Skip to main content
Hauptrubriken
CME Facharzt-Training Webinare Zeitschriften Bücher e.Medpedia Podcast
Service
Jobbörse Info & Hilfe
Fachgebiete
Anästhesiologie Allgemeinmedizin Arbeitsmedizin Augenheilkunde Chirurgie Dermatologie Gynäkologie und Geburtshilfe HNO Innere Medizin Kardiologie Neurologie Onkologie und Hämatologie Orthopädie und Unfallchirurgie Pädiatrie Pathologie Psychiatrie Radiologie Rechtsmedizin Urologie Zahnmedizin
Themen
Klimawandel und Gesundheit Neues aus dem Markt COVID-19 Praxis und Beruf Seltene Erkrankungen GOÄ & EBM Panorama
Sammlungen
Kasuistiken Algorithmen & Infografiken Blickdiagnosen Arthropedia FlapFinder (für Dermatochirurgen) Videos Kongressberichterstattung Medizin für Apothekerinnen und Apotheker Für Ärztinnen und Ärzte in Weiterbildung Für Medizinstudierende
Erweiterte Suche
Anmelden
nach oben
Annals of Surgical Oncology
Erschienen in: Annals of Surgical Oncology 2/2015

01.02.2015 | Breast Oncology

‘Taking Control of Cancer’: Understanding Women’s Choice for Mastectomy

verfasst von: Andrea M. Covelli, MD, PhD(c), Nancy N. Baxter, MD, PhD, Margaret I. Fitch, David R. McCready, MD, MSc, Frances C. Wright, MD, MEd

Erschienen in: Annals of Surgical Oncology | Ausgabe 2/2015

Einloggen, um Zugang zu erhalten

Abstract

Purpose

Rates of both unilateral (UM) and contralateral prophylactic mastectomy (CPM) for unilateral early-stage breast cancer (ESBC) have been increasing since 2003. Recent studies suggest that this increase may be due to women choosing UM and CPM because of fear. We conducted an in-depth qualitative study to identify those factors influencing a woman’s choice for more extensive surgery.

Methods

Semi-structured interviews were conducted with breast cancer patients to examine the experiences, decision making, and choice of UM ± CPM for the treatment of ESBC. Purposive sampling identified suitable candidates for breast-conserving therapy (BCT) who underwent UM ± CPM. Interviews were guided by grounded theory methodology, and constant comparative analysis identified key concepts and themes.

Results

Data saturation was achieved after 29 interviews. ‘Taking control of cancer’ was the dominant theme. Fear of breast cancer was expressed at diagnosis and remained throughout decision making. Personal experiences of family or friends ‘living with cancer’ were the most influential source of information during the decision-making process. Fear translated into an overestimated risk of recurrence, contralateral breast cancer (CBC), and death. Despite surgeons discussing equivalent survival with BCT, UM ± CPM patients believed that by choosing UM ± CPM they would eliminate recurrence, CBC and live longer. By choosing more extensive surgery, women were actively trying to control cancer outcomes as more surgery was believed to offer greater survival.

Conclusions

Women seek UM and CPM to take control of cancer and manage their fear. It is important for surgeons to understand how personal experiences shape women’s choice for UM ± CPM to facilitate informed decision making.
Literatur
1.
National Institutes of Health. Treatment of early-stage breast cancer. June 18–21 1990. JAMA. 1991;265:391–5.
2.
Lazovich D, Solomon CC, Thomas DB, et al. Breast conservation therapy in the United States following the 1990 NIH Consensus Development Conference. Cancer. 1999;86:628–37.PubMedCrossRef
3.
Gaudette LA, Goa RN, Spence A, Shi F, Joahnesen H, et al. Declining use of mastectomy for invasive breast cancer in Canada, 1981–2000. Can J Public Health. 2004;95:336–40.PubMed
4.
5.
Harries SA, Lawrence RN, Scrivener R, Fieldman NR, Kissin MW. A survey of the management of breast cancer in England and Wales. Ann R Coll Surg Engl. 1996;78:197–202.PubMedCentralPubMed
6.
Neuburger J, Macneill F, Jeevan R, et al. Trends in the use of bilateral mastectomy in England from 2002 to 2011: retrospective analysis of hospital episode statistics. BMJ Open. 2013;3:e003179.PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRef
7.
Jones NB, Wilson J, Kotur L, et al. Contralateral prophylactic mastectomy for unilateral breast cancer: an increasing trend at a single institution. Ann Surg Oncol. 2009;16:2691–96.PubMedCrossRef
8.
Tuttle TM, Habermann EB, Grund EH, et al. Increasing use of contralateral prophylactic mastectomy for breast cancer patients: a trend toward more aggressive surgical treatment. J Clin Oncol. 2007;25:5203–09.PubMedCrossRef
9.
Dragun AE, Huang B, Tucker TC, et al. Increasing mastectomy rates among all age groups for early stage breast cancer: a 10-year study of surgical choice. Breast J. 2012;18:318–25.PubMedCrossRef
10.
Dragun AE, Pan J, Riley EC, et al. Increasing use of elective mastectomy and contralateral prophylactic surgery among breast conservation candidates. Am J Clin Oncol. 2013;36:375–80.PubMedCrossRef
11.
Yao K, Stewart AK, Winchester DJ, et al. Trends in contralateral prophylactic mastectomy for unilateral cancer: a report from the National Cancer Data Base, 1998–2007. Ann Surg Oncol. 2010;17:2554–62.PubMedCrossRef
12.
Gomez SL, Lichtensztajn D, Kurian AW, et al. Increasing mastectomy rates for early-stage breast cancer? Population-based trends from California. J Clin Oncol. 2010;26:e155–57.CrossRef
13.
Mahmood U, Hanlon AL, Koshy M, et al. Increasing national mastectomy rates for the treatment of early stage breast cancer. Ann Surg Oncol. 2013;20:1436–43.PubMedCrossRef
14.
15.
16.
17.
King TA, Sakr R, Patil S, et al. Clinical management factors contribute to the decision for contralateral prophylactic mastectomy. J Clin Oncol. 2011;29:2158–64.PubMedCrossRef
18.
Katipamula R, Degnim AC, Hoskin T, et al. Trends in mastectomy rates at the Mayo Clinic Rochester: effect of surgical year and preoperative magnetic resonance imaging. J Clin Oncol. 2009;27:4082–88.PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRef
19.
Brennan ME, Houssami N, Lord S, et al. Magnetic resonance imaging screening of the contralateral breast in women with newly diagnosed breast cancer: systematic review and meta-analysis of incremental cancer detection and impact on surgical management. J Clin Oncol. 2009;27:5640–9.PubMedCrossRef
20.
Benedict S, Cole DJ, Baron L, et al. Factors influencing choice between mastectomy and lumpectomy for women in the Carolinas. J Surg Oncol. 2001;76:6–12.PubMedCrossRef
21.
Nekhlyudov L, Bower M, Herrinton LJ, et al. Women’s decision-making roles regarding contralateral prophylactic mastectomy. J Natl Cancer Inst Monogr. 2005;35:55–60.PubMedCrossRef
22.
Morrow M, Jagsi R, Alderman AK, et al. Surgeon recommendations and receipt of mastectomy for treatment of breast cancer. JAMA. 2009;302:1551–6.PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRef
23.
Arrington AK, Jarosek SL, Virnig BA, et al. Patient and surgeon characteristics associated with increased use of contralateral prophylactic mastectomy in patients with breast cancer. Ann Surg Oncol. 2009;16:2697–704.PubMedCrossRef
24.
Houssami N, Turner R, Morrow M. Preoperative magnetic resonance imaging in breast cancer: meta-analysis of surgical outcomes. Ann Surg. 2013;257:249–55.PubMedCrossRef
25.
Hawley ST, Jagsi R, Morrow M, et al. Social and clinical determinants of contralateral prophylactic mastectomy. JAMA Surg. Epub 21 May 2014.
26.
National Comprehensive Cancer Network. NCCN clinical practice guidelines in oncology: breast cancer. National Comprehensive Cancer Network; 2014.
27.
Coyne IT. Sampling in qualitative research. Purposeful and theoretical sampling: merging or clear boundaries? J Adv Nurs. 1997;26:623–30.PubMedCrossRef
28.
29.
Charmaz K. Constructing grounded theory. Thousand Oaks: Sage; 2009.
30.
McCann TV, Clarke E. Grounded theory in nursing research. Part 1: methodology. Nurse Res. 2002;11:7–16.CrossRef
31.
Lingard L, Albert M, Levinson W. Grounded theory, mixed methods, and action research. BMJ. 2008;337:a567.PubMedCrossRef
32.
Guest G. How many interviews are enough? An experiment with data saturation and variability. Field Methods. 2006;18:59–82.CrossRef
33.
Kuzel A. Sampling in qualitative inquiry. In: Crabtree B, Miller W, eds. Doing qualitative research. Newbury Park: Sage; 1992. pp. 31–44.
34.
Charmaz K. Grounded theory in the 21st century. In: Denzin NK, Lincoln YS, eds. Handbook of qualitative research. Thousand Oaks: Sage; 2000.
35.
Rosenberg SM, Tracy MS, Meyer ME, et al. Perceptions, knowledge, and satisfaction with contralateral prophylactic mastectomy among young women with breast cancer. Ann Intern Med. 2013;159:373–81.PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRef
36.
Bernhardt BA, Geller G, Holtzman NA, et al. Decoding informed consent: insights from women regarding breast cancer susceptibility testing. Hastings Cent Rep. 1997;27:28–33.PubMedCrossRef
37.
Kenen R, Arden-Jones A, Eeles R. We are talking, but are they listening? Communication patterns in families with a history of breast/ovarian cancer. Psychooncology. 2004;13:335–45.PubMedCrossRef
38.
d’Agincourt-Canning L. The effect of experiential knowledge on construction of risk perception in hereditary breast/ovarian cancer. J Genet Couns. 2005;14:55–69.
39.
Zikmund-Fisher BJ, Fagerlin A, Ubel PA. Risky feelings: why a 6 % risk of cancer does not always feel like 6%. Patient Educ Couns. 2010;81(Suppl):S87–93.
40.
Redelmeier DA, Rozin P, Kahneman D. Understanding patients’ decisions: cognitive and emotional perspectives. JAMA. 1993;270:72–76.PubMedCrossRef
41.
Borgida E, Nisbett RE. The differential impact of abstract vs. concrete information on decisions. J Appl Psychol. 1977;7:258–71.
42.
Petrie KJ, Weinman J. Patients’ perceptions of their illness. Curr Direct Psych Sci. 2012;21:60–65.CrossRef
43.
Broadbent E, Petrie KJ, Main J, et al. The brief illness perception questionnaire. J Psychosom Res. 2006;60:631–7.PubMedCrossRef
44.
Folkman S, Lazarus RS, Gruen RJ, et al. Appraisal, coping, health status, and psychological symptoms. J Pers Soc Psychol. 1986;50:571–79.PubMedCrossRef
45.
46.
Henselmans I, Sanderman R, Helgeson VS, et al. Personal control over the cure of breast cancer: adaptiveness, underlying beliefs and correlates. Psychooncology. 2010;19:525–34.PubMedCrossRef
47.
Tomich PL, Helgeson VS. Cognitive adaptation theory and breast cancer recurrence: are there limits? J Consult Clin Psychol. 2006;74:980–7.PubMedCrossRef
48.
Lostumbo L, Carbine NE, Wallace J. Prophylactic mastectomy for the prevention of breast cancer. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2010:(11):CD002748.
