Women’s Decision Making about Risk-Reducing Strategies in the Context of Hereditary Breast and Ovarian Cancer: A Systematic Review
- 702 Downloads
Women who have a mutation in the BRCA1 or BRCA2 genes have up to an 87% lifetime risk of breast cancer and up to a 40% lifetime risk of ovarian cancer. Cancer prevention and early detection strategies are often considered by these women to address this heightened risk. Risk-reducing strategies include risk-reducing mastectomy and oophorectomy, breast and ovarian cancer screening, and chemoprevention. This systematic literature review summarizes the factors and contexts that influence decision making related to cancer risk-reducing strategies among women at high-risk for hereditary breast and ovarian cancer. In the 43 published research articles reviewed, three main types of factors are identified that influence high-risk women’s decisions about risk-reducing strategies: a) medical and physical factors, b) psychological factors and c) social context factors. How these factors operate in women’s lives over time remains unknown, and would best be elucidated through prospective, longitudinal research, as well as qualitative research.
KeywordsBRCA1 BRCA2 Screening Risk-reducing mastectomy Risk-reducing oophorectomy Chemoprevention Risk reduction Decision making
This project was completed while A.F. Howard held a Canadian Institute for Health Research Doctoral Research Award, a Canadian Institute for Health Research (CIHR) Psychosocial Oncology Research Training Fellowship, and a Michael Smith Foundation for Health Research Senior Graduate Studentship. Dr. Balneaves holds a CIHR New Investigator award. We would like to thank Dr. Gregory Haljan and the anonymous reviewers for their helpful comments on different versions of this manuscript.
- Altschuer, A., & Somkin, C. P. (2005). Women’s decision making about whether or not to use breast cancer chemoprevention. Journal of Women's Health, 41(2), 81–95.Google Scholar
- American Cancer Society. (2008). American Cancer Society guidelines for the early detection of cancer. Retrieved from http://www.cancer.org/docroot/ped/content/ped_2_3x_acs_cancer_detection_guidelines_36.asp?sitearea=PED&viewmode=print&.
- Friebel, T. M., Domchek, S. M., Neuhausen, S. L., Wagner, T., Evans, D. G., Isaacs, C., et al. (2007). Bilateral risk-reducing oophorectomy and bilateral risk-reducing mastectomy in a prospective cohort of unaffected BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers. Clinical Breast Cancer, 7(11), 875–882.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- Horsman, D., Wilson, B. J., Avard, D., Meschino, W. S., Kim-Sing, C., Plante, M., et al. (2007). Clinical management recommendations for surveillance and risk-reduction strategies for hereditary breast and ovarian cancer among individuals carrying a deleterious BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutation. Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology Canada, 29(1), 45–60.PubMedGoogle Scholar
- Hurley, K. E., Miller, S. M., Costalas, J. W., Gillespie, D., & Daly, M. B. (2001). Anxiety/uncertainty reduction as a motivation for interest in risk-reducing oophorectomy in women with a family history of ovarian cancer. Journal of Women’s Health Gender-Based Medicine, 10(2), 189–199.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- Lodder, L. N., Frets, P. G., Trijsburg, R. W., Meijers-Heijboer, E. J., Klijn, J. G., Seynaeve, C., et al. (2002). One year follow-up of women opting for presymptomatic testing for BRCA1 and BRCA2: emotional impact of the test outcome and decisions on risk management (surveillance or risk-reducing surgery). Breast Cancer Research and Treatment, 73(2), 97–112.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- Madalinska, J. B., van Beurden, M., Bleiker, M. A., Valdimarsdottir, H. B., Lubsen-Brandsma, L., Massuger, L. F., et al. (2007). Predictors of risk-reducing bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy compared with gynecologic screening use in BRCA1/2 mutation carriers. Journal of Clinical Oncology, 25, 301–307.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- Meijers-Heijboer, H., Brekelmans, C. T., Menke-Pluymers, M., Seynaeve, C., Baalbergen, A., Burger, C., et al. (2003). Use of genetic testing and risk-reducing mastectomy and oophorectomy in women with breast or ovarian cancer from families with a BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutation. Journal of Clinical Oncology, 21(9), 1675–1681.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- Meiser, B., Butow, P., Barratt, A., Friedlander, M., Gattas, M., Kirk, J., et al. (1999). Attitudes toward risk-reducing oophorectomy and screening utilization in women at increased risk of developing hereditary breast/ovarian cancer. Gynecologic Oncology, 75(1), 122–129.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- National Comprehensive Cancer Network. (2008). NCCN clinical practice guidelines in oncology. Genetic/familial high-risk assessment: breast and ovarian. Retrieved from http://www.nccn.org/professionals/physician_gls/PDF/genetics_screening.pdf.
- O’Connor, A. M. (2006). Ottawa decision support framework to address decisional conflict. Retrieved from http://www.ohri.ca/decisionaid.com.
- Phillips, K. A., Jenkins, M. A., Lindeman, G. J., McLachlan, S. A., McKinley, J. M., Weideman, P. C., et al. (2006). Risk-reducing surgery, screening and chemoprevention practices of BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers: a prospective cohort study. Clinical Genetics, 70(3), 198–206.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- Rebbeck, T. R., Friebel, T., Lynch, H. T., Neuhausen, S. L., van’t Veer, L., Garber, J. E., et al. (2004). Bilateral prophylactic mastectomy reduces breast cancer risk in BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers: the PROSE study group. Journal of Clinical Oncology, 22(6), 1055–1062.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- Unic, I., Verhoef, L. C. G., Stalmeier, P. F. M., & van Daal, V. A. J. (2000). Risk-reducing mastectomy or screening in women suspected to have the BRCA1/2 mutation: a prospective pilot study of women’s treatment choices and medical-analytic recommendations. Medical Decision Making, 20, 251–262.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- van Dijk, S., Otten, W., Zoeteweij, M. W., Timmermans, D. R., van Asperen, C. J., Breuning, M. H., et al. (2003). Genetic counselling and the intention to undergo risk-reducing mastectomy: effects of a breast cancer risk assessment. British Journal of Cancer, 88(11), 1675–1681.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar