← All causality assessments
Causality assessment · Causality: well established

Estrogen + medroxyprogesterone acetate and Breast cancer: is the FAERS signal real?

n=9,771 co-reports · PRR 242.8 · ROR 302.2
A written Bradford Hill assessment of one drug–event pair. The grade is a judgement about the signal, not a statement that this drug causes this event in any one person; FAERS counts are reports, not rates.
Causality: well established

Estrogen + medroxyprogesterone acetate ↔ Breast cancer

n=9,771 co-reports · PRR 242.8 · ROR 302.2

Conjugated equine estrogen plus medroxyprogesterone acetate was the combined hormone-therapy regimen tested in the Women's Health Initiative, the large randomized trial whose 2002 report found an increased risk of invasive breast cancer (as well as cardiovascular events), leading to early termination of that arm and a sharp, worldwide drop in hormone-therapy use (Rossouw et al., JAMA 2002, PMID 12117397). The breast-cancer association is the best-established harm of combined postmenopausal hormone therapy, is duration-dependent, and prompted a boxed warning. Note that this is estrogen plus progestin therapy, not medroxyprogesterone used alone as a contraceptive — the two contexts differ.

Rossouw JE, et al. Risks and benefits of estrogen plus progestin in healthy postmenopausal women: principal results from the Women's Health Initiative randomized controlled trial. JAMA. 2002;288(3):321-333 (PMID 12117397). FDA boxed warning for estrogen+progestin postmenopausal therapy.

Bradford Hill viewpointStatusNote
Temporality (necessary)metRisk emerged during randomized exposure in the WHI
StrengthmetPRR 243 here; a modest but real hazard ratio in the randomized trial
ConsistencymetConsistent across observational cohorts and the randomized WHI
SpecificitypartialCombined therapy; estrogen-alone results differ, so the progestin matters
Biological gradientmetRisk rises with duration of combined therapy
PlausibilitymetHormone-receptor-driven breast tissue growth — named mechanism
CoherencemetCoheres with decades of hormonal-carcinogenesis research
ExperimentmetThe WHI itself is the randomized experiment — the strongest possible evidence
AnalogymetSimilar to other prolonged hormonal exposures

This page's own qualitative read, not an automated/citation-gated assessment.

Not applicable in principle. This question was answered by a purpose-built randomized trial (the WHI) with years of follow-up; a short trial's adverse-event table cannot capture a cancer outcome. The one MPA trial that surfaced in searching (NCT02228681, an endometrial-cancer study with a small MPA arm) is far too small and short to speak to breast-cancer risk.