National trends in contralateral prophylactic mastectomy in women with locally advanced breast cancer.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Panchal H
PROVIDER: S-EPMC6327316 | biostudies-literature | 2019 Jan
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Publications
National trends in contralateral prophylactic mastectomy in women with locally advanced breast cancer.
Panchal Hinaben H Pilewskie Melissa L ML Sheckter Clifford C CC Albornoz Claudia R CR Razdan Shantanu N SN Disa Joseph J JJ Cordeiro Peter G PG Mehrara Babak J BJ Matros Evan E
Journal of surgical oncology 20181127 1
<h4>Background and objectives</h4>Women with unilateral early-stage breast cancer are increasingly choosing contralateral prophylactic mastectomy (CPM) despite the absence of survival benefits and increased risk of surgical complications. Data are lacking on whether this trend extends to women with clinically locally advanced nonmetastatic (cT4M0) cancer. This study aims to estimate national CPM trends in women with unilateral cT4M0 breast cancer.<h4>Methods</h4>Women aged ≥ 18 years, who underw ...[more]
Similar Datasets
Project description:BACKGROUND:Contralateral prophylactic mastectomy may be unnecessary from an oncologic perspective; therefore, the debate persists about the value of contralateral prophylactic mastectomy in women with early-stage unilateral breast cancer. Given finite health care resources, this study aims to evaluate the cost of contralateral prophylactic mastectomy and breast reconstruction. METHODS:Women with unilateral breast cancer undergoing either unilateral mastectomy or unilateral mastectomy with contralateral prophylactic mastectomy and immediate breast reconstruction were selected from the Truven MarketScan databases between 2009 and 2013. Demographic and treatment data were recorded, and over an 18-month follow-up period, the treatment cost was tallied. A log-transformed linear model was used to compare cost between the groups. RESULTS:A total of 2343 women were identified who met our inclusion criteria, with 1295 undergoing unilateral mastectomy and 1048 undergoing contralateral prophylactic mastectomy. Complication rates within 18 months were similar for women undergoing unilateral mastectomy and contralateral prophylactic mastectomy (39 percent versus 42 percent; p = 0.17). Management with unilateral mastectomy with reconstruction required an adjusted cumulative mean cost of $33,557. Contralateral prophylactic mastectomy with reconstruction was an additional $11,872 in expenditure (p < 0.001). The cost of initial procedures (mean difference, $6467) and secondary procedures (mean difference, $2455) were the greatest contributors to cost. CONCLUSIONS:In women with unilateral breast cancer, contralateral prophylactic mastectomy with reconstruction is more costly. The increased monetary cost of contralateral prophylactic mastectomy may be offset by improved quality of life. However, this financial reality is an important consideration when ongoing efforts toward reimbursement reform may not pay for contralateral prophylactic mastectomy if outcomes data are not presented to justify this procedure.
| S-EPMC5922428 | biostudies-literature
Project description:The use of contralateral prophylactic mastectomy (CPM) in the U.S. among patients with unilateral invasive breast cancer increased by 150% from 1993 to 2003. Although CPM has been shown to reduce the risk for developing contralateral breast cancer, there is conflicting evidence on whether or not it reduces breast cancer mortality or overall death. The increase in the CPM rate is especially concerning among women with early-stage sporadic breast cancer who have a minimal annual risk for developing contralateral breast cancer, and for many of these women the risk for distant metastatic disease outweighs the risk for contralateral breast cancer. The lack of information about the clinical value of CPM in women with sporadic breast cancer is an important public health problem. This review evaluates current data on the clinical indications for CPM and long-term patient satisfaction and psychosocial outcomes. Gaps in knowledge about the clinical value of CPM, including patient- and physician-related psychosocial factors that influence the decision-making process of CPM among women with sporadic breast cancer, are highlighted.
