Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25141939›Full record

ArticleJAMA surgery2014

Access to breast reconstruction after mastectomy and patient perspectives on reconstruction decision making.

Monica Morrow, Yun Li, Amy K Alderman, Reshma Jagsi, Ann S Hamilton, John J Graff, Sarah T Hawley, Steven J Katz

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in JAMA surgery, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 90 papers, 5 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
90citing papers in PubMed, 5 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

90 citing papers in PubMed, 5 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Making decisions about breast reconstruction: A systematic review of patient-reported factors influencing choice.Quality of life research : an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation · 2017
    Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Trial
  7. Trial
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. Article

30 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors.

Monica MorrowBreast Service, Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York.
Yun LiSchool of Public Health, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor.
Amy K AldermanThe Swan Center for Plastic Surgery, Alpharetta, Georgia.
Reshma JagsiDepartment of Radiation Oncology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor.
Ann S HamiltonDepartment of Preventive Medicine, Keck School of Medicine, University of Southern California, Los Angeles.
John J GraffDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Robert Wood Johnson Medical School, New Brunswick, New Jersey.
Sarah T HawleyVeterans Affairs Ann Arbor Healthcare System, Ann Arbor, Michigan8Medical School, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor9School of Public Health, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor.
Steven J KatzDivision of General Medicine, Department of Internal Medicine, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor.

Funding

X-RAY CRYSTALLOGRAPHYP30CA008748 · NCI · SLOAN-KETTERING INSTITUTE FOR CANCER RES · PI Nicholas D Socci · 1985 to 2026
$347.4M
CALIFORNIA'S PARTICIPATION IN THE NATIONAL CANCER PREVENTION AND CONTRO PROGRAMU58DP000807 · DP · PUBLIC HEALTH INSTITUTE · PI SNIPES, KURT P · 2007 to 2011
$22.5M
Surgical Treament for Early State Breast CancerR01CA088370 · NCI · UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN AT ANN ARBOR · PI KATZ, STEVEN J. · 2001 to 2009
$4.3M
Racial/Ethnic Disparities In Work and Qol Outcomes In Survivors of Breast CancerR01CA109696 · NCI · UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN AT ANN ARBOR · PI HAWLEY, SARAH T, KATZ, STEVEN J. · 2004 to 2010
$3.0M
Racial/Ethnic and SES Disparities in Quality of Breast Cancer Systemic TherapyR01CA139014 · NCI · UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN AT ANN ARBOR · PI GRIGGS, JENNIFER J, KATZ, STEVEN J. · 2009 to 2013
$2.4M
Quality of Cancer Care Evaluation and InterventionsK05CA111340 · NCI · UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN AT ANN ARBOR · PI KATZ, STEVEN J. · 2006 to 2011
$625k
Understanding Decision-Making in Breast Cancer ReconstructionR21CA122467 · NCI · UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN AT ANN ARBOR · PI KATZ, STEVEN J. · 2008 to 2009
$382k
NOVEL NUCLEAR PROTEINS IN NORMAL AND CANCER CELLSR55CA054404 · NCI · JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY · PI PASTERNACK, GARY R. · 1991 to 1991
–
NOVEL NUCLEAR PROTEINS IN NORMAL AND CANCER CELLSR01CA054404 · NCI · JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY · PI PASTERNACK, GARY R. · 1992 to 1999
–
NCCDPHP CDC HHS U58 DP000807NCI NIH HHS K05 CA111340NCI NIH HHS K05CA111340NCI NIH HHS N01 PC035139NCI NIH HHS N01 PC035145NCI NIH HHS N01 PC054404NCI NIH HHS P30 CA008748NCI NIH HHS R01 CA088370NCI NIH HHS R01 CA109696NCI NIH HHS R01CA109696NCI NIH HHS R01 CA139014NCI NIH HHS R21 CA122467NCI NIH HHS R21CA122467
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

importanceMost women undergoing mastectomy for breast cancer do not undergo breast reconstruction.

objectiveTo examine correlates of breast reconstruction after mastectomy and to determine if a significant unmet need for reconstruction exists. DESIGN, SETTING, AND

participantsWe used Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results registries from Los Angeles, California, and Detroit, Michigan, for rapid case ascertainment to identify a sample of women aged 20 to 79 years diagnosed as having ductal carcinoma in situ or stages I to III invasive breast cancer. Black and Latina women were oversampled to ensure adequate representation of racial/ethnic minorities. Eligible participants were able to complete a survey in English or Spanish. Of 3252 women sent the initial survey a median of 9 months after diagnosis, 2290 completed it. Those who remained disease free were surveyed 4 years later to determine the frequency of immediate and delayed reconstruction and patient attitudes toward the procedure; 1536 completed the follow-up survey. The 485 who remained disease free at follow-up underwent analysis. EXPOSURES: Disease-free survival of breast cancer. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: Breast reconstruction at any time after mastectomy and patient satisfaction with different aspects of the reconstruction decision-making process.

resultsResponse rates in the initial and follow-up surveys were 73.1% and 67.7%, respectively (overall, 49.4%). Of 485 patients reporting mastectomy at the initial survey and remaining disease free, 24.8% underwent immediate and 16.8% underwent delayed reconstruction (total, 41.6%). Factors significantly associated with not undergoing reconstruction were black race (adjusted odds ratio [AOR], 2.16 [95% CI, 1.11-4.20]; P = .004), lower educational level (AOR, 4.49 [95% CI, 2.31-8.72]; P < .001), increased age (AOR in 10-year increments, 2.53 [95% CI, 1.77-3.61]; P < .001), major comorbidity (AOR, 2.27 [95% CI, 1.01-5.11]; P = .048), and chemotherapy (AOR, 1.82 [95% CI, 0.99-3.31]; P = .05). Only 13.3% of women were dissatisfied with the reconstruction decision-making process, but dissatisfaction was higher among nonwhite patients in the sample (AOR, 2.87 [95% CI, 1.27-6.51]; P = .03). The most common patient-reported reasons for not having reconstruction were the desire to avoid additional surgery (48.5%) and the belief that it was not important (33.8%), but 36.3% expressed fear of implants. Reasons for avoiding reconstruction and systems barriers to care varied by race; barriers were more common among nonwhite participants. Residual demand for reconstruction at 4 years was low, with only 30 of 263 who did not undergo reconstruction still considering the procedure. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Reconstruction rates largely reflect patient demand; most patients are satisfied with the decision-making process about reconstruction. Specific approaches are needed to address lingering patient-level and system factors with a negative effect on reconstruction among minority women.

Indexed as

Decision MakingHealth Services AccessibilityMammaplastyMastectomyAdultAgedBreast NeoplasmsCarcinoma, Ductal, BreastFemaleHumansLos AngelesMichiganMiddle AgedNeoplasm StagingPatient SatisfactionSEER Program

Identifiers

PMID25141939
PMCPMC4732701

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.