Quality-of-life effects of prophylactic salpingo-oophorectomy versus gynecologic screening among women at increased risk of hereditary ovarian cancer
- PMID: 16129845
- DOI: 10.1200/JCO.2005.02.626
Quality-of-life effects of prophylactic salpingo-oophorectomy versus gynecologic screening among women at increased risk of hereditary ovarian cancer
Abstract
Purpose: Recommendations for women at high risk of ovarian cancer include periodic gynecologic screening (GS) and prophylactic bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy (PBSO). The aim of the current study was to determine the quality-of-life (QOL) effects of PBSO versus GS.
Patients and methods: Questionnaire data were obtained from 846 high-risk women who had participated in this nationwide, cross-sectional, observational study. Forty-four percent of the women had undergone PBSO, and 56% had opted for GS. Topics addressed by the questionnaire included generic QOL, cancer-specific distress, endocrine symptoms, and sexual functioning.
Results: No statistically significant between-group differences were observed in generic QOL (Short Form-36), with women in both the PBSO and GS groups scoring similarly to the general population. Compared with GS, PBSO was associated with fewer breast and ovarian cancer worries (P < .001) and more favorable cancer risk perception (P < .05). However, the PBSO group reported significantly more endocrine symptoms (P < .001) and worse sexual functioning (P < .05) than the GS group. Eighty-six percent of women would choose PBSO again, and 63% would recommend it to a friend with familial risk of ovarian cancer.
Conclusion: PBSO had no measurable adverse impact on generic QOL of high-risk women. The favorable effects of PBSO in terms of reduced cancer worries and low perceived cancer risk need to be weighed against the increase in endocrine and sexual symptoms. Balanced information will help clinicians and high-risk women to make informed decisions about the optimal preventive health strategy.
Comment in
-
Quality or quantity in the management of hereditary ovarian cancer risk: Is it really a trade-off?J Clin Oncol. 2005 Oct 1;23(28):6817-9. doi: 10.1200/JCO.2005.96.009. Epub 2005 Sep 12. J Clin Oncol. 2005. PMID: 16157931 No abstract available.
-
Is the fault in our steroids or in our selves?J Clin Oncol. 2006 Aug 1;24(22):3519-21. doi: 10.1200/JCO.2006.06.5243. J Clin Oncol. 2006. PMID: 16877717 No abstract available.
-
Are we ready for online tools in decision making for BRCA1/2 mutation carriers?J Clin Oncol. 2012 Feb 10;30(5):471-3. doi: 10.1200/JCO.2011.40.1562. Epub 2012 Jan 9. J Clin Oncol. 2012. PMID: 22231044 No abstract available.
Publication types
MeSH terms
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Medical