| S-EPMC3228146 | biostudies-other
Project description:BackgroundAn increasing number of patients undergo contralateral prophylactic mastectomy (CPM) for unilateral breast cancer. However, the benefit of CPM has not been quantified in the setting of contemporary breast cancer therapy.MethodsWe performed an analysis of 180 068 patients in the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) database, diagnosed with unilateral ductal breast carcinoma between 1998 and 2013 and treated with unilateral mastectomy (UM) or CPM. UM was performed in 146 213 patients (81.2%); CPM was performed in 33 855 patients (19.8%). Primary outcome of interest was cumulative incidence of a second primary breast cancer in the ipsilateral or contralateral breast greater than 3 months after initial diagnosis. Cumulative incidence analysis was based on a Cox proportional model to generate curves of second primary breast cancer in any breast, ipsilateral breast only, or contralateral breast only.ResultsPatients who underwent CPM had a significantly reduced incidence of second primary breast cancer 10 and 15 years after surgery (CPM 0.93% [0.73%, 1.12%] vs UM 4.44% [4.28%, 4.60%]). Patients who underwent CPM had significantly lower adjusted hazard of second primary breast cancer when compared with UM (HR 0.38 vs 1.0, P < .0001).ConclusionsCPM offers some protection from a second primary breast cancer, attributable to a reduced incidence in the contralateral breast. These findings provide additional information to providers and patients as they make decisions regarding surgical management. They should also be interpreted in the context of the absolute incidence of second primary breast cancer after UM and previous literature demonstrating no survival benefit.
| S-EPMC7643660 | biostudies-literature
Project description:OBJECTIVES:The study's goals were to characterize decisional conflict and preparedness for making the decision about having CPM among breast cancer patients considering CPM who do not carry cancer-predisposing mutation and to evaluate correlates of decisional conflict and preparedness. METHODS:93 women considering CPM completed a survey of decisional conflict and preparedness for the CPM decision, knowledge, perceived risk, self-efficacy, reasons for CPM, input from others and discussion with the doctor about CPM, and cancer worry. RESULTS:Between 8% and 27% of women endorsed elevated decisional conflict. Most women were satisfied with preparatory information that they were provided. Knowledge was low. Top reasons for choosing CPM were the desire for peace of mind, lowering the chance of another breast cancer, and improving survival. CONCLUSIONS:Decisional conflict is elevated in a subset of patients considering CPM. A more well-informed decision may be fostered by a comprehensive discussion about CPM with the patient's clinician, fostering self-efficacy in managing cancer worry, and helping patients understand their motivations for CPM. PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS:Clinicians working with breast cancer patients considering CPM should discuss the CPM decision, foster self-efficacy in managing cancer worry, and help patients understand their motivations for the surgery.
| S-EPMC7666877 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ImportanceRates of contralateral prophylactic mastectomy (CPM) have markedly increased but we know little about the influence of surgeons on variability of the procedure in the community.ObjectiveTo quantify the influence of the attending surgeon on rates of CPM and clinician attitudes that explained it.Design, setting, and participantsIn this population-based survey study, we identified 7810 women with stages 0 to II breast cancer treated in 2013 to 2015 through the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results registries of Georgia and Los Angeles County. Surveys were sent approximately 2 months after surgery. Surveys were also sent to 488 attending surgeons identified by the patients.Main outcomes and measuresWe conducted multilevel analyses to examine the impact of surgeon influence on variations in patient receipt of CPM using information from patient and surgeon surveys merged to Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results data.ResultsA total of 5080 women responded to the survey (70% response rate), and 377 surgeons responded (77% response rate). The mean (SD) age of responding women was 61.9 (11) years; 28% had an increased risk of second primary cancer, and 16% received CPM. Half of surgeons (52%) practiced for more than 20 years and 30% treated more than 50 new patients with breast cancer annually. Attending surgeon explained a large amount (20%) of the variation in CPM, controlling for patient factors. The odds of a patient receiving CPM increased almost 3-fold (odds ratio, 2.8; 95% CI, 2.1-3.4) if she saw a surgeon with a practice approach 1 SD above a surgeon with the mean CPM rate (independent of age, diagnosis date, BRCA status, and risk of second primary). One-quarter (25%) of the surgeon influence was explained by attending attitudes about initial recommendations for surgery and responses to patient requests for CPM. The estimated rate of CPM was 34% for surgeons who least favored initial breast conservation and were least reluctant to perform CPM vs 4% for surgeons who most favored initial breast conservation and were most reluctant to perform CPM.Conclusions and relevanceIn this study, attending surgeons exerted influence on the likelihood of receipt of CPM after a breast cancer diagnosis. Variations in surgeon attitudes about recommendations for surgery and response to patient requests for CPM explain a substantial amount of this influence.
| S-EPMC5833615 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Purpose The incidence of contralateral prophylactic mastectomy (CPM) has continued to increase. We prospectively examined psychosocial outcomes before and up to 18 months after surgery in women who did or did not have CPM. Methods Women with unilateral, nonhereditary breast cancer completed questionnaires before and 1, 6, 12, and 18 months after surgery. Primary psychosocial measures were cancer worry and cancer-specific distress. Secondary measures were body image, quality of life (QOL), decisional satisfaction, and decisional regret. Results A total of 288 women (mean age, 56 years; 58% non-Hispanic white) provided questionnaire data, of whom 50 underwent CPM. Before surgery, women who subsequently received CPM had higher cancer distress ( P = .04), cancer worry ( P < .001), and body image concerns ( P < .001) than women who did not have CPM. In a multivariable repeated measures model adjusted for time, age, race/ethnicity, and stage, CPM was associated with more body image distress ( P < .001) and poorer QOL ( P = .02). There was a significant interaction between time point and CPM group for cancer worry ( Pinteraction < .001), suggesting that CPM patients had higher presurgery cancer worry, but their postsurgery worry decreased over time and was similar to the worry of patients who did not have CPM. QOL was similar between CPM groups before surgery but declined 1 month after surgery and remained lower than patients who did not have CPM after surgery ( Pinteraction = .05). Conclusion These results may facilitate informed discussions between women and their physicians regarding CPM. Fear and worry may be foremost concerns at the time surgical decisions are made, when women may not anticipate the adverse future effect of CPM on body image and QOL.
| S-EPMC6118404 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Chinese translationRates of contralateral prophylactic mastectomy (CPM) have increased dramatically, particularly among younger women with breast cancer, but little is known about how women approach the decision to have CPM.To examine preferences, knowledge, decision making, and experiences of young women with breast cancer who choose CPM.Cross-sectional survey.8 academic and community medical centers that enrolled 550 women diagnosed with breast cancer at age 40 years or younger between November 2006 and November 2010.123 women without known bilateral breast cancer who reported having bilateral mastectomy.A 1-time, 23-item survey that included items related to decision making, knowledge, risk perception, and breast cancer worry.Most women indicated that desires to decrease their risk for contralateral breast cancer (98%) and improve survival (94%) were extremely or very important factors in their decision to have CPM. However, only 18% indicated that women with breast cancer who undergo CPM live longer than those who do not. BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutation carriers more accurately perceived their risk for contralateral breast cancer, whereas women without a known mutation substantially overestimated this risk.The survey, which was administered a median of 2 years after surgery, was not validated, and some questions might have been misinterpreted by respondents or subject to recall bias. Generalizability of the findings might be limited.Despite knowing that CPM does not clearly improve survival, women who have the procedure do so, in part, to extend their lives. Many women overestimate their actual risk for cancer in the unaffected breast. Interventions aimed at improving risk communication in an effort to promote evidence-based decision making are warranted.Susan G. Komen for the Cure.
| S-EPMC3968260 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundRates of contralateral prophylactic mastectomy (CPM)-removal of the healthy breast following breast cancer diagnosis-have increased, particularly among women for whom CPM provides no survival benefit. Affective (i.e., emotional) decision making is often blamed for this increase. We studied whether greater negative breast cancer affect could motivate uptake of CPM through increased cancer risk perceptions and biased treatment evaluations.MethodsWe randomly assigned healthy women with average breast-cancer risk (N = 1030; Mage = 44.14, SD = 9.23 y) to 1 of 3 affect conditions (negative v. neutral v. positive narrative manipulation) in a hypothetical online experiment in which they were asked to imagine being diagnosed with cancer in one breast. We assessed 1) treatment choice, 2) affect toward CPM, and 3) perceived risk of future breast cancer in each breast (cancer affected and healthy) following lumpectomy, single mastectomy, and CPM.ResultsThe manipulation caused women in the negative and neutral narrative conditions (26.9% and 26.4%, respectively) to choose CPM more compared with the positive narrative condition (19.1%). Across conditions, women's CPM affect did not differ. However, exploratory analyses addressing a possible association of affect toward cancer-related targets suggested that women in the negative narrative condition may have felt more positively toward CPM than women in the positive narrative condition. The manipulation did not have significant effects on breast cancer risk perceptions.LimitationsThe manipulation of affect had a small effect size, possibly due to the hypothetical nature of this study and/or strong a priori knowledge and attitudes about breast cancer and its treatment options.ConclusionIncreased negative affect toward breast cancer increased choice of CPM over other surgical options and might have motivated more positive affective evaluations of CPM.HighlightsThis study used narratives to elicit different levels of negative integral affect toward breast cancer to investigate the effects of affect on breast cancer treatment choices.Increased negative affect toward breast cancer increased the choice of double mastectomy over lumpectomy and single mastectomy to treat a hypothetical, early-stage cancer.The narrative manipulation of negative affect toward breast cancer did not change the perceived risks of future cancer following any of the surgical interventions.Negative affect toward breast cancer may have biased affective evaluations of double mastectomy.
