cancer 1997;79:1944–50.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  36. Rodriguez GC, Walmer DK, Cline M, et al. Effect of progestin on the ovarian epithelium of macaques: cancer prevention through apoptosis? J Soc Gynecol Investig 1998;5:271–6.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  37. ↵
    Yu S, Lee M, Shin S, Park J. Apoptosis induced by progesterone in human ovarian cancer cell line SNU-840. J Cell Biochem 2001;82:445–51.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  38. ↵
    Schildkraut JM, Calingaert B, Marchbanks PA, Moorman PG, Rodriguez GC. Impact of progestin and estrogen potency in oral contraceptives on ovarian cancer risk. J Natl Cancer Inst 2002;94:32–8.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  39. ↵
    Yen SSC, Jaffe RB, Barbieri RL. Reproductive endocrinology: physiology, pathophysiology, and clinical management. 4th ed. Philadelphia: W.B. Saunders; 1999; p. 768–70.
  40. ↵
    Tourgeman DE, Lu JJ, Boostanfar R, Amezcua C, Felix JC, Paulson RJ. Human chorionic gonadotropin suppresses ovarian epithelial neoplastic cell proliferation in vitro. Fertil Steril 2002;78:1096–9.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  41. ↵
    Giovannucci E. Insulin-like growth factor-I and binding protein-3 and risk of cancer. Horm Res 1999;51:34–41.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  42. ↵
    Lukanova A, Lundin E, Toniolo P, et al. Circulating levels of insulin-like growth factor-I and risk of ovarian cancer. Int J Cancer 2002;101:549–54.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  43. ↵
    Gol M, Altunyurt S, Cimrin D, Guclu S, Bagci M, Demir N. Different maternal serum hCG levels in pregnant women with female and male fetuses: does fetal hypophyseal-adrenal-gonadal axis play a role? J Perinat Med 2004;32:342–5.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  44. Boroditsky RS, Reyes FI, Winter JS, Faiman C. Serum human chorionic gonadotropin and progesterone patterns in the last trimester of pregnancy: relationship to fetal sex. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1975;121:238–41.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  45. Steier JA, Myking OL, Bergsjo PB. Correlation between fetal sex and human chorionic gonadotropin in peripheral maternal blood and amniotic fluid in second and third trimester normal pregnancies. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand 1999;78:367–71.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  46. ↵
    Gol M, Guclu S, Demir A, Erata Y, Demir N. Effect of fetal gender on maternal serum human chorionic gonadotropin levels throughout pregnancy. Arch Gynecol Obstet 2005;273:90–2.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  47. ↵
    Hercz P, Kazy Z, Siklos P, Ungar L. Quantitative comparison of serum steroid and peptide hormone concentrations in male and female fetuses in the maternal-fetoplacental system during the 28th-40th weeks of pregnancy. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol 1989;30:201–4.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  48. ↵
    Meulenberg PM, Hofman JA. Maternal testosterone and fetal sex. J Steroid Biochem Mol Biol 1991;39:51–4.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  49. ↵
    Dawood MY, Saxena BB. Testosterone and dihydrotestosterone in maternal and cord blood and in amniotic fluid. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1977;129:37–42.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  50. ↵
    Maccoby EE, Doering CH, Jacklin CN, Kraemer H. Concentrations of sex hormones in umbilical-cord blood: their relation to sex and birth order of infants. Child Dev 1979;50:632–42.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  51. ↵
    al-Nuaim AR, Abdullah MA, Stevens B, Zain M. Effect of gender, birth weight and gestational age on serum 17-hydroxyprogesterone concentration and distribution among neonates in Saudi Arabia. Indian J Pediatr 1995;62:605–9.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  52. ↵
    Godo B, Visser HK, Degenhart HJ. Plasma 17-OH-progesterone in fullterm and preterm infants at birth and during the early neonatal period. Horm Res 1981;15:65–71.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  53. ↵
    Verhaeghe J, Van Bree R, Van Herck E, Laureys J, Bouillon R, Van Assche FA. C-peptide, insulin-like growth factors I and II, and insulin-like growth factor binding protein-1 in umbilical cord serum: correlations with birth weight. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1993;169:89–97.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  54. ↵
    Bernstein IM, Goran MI, Copeland KC. Maternal insulin sensitivity and cord blood peptides: relationships to neonatal size at birth. Obstet Gynecol 1997;90:780–3.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  55. ↵
    Coutant R, Boux de Casson F, Douay O, et al. Relationships between placental GH concentration and maternal smoking, newborn gender, and maternal leptin: possible implications for birth weight. J Clin Endocrinol Metab 2001;86:4854–9.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  56. ↵
    Vatten LJ, Nilsen ST, Odegard RA, Romundstad PR, Austgulen R. Insulin-like growth factor I and leptin in umbilical cord plasma and infant birth size at term. Pediatrics 2002;109:1131–5.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  57. ↵
    Chen RJ, Lin YH, Huang SC. Fetal sex and maternal α-fetoprotein concentration at late normal singleton pregnancies. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand 1994;73:192–4.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  58. ↵
    Szabo M, Veress L, Munnich A, Papp Z. Maternal age-dependent and sex-related changes of gestational serum α-fetoprotein. Fetal Diagn Ther 1995;10:368–72.
    OpenUrlPubMed
PreviousNext
Back to top
Cancer Epidemiology Biomarkers & Prevention: 16 (11)
November 2007
Volume 16, Issue 11
  • Table of Contents
  • Table of Contents (PDF)

