Breast (Edinburgh, Scotland) · 2016
Women's preferences for contralateral prophylactic mastectomy following unilateral breast cancer: What risk-reduction makes it worthwhile?
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Tesson Stephanie, Richards Imogen, Porter David, Phillips Kelly-Anne, Rankin Nicole, Costa Daniel, Musiello Toni, Marven Michelle, Butow Phyllis
Аннотация
OBJECTIVES: Contralateral prophylactic mastectomy (CPM) reduces the risk of contralateral breast cancer (BC) following unilateral BC, but may not increase survival in BRCA1/2 mutation negative women. Despite this, and the risk for adverse physical and psychological impact, uptake is increasing in BRCA1/2 mutation negative women. We aimed to quantify the degree of reduction in lifetime contralateral BC risk women required to justify CPM, and to explore demographic, disease and psychosocial predictors of preferences using Protection Motivation Theory (PMT) as a theoretical framework. Reasoning behind preferences was also examined.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: 388 women previously diagnosed with unilateral BC, of negative or unknown BRCA1/2 status, were recruited from an advocacy group research database. Two hypothetical risk trade-off scenarios were used to quantify the reduction in lifetime contralateral BC risk that women judged necessary to justify CPM, using a 5% and 20% baseline. Demographic, disease and PMT measures were assessed using a questionnaire.
RESULTS: Most women required their risk to be more than halved from a 5% or 20% baseline to justify CPM. Polarised preferences were also common, with some women consistently accepting or refusing CPM independent of risk/benefit trade-offs. Preferences were associated with coping self-efficacy and having a prior CPM. Explanations for judging CPM worthwhile included reducing or eliminating contralateral BC risk, attaining breast symmetry and reducing worry.
CONCLUSION: Risk-reduction preferences were highly variable. Decisive factors in women's preferences for CPM related to clinical, psychological and cosmetic outcomes, but not to demographic or disease characteristics.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: 388 women previously diagnosed with unilateral BC, of negative or unknown BRCA1/2 status, were recruited from an advocacy group research database. Two hypothetical risk trade-off scenarios were used to quantify the reduction in lifetime contralateral BC risk that women judged necessary to justify CPM, using a 5% and 20% baseline. Demographic, disease and PMT measures were assessed using a questionnaire.
RESULTS: Most women required their risk to be more than halved from a 5% or 20% baseline to justify CPM. Polarised preferences were also common, with some women consistently accepting or refusing CPM independent of risk/benefit trade-offs. Preferences were associated with coping self-efficacy and having a prior CPM. Explanations for judging CPM worthwhile included reducing or eliminating contralateral BC risk, attaining breast symmetry and reducing worry.
CONCLUSION: Risk-reduction preferences were highly variable. Decisive factors in women's preferences for CPM related to clinical, psychological and cosmetic outcomes, but not to demographic or disease characteristics.