Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2015 Dec;14(4):521-30.
doi: 10.1007/s10689-015-9823-y.

Risk reducing salpingectomy and delayed oophorectomy in high risk women: views of cancer geneticists, genetic counsellors and gynaecological oncologists in the UK

Affiliations

Risk reducing salpingectomy and delayed oophorectomy in high risk women: views of cancer geneticists, genetic counsellors and gynaecological oncologists in the UK

Dhivya Chandrasekaran et al. Fam Cancer. 2015 Dec.

Abstract

Risk-reducing-salpingectomy and Delayed-Oophorectomy (RRSDO) is being proposed as a two-staged approach in place of RRSO to reduce the risks associated with premature menopause in high-risk women. We report on the acceptability/attitude of UK health professionals towards RRSDO. An anonymised web-based survey was sent to UK Cancer Genetics Group (CGG) and British Gynaecological Cancer Society (BGCS) members to assess attitudes towards RRSDO. Baseline characteristics were described using descriptive statistics. A Chi square test was used to compare categorical, Kendal-tau-b test for ordinal and Mann-Whitney test for continuous variables between two groups. 173/708 (24.4%) of invitees responded. 71% respondents (CGG = 57%/BGCS = 83%, p = 0.005) agreed with the tubal hypothesis for OC, 55% (CGG = 42%/BGCS = 66%, p = 0.003) had heard of RRSDO and 48% (CGG = 46%/BGCS = 50%) felt evidence was not currently strong enough for introduction into clinical practice. However, 60% respondents' (CGG = 48%/BGCS = 71%, p = 0.009) favoured offering RRSDO to high-risk women declining RRSO, 77% only supported RRSDO within a clinical trial (CGG = 78%/BGCS = 76%) and 81% (CGG = 76%/BGCS = 86%) advocated a UK-wide registry. Vasomotor symptoms (72%), impact on sexual function (63%), osteoporosis (59%), hormonal-therapy (55%) and subfertility (48%) related to premature menopause influenced their choice of RRSDO. Potential barriers to offering the two-stage procedure included lack of data on precise level of benefit (83%), increased surgical morbidity (79%), loss of breast cancer risk reduction associated with oophorectomy (68%), need for long-term follow-up (61%) and a proportion not undergoing DO (66%). There were variations in perception between BGCS/CGG members which are probably attributable to differences in clinical focus/expertise between these two groups. Despite concerns, there is reasonable support amongst UK clinicians to offering RRSDO to premenopausal high-risk women wishing to avoid RRSO, within a prospective clinical trial.

Keywords: BRCA; Delayed oophorectomy; High-risk; Ovarian cancer; RRSDO; Risk reducing salpingectomy.

PubMed Disclaimer

References

    1. J Clin Oncol. 2012 Jul 20;30(21):2654-63 - PubMed
    1. Gynecol Oncol. 2011 Jun 1;121(3):472-6 - PubMed
    1. Am J Hum Genet. 1995 Jan;56(1):265-71 - PubMed
    1. J Clin Oncol. 2005 Oct 20;23(30):7491-6 - PubMed
    1. Am J Hum Genet. 1998 Mar;62(3):676-89 - PubMed

Publication types

LinkOut - more resources