Sign up for alerts

View this article with LENS

Open full page PDF
Article Alerts
Sign In to Email Alerts with your Email Address
Email Article

Thank you for sharing this Cancer Epidemiology, Biomarkers & Prevention article.

NOTE: We request your email address only to inform the recipient that it was you who recommended this article, and that it is not junk mail. We do not retain these email addresses.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
Gender of Offspring and Maternal Risk of Invasive Epithelial Ovarian Cancer
(Your Name) has forwarded a page to you from Cancer Epidemiology, Biomarkers & Prevention
(Your Name) thought you would be interested in this article in Cancer Epidemiology, Biomarkers & Prevention.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
Citation Tools
Gender of Offspring and Maternal Risk of Invasive Epithelial Ovarian Cancer
Inkyung Baik, Mats Lambe, Qin Liu, Sven Cnattingius, Lorelei A. Mucci, Tomas Riman, Anders Ekbom, Hans-Olov Adami and Chung-Cheng Hsieh
Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev November 1 2007 (16) (11) 2314-2320; DOI: 10.1158/1055-9965.EPI-07-0645

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero
Share
Gender of Offspring and Maternal Risk of Invasive Epithelial Ovarian Cancer
Inkyung Baik, Mats Lambe, Qin Liu, Sven Cnattingius, Lorelei A. Mucci, Tomas Riman, Anders Ekbom, Hans-Olov Adami and Chung-Cheng Hsieh
Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev November 1 2007 (16) (11) 2314-2320; DOI: 10.1158/1055-9965.EPI-07-0645
del.icio.us logo Digg logo Reddit logo Twitter logo CiteULike logo Facebook logo Google logo Mendeley logo
  • Tweet Widget
  • Facebook Like
  • Google Plus One

Jump to section

  • Article
    • Abstract
    • Introduction
    • Materials and Methods
    • Results
    • Discussion
    • Acknowledgments
    • Footnotes
    • References
  • Figures & Data
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF
Advertisement

Related Articles

Cited By...

More in this TOC Section

  • Gallstones and Gallbladder Cancer
  • Additive Effects of Aristolochic Acid and Arsenic in UTUC
  • Provider Lifestyle Discussions
Show more Research Articles
  • Home
  • Alerts
  • Feedback
  • Privacy Policy
Facebook   Twitter   LinkedIn   YouTube   RSS

Articles

  • Online First
  • Current Issue
  • Past Issues

Info for

  • Authors
  • Subscribers
  • Advertisers
  • Librarians

About Cancer Epidemiology, Biomarkers & Prevention

  • About the Journal
  • Editorial Board
  • Permissions
  • Submit a Manuscript
AACR logo

Copyright © 2021 by the American Association for Cancer Research.

Cancer Epidemiology, Biomarkers & Prevention
eISSN: 1538-7755
ISSN: 1055-9965

Advertisement