| S-EPMC9898882 | biostudies-literature
Project description:PurposeDespite lack of survival benefit, demand for contralateral prophylactic mastectomy (CPM) to treat unilateral breast cancer remains high. High uptake of CPM has been demonstrated in Midwestern rural women. Greater travel distance for surgical treatment is associated with CPM. Our objective was to examine the relationship between rurality and travel distance to surgery with CPM.MethodsWomen diagnosed with stages I-III unilateral breast cancer between 2007 and 2017 were identified using the National Cancer Database. Logistic regression was used to model likelihood of CPM based on rurality, proximity to metropolitan centers, and travel distance. A multinomial logistic regression model compared factors associated with CPM with reconstruction versus other surgical options.ResultsBoth rurality (OR 1.10, 95% CI 1.06-1.15 for non-metro/rural vs. metro) and travel distance (OR 1.37, 95% CI 1.33-1.41 for those who traveled 50 + miles vs. < 30 miles) were independently associated with CPM. For women who traveled 30 + miles, odds of receiving CPM were highest for non-metro/rural women (OR 1.33 for 30-49 miles, OR 1.57 for 50 + miles; reference: metro women traveling < 30 miles). Non-metro/rural women who received reconstruction were more likely to undergo CPM regardless of travel distance (ORs 1.11-1.21). Both metro and metro-adjacent women who received reconstruction were more likely to undergo CPM only if they traveled 30 + miles (ORs 1.24-1.30).ConclusionThe impact of travel distance on likelihood of CPM varies by patient rurality and receipt of reconstruction. Further research is needed to understand how patient residence, travel burden, and geographic access to comprehensive cancer care services, including reconstruction, influence patient decisions regarding surgery.
| S-EPMC10689552 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ImportanceGuidelines assert that contralateral prophylactic mastectomy (CPM) should be discouraged in patients without an elevated risk for a second primary breast cancer. However, little is known about the impact of surgeons discouraging CPM on patient care satisfaction or decisions to seek treatment from another clinician.ObjectiveTo examine the association between patient report of first-surgeon recommendation against CPM and the extent of discussion about it with 3 outcomes: patient satisfaction with surgery decisions, receipt of a second opinion, and receipt of surgery by a second surgeon.Design, setting, and participantsThis population-based survey study was conducted in Georgia and California. We identified 3880 women with stages 0 to II breast cancer treated in 2013-2014 through the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results registries of Georgia and Los Angeles County. Surveys were sent approximately 2 months after surgery (71% response rate, n = 2578). In this analysis conducted from February to May 2016, we included patients with unilateral breast cancer who considered CPM (n = 1140). Patients were selected between July 2013 and September 2014.Main outcomes and measuresWe examined report of surgeon recommendations, level of discussion about CPM, satisfaction with surgical decision making, receipt of second surgical opinion, and surgery from a second surgeon.ResultsThe mean (SD) age of patients included in this study was 56 (10.6) years. About one-quarter of patients (26.7%; n = 304) reported that their first surgeon recommended against CPM and 30.1% (n = 343) reported no substantial discussion about CPM. Dissatisfaction with surgery decision was uncommon (7.6%; n = 130), controlling for clinical and demographic characteristics. One-fifth of patients (20.6%; n = 304) had a second opinion about surgical options and 9.8% (n = 158) had surgery performed by a second surgeon. Dissatisfaction was very low (3.9%; n = 42) among patients who reported that their surgeon did not recommend against CPM but discussed it. Dissatisfaction was substantively higher for those whose surgeon recommended against CPM with no substantive discussion (14.5%; n = 37). Women who received a recommendation against CPM were not more likely to seek a second opinion (17.1% among patients with recommendation against CPM vs 15.1% of others; P = .52) nor to receive surgery by a second surgeon (7.9% among patients with recommendation against CPM vs 8.3% of others; P = .88).Conclusions and relevanceMost patients are satisfied with surgical decision making. First-surgeon recommendation against CPM does not appear to substantively increase patient dissatisfaction, use of second opinions, or loss of the patient to a second surgeon.
| S-EPMC5520628 | biostudies-literature