49.
Nichols HB, Berrington de Gonzalez A, Lacey JV Jr, et al. Declining incidence of contralateral breast cancer in the United States from 1975 to 2006. J Clin Oncol. 2011;29:1564–9.
50.
Forbes JF, Cuzick J, Buzdar A, Arimidex, Tamoxifen, Alone or in Combination (ATAC) Trialists’ Group, et al. Effect of anastrozole and tamoxifen as adjuvant treatment for early-stage breast cancer: 100-month analysis of the ATAC trial. Lancet Oncol. 2008;9:45–53.PubMedCrossRef
51.
Gao X, Fisher SG, Emami B. Risk of second primary cancer in the contralateral breast in women treated for early-stage breast cancer. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2003;56:1038–45.PubMedCrossRef
52.
Rosen PP, Groshen S, Kinne DW, et al. Factors influencing prognosis in node-negative breast carcinoma: analysis of 767 T1N0M0/T2N0M0 patients with long-term follow-up. J Clin Oncol. 1993;11:2090–100.PubMed
53.
Osman F, Saleh F, Jackson TD, et al. Increased postoperative complications in bilateral mastectomy patients compared to unilateral mastectomy. Ann Surg Oncol. 2013;20:3212–7.PubMedCrossRef
54.
Miller ME, Czechura T, Martz B, et al. Operative risks associated with contralateral prophylactic mastectomy: a single institution experience. Ann Surg Oncol. 2013;20:4113–20.PubMedCrossRef
55.
Goldflam K, Hunt KK, Gershenwald JE, et al. Contralateral prophylactic mastectomy. Predictors of significant histologic findings. Cancer. 2004;101:1977–86.PubMedCrossRef
56.
Brummett CM. Chronic pain following breast surgery. Tech Reg Anesth Pain Manag. 2011;15:124–32.CrossRef
57.
Gartner R, Jensen M-B, Nielsen J, et al. Prevalence of and factors associated with persistent pain following breast cancer surgery. JAMA. 2009;302:1985–92.PubMedCrossRef
58.
Tasmuth T, Von Smitten K, Hietanen P, et al. Pain and other symptoms after different treatment modalities of breast cancer. Ann Oncol. 1995;6:453–59.PubMed
59.
Altschuler A, Nekhlyudov L, Rolnick SJ, et al. Positive, negative, and disparate: women’s differing long-term psychosocial experiences of bilateral or contralateral prophylactic mastectomy. Breast J. 2008;14:25–32.PubMedCrossRef
60.
Frost MH, Hoskin TL, Hartmann LC, et al. Contralateral prophylactic mastectomy: long-term consistency of satisfaction and adverse effects and the significance of informed decision-making, quality of life, and personality traits. Ann Surg Oncol. 2011;18:3110–6.PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRef
61.
Whelan T, Levine M, Willan A, et al. Effect of a decision aid on knowledge and treatment decision making for breast cancer surgery: a randomized trial. JAMA. 2004;292:435–41.PubMedCrossRef
62.
Shaffer VA, Tomek S, Hulsey L. The effect of narrative information in a publicly available patient decision aid for early-stage breast cancer. Health Commun. 2014;29:64–73.PubMedCrossRef
63.
Ubel PA, Jepson C, Baron J. The inclusion of patient testimonials in decision aids: effects on treatment choices. Med Decis Making. 2001;21:60–68.CrossRef
64.
Bekker HL, Winterbottom AE, Butow P, et al. Do personal stories make patient decision aids more effective? A critical review of theory and evidence. BMC Med Inform Decis Mak. 2013;13(Suppl 2):S9.PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRef
Metadaten
Titel
‘Taking Control of Cancer’: Understanding Women’s Choice for Mastectomy
verfasst von
Andrea M. Covelli, MD, PhD(c)
Nancy N. Baxter, MD, PhD
Margaret I. Fitch
David R. McCready, MD, MSc
Frances C. Wright, MD, MEd
Publikationsdatum
01.02.2015
Verlag
Springer US
Erschienen in
Annals of Surgical Oncology / Ausgabe 2/2015
Print ISSN: 1068-9265
Elektronische ISSN: 1534-4681
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1245/s10434-014-4033-7

