Chandrasekaran, D; Menon, U; Evans, G; Crawford, R; Saridogan, E; Jacobs, C; Tischkowitz, M; ... Manchanda, R; + view all Chandrasekaran, D; Menon, U; Evans, G; Crawford, R; Saridogan, E; Jacobs, C; Tischkowitz, M; Brockbank, E; Kalsi, J; Jurkovic, D; Manchanda, R; - view fewer (2015) Risk reducing salpingectomy and delayed oophorectomy in high risk women: views of cancer geneticists, genetic counsellors and gynaecological oncologists in the UK. Familial Cancer , 14 (4) pp. 521-530. 10.1007/s10689-015-9823-y.

Preview

Text BGCS CGG RRSDO paper_famcancer_Revision_vF3-accepted.pdf - Accepted Version Download (196kB) | Preview

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.

Download activity - last month

Export as JSONXMLCSV

Download activity - last 12 months

Export as CSVXMLJSON

Downloads by country - last 12 months

Export as JSONCSVXML

Archive Staff Only

View Item