Cited by 177BRCA gene mutations in cancerWomen's cancer prevention and managementBreast Implant and Reconstruction

Predictors of and Satisfaction with Bilateral Prophylactic Mastectomy

Open access
Stefanek, M.E., Helzlsouer, K.J., Wilcox, P.M., Houn, F.·1995·Preventive Medicine

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Women with a first-degree relative with breast cancer are at increased risk of developing this disease. The optimal medical management of these women is unclear, with options including close breast cancer screening, bilateral prophylactic mastectomy, or participation in chemoprevention trials. Among women who undergo prophylactic bilateral mastectomy, very little is known about satisfaction with this surgery. Also, we know very little about variables related to prophylactic mastectomy decision making. METHODS: Participants were women at increased risk of breast cancer due to family history. These women were categorized by self-report as not interested in prophylactic mastectomy (n = 58), interested but deciding against surgery (n = 92), or subsequently having a bilateral prophylactic mastectomy (n = 14). Information on screening practices, risk perception, level of depression, and cancer-related worry was collected. Women completing prophylactic mastectomy reported on their satisfaction with the surgery and breast reconstruction. RESULTS: Women selecting surgery reported more breast cancer worry. The group expressing no interest in surgery reported fewer biopsies and lower risk estimates. Women completing surgery were satisfied with their decision, although satisfaction with reconstruction was mixed. CONCLUSION: Factors influencing surgical decision making may include breast-cancer-related worry, biopsy history, and subjective breast cancer risk.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1006/pmed.1995.1066

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Stefanek, M. E., Helzlsouer, K. J., Wilcox, P. M., & Houn, F.
Affiliations
United States Food and Drug Administration (US)
Venue
Preventive Medicine
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
1995-07
Volume
24
Issue
4
Pages
412-419
ISSN
0091-7435 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2044170626
Cited by
177
References
0
Citations by year
2025: 1 · 2024: 2 · 2023: 1 · 2022: 2 · 2021: 1 · 2019: 2 · 2018: 2 · 2017: 2 · 2016: 2 · 2015: 1 · 2014: 3 · 2013: 2 · 2012: 4
FWCI
2.08
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Preventive Medicine (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Genetics › BRCA gene mutations in cancer
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Women's cancer prevention and management
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Surgery › Breast Implant and Reconstruction
Keywords
bilateral prophylactic mastectomy, breast cancer risk, family history of breast cancer, patient satisfaction, surgical decision-making, breast cancer worry, risk perception, breast cancer screening, breast reconstruction, depression, chemoprevention
MeSH terms
Adult, Analysis of Variance, Biopsy, Breast Neoplasms, Decision Making, Disease Susceptibility, Family Health, Female, Humans, Life Change Events, Mastectomy, Middle Aged, Stress, Psychological, Chi-Square Distribution, Mammaplasty, Patient Satisfaction, Patient Selection

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review