Weitere Artikel der Ausgabe 2/2015

Annals of Surgical Oncology 2/2015 Zur Ausgabe

Endocrine Tumors

False-Positive Rate of Positron Emission Tomography/Computed Tomography for Presumed Solitary Metastatic Adrenal Disease in Patients with Known Malignancy

Melanomas

In-transit Melanoma Metastases: Incidence, Prognosis, and the Role of Lymphadenectomy

Breast Oncology

Nipple-Sparing Mastectomy in BRCA1/2 Mutation Carriers: An Interim Analysis and Review of the Literature

Translational Research and Biomarkers

Decreased Expression of FOXJ1 is a Potential Prognostic Predictor for Progression and Poor Survival of Gastric Cancer

Colorectal Cancer

Clinical Significance of Thrombocytosis Before Preoperative Chemoradiotherapy in Rectal Cancer: Predicting Pathologic Tumor Response and Oncologic Outcome

Endocrine Tumors

Assessing Safety and Outcomes in Outpatient versus Inpatient Thyroidectomy using the NSQIP: A Propensity Score Matched Analysis of 16,370 Patients

Neu im Fachgebiet Chirurgie

23.04.2024 | Ablationstherapie | Nachrichten

Wie erfolgreich ist eine Re-Ablation nach Rezidiv?

23.04.2024 | Appendizitis | Nachrichten

Hinter dieser Appendizitis steckte ein Erreger

23.04.2024 | Operationsvorbereitung | Nachrichten

Mehr Schaden als Nutzen durch präoperatives Aussetzen von GLP-1-Agonisten?

19.04.2024 | EAU 2024 | Kongressbericht | Nachrichten

Ureterstriktur: Innovative OP-Technik bewährt sich
weitere anzeigen

Update Chirurgie

Bestellen Sie unseren Fach-Newsletter und bleiben Sie gut informiert.

Newsletter bestellen

Aktuelle BDC Leitlinien-Webinare

S3-Leitlinie „Diagnostik und Therapie des Karpaltunnelsyndroms“

Karpaltunnelsyndrom BDC Leitlinien Webinare
CME: 2 Punkte

Das Karpaltunnelsyndrom ist die häufigste Kompressionsneuropathie peripherer Nerven. Obwohl die Anamnese mit dem nächtlichen Einschlafen der Hand (Brachialgia parästhetica nocturna) sehr typisch ist, ist eine klinisch-neurologische Untersuchung und Elektroneurografie in manchen Fällen auch eine Neurosonografie erforderlich. Im Anfangsstadium sind konservative Maßnahmen (Handgelenksschiene, Ergotherapie) empfehlenswert. Bei nicht Ansprechen der konservativen Therapie oder Auftreten von neurologischen Ausfällen ist eine Dekompression des N. medianus am Karpaltunnel indiziert.

Prof. Dr. med. Gregor Antoniadis
Berufsverband der Deutschen Chirurgie e.V.

S2e-Leitlinie „Distale Radiusfraktur“

Radiusfraktur BDC Leitlinien Webinare
CME: 2 Punkte

Das Webinar beschäftigt sich mit Fragen und Antworten zu Diagnostik und Klassifikation sowie Möglichkeiten des Ausschlusses von Zusatzverletzungen. Die Referenten erläutern, welche Frakturen konservativ behandelt werden können und wie. Das Webinar beantwortet die Frage nach aktuellen operativen Therapiekonzepten: Welcher Zugang, welches Osteosynthesematerial? Auf was muss bei der Nachbehandlung der distalen Radiusfraktur geachtet werden?

PD Dr. med. Oliver Pieske
Dr. med. Benjamin Meyknecht
Berufsverband der Deutschen Chirurgie e.V.

S1-Leitlinie „Empfehlungen zur Therapie der akuten Appendizitis bei Erwachsenen“

Appendizitis BDC Leitlinien Webinare
CME: 2 Punkte

Inhalte des Webinars zur S1-Leitlinie „Empfehlungen zur Therapie der akuten Appendizitis bei Erwachsenen“ sind die Darstellung des Projektes und des Erstellungswegs zur S1-Leitlinie, die Erläuterung der klinischen Relevanz der Klassifikation EAES 2015, die wissenschaftliche Begründung der wichtigsten Empfehlungen und die Darstellung stadiengerechter Therapieoptionen.

Dr. med. Mihailo Andric
Berufsverband der Deutschen Chirurgie e.V.