Psycho-oncology · 2021
BRCA mutation carriers' perceptions on postmenopausal hormone therapy: An Italian study.
СтатьяПоддержка исследования: вне правительства СШАНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
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.
Grandi Giovanni, Boggio Sola Valentina, Cortesi Laura, Toss Angela, Giuliani Giulia Andrea, Del Savio Maria Chiara, Facchinetti Fabio
Аннотация
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the actual perceptions of postmenopausal hormone therapy (HT) in BRCA mutation carriers (BRCAmc) in comparison with women from the general population.
METHODS: Questionnaire-based study of 83 BRCAmc and a control group of 89 women without a genetic mutation. Perceptions were evaluated by specific questions and Likert scales (-5-+5).
RESULTS: Present and past users of HT were more frequent in the control group (p = 0.01), with a longer time of use (p = 0.03). The preferred route of administration of HT was 'oral' (54.6%). The most frequently reported adverse effect of HT was venous thrombosis (0.8), while a protective effect on bone health was reported. No noticeable beneficial effects of HT have been recognised for hot flushes (0.2) and vaginal dryness (0.1). The most frequently perceived beneficial and adverse effects of HT were not significantly different between BRCA mutation carriers and controls. The greatest oncological fear was breast cancer (1.0). The protective role of HT on colorectal cancer was not known (0.1). These oncological impacts were mostly overestimated in BRCAmc, however this was not significant. Few BRCAmc would think of taking HT after risk-reducing surgeries.
CONCLUSIONS: Knowledge of the effects of HT on BRCAmc is relatively poor and they are likely to overstate its negative effects and underestimate its health benefits; however, this is not significant in comparison to the general population. More and better information should be given to BRCAmc to allow them to make informed decisions about the use of HT, especially before undergoing risk-reducing surgeries.
METHODS: Questionnaire-based study of 83 BRCAmc and a control group of 89 women without a genetic mutation. Perceptions were evaluated by specific questions and Likert scales (-5-+5).
RESULTS: Present and past users of HT were more frequent in the control group (p = 0.01), with a longer time of use (p = 0.03). The preferred route of administration of HT was 'oral' (54.6%). The most frequently reported adverse effect of HT was venous thrombosis (0.8), while a protective effect on bone health was reported. No noticeable beneficial effects of HT have been recognised for hot flushes (0.2) and vaginal dryness (0.1). The most frequently perceived beneficial and adverse effects of HT were not significantly different between BRCA mutation carriers and controls. The greatest oncological fear was breast cancer (1.0). The protective role of HT on colorectal cancer was not known (0.1). These oncological impacts were mostly overestimated in BRCAmc, however this was not significant. Few BRCAmc would think of taking HT after risk-reducing surgeries.
CONCLUSIONS: Knowledge of the effects of HT on BRCAmc is relatively poor and they are likely to overstate its negative effects and underestimate its health benefits; however, this is not significant in comparison to the general population. More and better information should be given to BRCAmc to allow them to make informed decisions about the use of HT, especially before undergoing risk-reducing surgeries.