Surgical decision making in premenopausal
genetics
gynecology
surgical oncology
Journal
Journal of medical genetics
ISSN: 1468-6244
Titre abrégé: J Med Genet
Pays: England
ID NLM: 2985087R
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
02 2022
02 2022
Historique:
received:
08
10
2020
revised:
20
11
2020
accepted:
21
11
2020
pubmed:
12
2
2021
medline:
3
3
2022
entrez:
11
2
2021
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
Acceptance of the role of the fallopian tube in 'ovarian' carcinogenesis and the detrimental sequelae of surgical menopause in premenopausal women following risk-reducing salpingo-oophorectomy (RRSO) has resulted in risk-reducing early-salpingectomy with delayed oophorectomy (RRESDO) being proposed as an attractive alternative risk-reducing strategy in women who decline/delay oophorectomy. We present the results of a qualitative study evaluating the decision-making process among In-depth semistructured 1:1 interviews conducted using a predeveloped topic-guide (development informed by literature review and expert consultation) until informational saturation reached. Wording and sequencing of questions were left open with probes used to elicit additional information. All interviews were audio-recorded, transcribed verbatim, transcripts analysed using an inductive theoretical framework and data managed using NVIVO-v12. Informational saturation was reached following 24 interviews. Seven interconnected themes integral to surgical decision making were identified: fertility/menopause/cancer risk reduction/surgical choices/surgical complications/sequence of ovarian-and-breast prophylactic surgeries/support/satisfaction. Women for whom maximising ovarian cancer risk reduction was relatively more important than early menopause/quality-of-life preferred RRSO, whereas those more concerned about detrimental impact of menopause chose RRESDO. Women managed in specialist familial cancer clinic settings compared with non-specialist settings felt they received better quality care, improved hormone replacement therapy access and were more satisfied. Multiple contextual factors (medical, physical, psychological, social) influence timing of risk-reducing surgeries. RRESDO offers women delaying/declining premenopausal oophorectomy, particularly those concerned about menopausal effects, a degree of ovarian cancer risk reduction while avoiding early menopause. Care of high-risk women should be centralised to centres with specialist familial gynaecological cancer risk management services to provide a better-quality, streamlined, holistic multidisciplinary approach.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
Acceptance of the role of the fallopian tube in 'ovarian' carcinogenesis and the detrimental sequelae of surgical menopause in premenopausal women following risk-reducing salpingo-oophorectomy (RRSO) has resulted in risk-reducing early-salpingectomy with delayed oophorectomy (RRESDO) being proposed as an attractive alternative risk-reducing strategy in women who decline/delay oophorectomy. We present the results of a qualitative study evaluating the decision-making process among
METHODS
In-depth semistructured 1:1 interviews conducted using a predeveloped topic-guide (development informed by literature review and expert consultation) until informational saturation reached. Wording and sequencing of questions were left open with probes used to elicit additional information. All interviews were audio-recorded, transcribed verbatim, transcripts analysed using an inductive theoretical framework and data managed using NVIVO-v12.
RESULTS
Informational saturation was reached following 24 interviews. Seven interconnected themes integral to surgical decision making were identified: fertility/menopause/cancer risk reduction/surgical choices/surgical complications/sequence of ovarian-and-breast prophylactic surgeries/support/satisfaction. Women for whom maximising ovarian cancer risk reduction was relatively more important than early menopause/quality-of-life preferred RRSO, whereas those more concerned about detrimental impact of menopause chose RRESDO. Women managed in specialist familial cancer clinic settings compared with non-specialist settings felt they received better quality care, improved hormone replacement therapy access and were more satisfied.
CONCLUSION
Multiple contextual factors (medical, physical, psychological, social) influence timing of risk-reducing surgeries. RRESDO offers women delaying/declining premenopausal oophorectomy, particularly those concerned about menopausal effects, a degree of ovarian cancer risk reduction while avoiding early menopause. Care of high-risk women should be centralised to centres with specialist familial gynaecological cancer risk management services to provide a better-quality, streamlined, holistic multidisciplinary approach.
Identifiants
pubmed: 33568437
pii: jmedgenet-2020-107501
doi: 10.1136/jmedgenet-2020-107501
pmc: PMC8788252
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Multicenter Study
Observational Study
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
122-132Investigateurs
Raji Ganesan
(R)
Gareth Bryson
(G)
Gareth Rowlands
(G)
Rupali Arora
(R)
Munaza Ahmed
(M)
Aarti Sharma
(A)
Gautam Mehra
(G)
Adam Rosenthal
(A)
Michelle Mackintosh
(M)
Sadaf Ghaem-Maghami
(S)
Omer Devaja
(O)
Sudha Sundar
(S)
Janos Balega
(J)
Tim Duncan
(T)
Claire Newton
(C)
Sonali Kaushik
(S)
Angela Brady
(A)
Supratik Chattopadhyay
(S)
Natalia Povolotskaya
(N)
Iain Cameron
(I)
Rema Iyer
(R)
Lucy Side
(L)
Katie Snape
(K)
Anil Tailor
(A)
Kavitha Thumuluru Madhuri
(KT)
Katherine Edey
(K)
Sian Taylor
(S)
Manon van Seters
(MV)
Suma Kodiathodi
(S)
Partha Sengupta
(P)
Scott Fegan
(S)
Karin Williamson
(K)
Andrew Phillips
(A)
Mark Willett
(M)
Tony Chalhoub
(T)
Sanjay Rao
(S)
Nicholas Matthews
(N)
Beena Abdul
(B)
Claire Park
(C)
Jane Borley
(J)
Ibraheem Hamoodi
(I)
Richard Hutson
(R)
Kerryn Lutchman-Singh
(K)
Richard Peevor
(R)
Mahalakshmi Gurumurthy
(M)
Kalpana Ragupathy
(K)
Emma Crosbie
(E)
Informations de copyright
© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2022. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.
Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
Competing interests: RM declares research funding from Cancer Research UK and The Eve Appeal outside this work, an honorarium for grant review from Israel National Institute for Health Policy Research and honorarium for advisory board membership from Astrazeneca/MSD. RM is supported by an NHS Innovation Accelerator (NIA) Fellowship for population testing.
Références
Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2017 Apr;156(4):587-588
pubmed: 28366109
J Clin Oncol. 2006 Aug 1;24(22):3576-82
pubmed: 16877724
Eur J Cancer. 2015 Feb;51(3):400-8
pubmed: 25532426
J Natl Cancer Inst. 2015 Mar 18;107(5):
pubmed: 25788320
BMC Cancer. 2015 Aug 19;15:593
pubmed: 26286255
Obstet Gynecol. 2013 Apr;121(4):709-716
pubmed: 23635669
J Cancer Surviv. 2018 Feb;12(1):1-9
pubmed: 28861845
PLoS One. 2017 Jan 6;12(1):e0169673
pubmed: 28060958
Patient Educ Couns. 2006 Mar;60(3):301-12
pubmed: 16051459
J Clin Oncol. 2004 Mar 15;22(6):1055-62
pubmed: 14981104
Best Pract Res Clin Obstet Gynaecol. 2020 May;65:46-65
pubmed: 32192936
BMC Womens Health. 2010 Aug 05;10:24
pubmed: 20687957
Gynecol Oncol. 2017 Apr;145(1):122-129
pubmed: 28190649
J Med Genet. 2001 Oct;38(10):683-91
pubmed: 11594337
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2017 Mar 10;3:CD011652
pubmed: 28278559
Gynecol Oncol. 2006 Jan;100(1):58-64
pubmed: 16137750
J Genet Couns. 2002 Apr;11(2):81-96
pubmed: 26141655
Psychooncology. 2000 Nov-Dec;9(6):486-95
pubmed: 11180583
JAMA. 2017 Jun 20;317(23):2402-2416
pubmed: 28632866
Br J Cancer. 2004 Oct 18;91(8):1580-90
pubmed: 15381934
Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2017 Oct;217(4):425.e1-425.e16
pubmed: 28610900
PLoS One. 2017 May 26;12(5):e0178392
pubmed: 28552971
BJOG. 2019 Jun;126(7):831-839
pubmed: 30735593
Fam Cancer. 2015 Dec;14(4):531-8
pubmed: 26239694
Patient Educ Couns. 2017 Dec;100(12):2182-2189
pubmed: 28732648
Ann Chir Plast Esthet. 2016 Jun;61(3):177-82
pubmed: 26946931
Gynecol Oncol. 2014 May;133(2):283-6
pubmed: 24582866
BJOG. 2012 Apr;119(5):527-36
pubmed: 22260402
J Natl Cancer Inst. 2016 Sep 06;109(1):
pubmed: 27601060
Lancet. 2014 Mar 22;383(9922):1041-8
pubmed: 24333009
BJOG. 2021 Mar;128(4):714-726
pubmed: 32803845
Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2019 Jun;175(2):443-449
pubmed: 30756284
Eur J Surg Oncol. 2013 Dec;39(12):1346-50
pubmed: 24113619
J Genet Couns. 2016 Dec;25(6):1198-1206
pubmed: 27091466
Arch Womens Ment Health. 2016 Dec;19(6):1073-1078
pubmed: 27562824
J Clin Oncol. 2005 Oct 1;23(28):6890-8
pubmed: 16129845
Cancer Discov. 2016 Dec;6(12):1342-1351
pubmed: 27856443
Menopause Int. 2008 Sep;14(3):111-6
pubmed: 18714076
J Natl Cancer Inst. 2020 Dec 14;112(12):1242-1250
pubmed: 32107557
J Natl Cancer Inst. 2007 Feb 21;99(4):272-82
pubmed: 17312304
Am J Surg Pathol. 2015 Mar;39(3):287-93
pubmed: 25581732
Gynecol Oncol. 2015 Feb;136(2):305-10
pubmed: 25560807
J Clin Oncol. 2020 Mar 1;38(7):674-685
pubmed: 31841383
Neurology. 2007 Sep 11;69(11):1074-83
pubmed: 17761551