The record
The largest prospective pooled cohort analysis of genital powder use and ovarian cancer found no statistically significant overall association: estimated HR 1.08 (95% CI, 0.99 to 1.17) for ever use, with HR 1.13 (95% CI, 1.01 to 1.26) restricted to women with a patent reproductive tract.
Claim scope
MANDATORY COUNTERWEIGHT. JAMA 2020;323:49-59, 252,745 women, 2,168 ovarian cancers, 3.8 million person-years. Prospective cohort data do not reproduce the case-control effect sizes. The authors note the study 'may have been underpowered to identify a small increase in risk.'
What this source does not establish
It does not refute the case-control literature; it shows the prospective estimate is smaller and imprecise. The subgroup tests for heterogeneity were not statistically significant for any of 10 variables, including race.
Limitations
A page that presents only the case-control ORs and omits this pooled cohort result would fail an honest reading of the literature. Present both. Note also PMID 27327020 (Sister Study, Epidemiology 2016;27:797-802) found HR 0.73 (CI 0.44, 1.2) for talc — below 1.0. QUOTE FIDELITY: PubMed encodes the thousands separator in '100 000' as a narrow no-break space ( ), rendered here as a plain space. Do not insert a comma — the source reads '100 000', not '100,000'.
Source
Pmid — 31910280