Cargando…

Patient opinions on contralateral prophylactic mastectomy: A patient-driven discussion in need of tuning?

BACKGROUND: Rates of contralateral prophylactic mastectomy (CPM) are increasing among women with unilateral breast cancer despite low rates of contralateral recurrence and lack of survival benefit. We aimed to investigate the decisional needs and supports required to ensure adequate and quality deci...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Brown, Zachary M., Schellenberg, Angela E., Cordeiro, Erin, Holloway, Claire M.B., Scheer, Adena S., Eisen, Andrea
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: CMA Impact Inc. 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8979655/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35365498
http://dx.doi.org/10.1503/cjs.003420
_version_ 1784681220937875456
author Brown, Zachary M.
Schellenberg, Angela E.
Cordeiro, Erin
Holloway, Claire M.B.
Scheer, Adena S.
Eisen, Andrea
author_facet Brown, Zachary M.
Schellenberg, Angela E.
Cordeiro, Erin
Holloway, Claire M.B.
Scheer, Adena S.
Eisen, Andrea
author_sort Brown, Zachary M.
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Rates of contralateral prophylactic mastectomy (CPM) are increasing among women with unilateral breast cancer despite low rates of contralateral recurrence and lack of survival benefit. We aimed to investigate the decisional needs and supports required to ensure adequate and quality decision-making by patients with breast cancer facing the decision regarding CPM. METHODS: In this qualitative study, we used semistructured interviews developed with the use of the Ottawa Decision Support Framework to investigate the decisional needs and supports of women (aged > 18 yr) with nonhereditary breast cancer who had previously discussed CPM with their care provider. Patients were recruited from 2 academic cancer centres in Toronto, Ontario. Interviews were conducted between June 2016 and October 2017. We analyzed responses to the open-ended questions iteratively and inductively to establish major themes within the results. RESULTS: Ten patients were recruited. Eight patients reported having initiated the discussion about CPM. Although most patients reported feeling supported, 6 mentioned some degree of decisional conflict. Cancer risk reduction was the most commonly reported perceived benefit of CPM (9 patients), followed by improved psychologic well-being (7). Most patients (8) did not mention the lack of survival benefit of CPM as a disadvantage of the procedure. Patients indicated that information resources (in 8 cases) and improved counselling from their health care team (in 7) would assist in decision-making. CONCLUSION: Our findings illustrate the disconnect between true and perceived risks (i.e., surgical risk) and benefits (potential recurrence and survival benefit) of CPM, which is not being managed adequately despite support from the health care team. A decision aid may address unmet patient need by providing a reliable resource regarding the benefits and risks of this procedure, while helping patients understand their values and realign their expectations.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-8979655
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2022
publisher CMA Impact Inc.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-89796552022-04-08 Patient opinions on contralateral prophylactic mastectomy: A patient-driven discussion in need of tuning? Brown, Zachary M. Schellenberg, Angela E. Cordeiro, Erin Holloway, Claire M.B. Scheer, Adena S. Eisen, Andrea Can J Surg Research BACKGROUND: Rates of contralateral prophylactic mastectomy (CPM) are increasing among women with unilateral breast cancer despite low rates of contralateral recurrence and lack of survival benefit. We aimed to investigate the decisional needs and supports required to ensure adequate and quality decision-making by patients with breast cancer facing the decision regarding CPM. METHODS: In this qualitative study, we used semistructured interviews developed with the use of the Ottawa Decision Support Framework to investigate the decisional needs and supports of women (aged > 18 yr) with nonhereditary breast cancer who had previously discussed CPM with their care provider. Patients were recruited from 2 academic cancer centres in Toronto, Ontario. Interviews were conducted between June 2016 and October 2017. We analyzed responses to the open-ended questions iteratively and inductively to establish major themes within the results. RESULTS: Ten patients were recruited. Eight patients reported having initiated the discussion about CPM. Although most patients reported feeling supported, 6 mentioned some degree of decisional conflict. Cancer risk reduction was the most commonly reported perceived benefit of CPM (9 patients), followed by improved psychologic well-being (7). Most patients (8) did not mention the lack of survival benefit of CPM as a disadvantage of the procedure. Patients indicated that information resources (in 8 cases) and improved counselling from their health care team (in 7) would assist in decision-making. CONCLUSION: Our findings illustrate the disconnect between true and perceived risks (i.e., surgical risk) and benefits (potential recurrence and survival benefit) of CPM, which is not being managed adequately despite support from the health care team. A decision aid may address unmet patient need by providing a reliable resource regarding the benefits and risks of this procedure, while helping patients understand their values and realign their expectations. CMA Impact Inc. 2022-04-01 /pmc/articles/PMC8979655/ /pubmed/35365498 http://dx.doi.org/10.1503/cjs.003420 Text en © 2022 CMA Impact Inc. or its licensors https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/This is an Open Access article distributed in accordance with the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY-NC-ND 4.0) licence, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided that the original publication is properly cited, the use is noncommercial (i.e., research or educational use), and no modifications or adaptations are made. See: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/.
spellingShingle Research
Brown, Zachary M.
Schellenberg, Angela E.
Cordeiro, Erin
Holloway, Claire M.B.
Scheer, Adena S.
Eisen, Andrea
Patient opinions on contralateral prophylactic mastectomy: A patient-driven discussion in need of tuning?
title Patient opinions on contralateral prophylactic mastectomy: A patient-driven discussion in need of tuning?
title_full Patient opinions on contralateral prophylactic mastectomy: A patient-driven discussion in need of tuning?
title_fullStr Patient opinions on contralateral prophylactic mastectomy: A patient-driven discussion in need of tuning?
title_full_unstemmed Patient opinions on contralateral prophylactic mastectomy: A patient-driven discussion in need of tuning?
title_short Patient opinions on contralateral prophylactic mastectomy: A patient-driven discussion in need of tuning?
title_sort patient opinions on contralateral prophylactic mastectomy: a patient-driven discussion in need of tuning?
topic Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8979655/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35365498
http://dx.doi.org/10.1503/cjs.003420
work_keys_str_mv AT brownzacharym patientopinionsoncontralateralprophylacticmastectomyapatientdrivendiscussioninneedoftuning
AT schellenbergangelae patientopinionsoncontralateralprophylacticmastectomyapatientdrivendiscussioninneedoftuning
AT cordeiroerin patientopinionsoncontralateralprophylacticmastectomyapatientdrivendiscussioninneedoftuning
AT hollowayclairemb patientopinionsoncontralateralprophylacticmastectomyapatientdrivendiscussioninneedoftuning
AT scheeradenas patientopinionsoncontralateralprophylacticmastectomyapatientdrivendiscussioninneedoftuning
AT eisenandrea patientopinionsoncontralateralprophylacticmastectomyapatientdrivendiscussioninneedoftuning