Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25759620›Full record

ReviewBreast care (Basel, Switzerland)2014

Impact of Prophylactic Mastectomy in BRCA1/2 Mutation Carriers.

Kerstin Rhiem, Rita Schmutzler

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Breast care (Basel, Switzerland), 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed
–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

7 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
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

2 authors.

Kerstin RhiemCenter for Hereditary Breast and Ovarian Cancer, University Hospital Cologne, Germany.
Rita SchmutzlerCenter for Hereditary Breast and Ovarian Cancer, University Hospital Cologne, Germany.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Unlike the general decrease in invasive oncologic care, the trend for prophylactic bilateral mastectomy in healthy women and prophylactic contralateral mastectomy in women with unilateral breast cancer is steadily rising. This is even more surprising when considering that for e.g. prophylactic contralateral mastectomy no clear survival benefit has been demonstrated so far. The decision-making process around risk-reducing surgery may be influenced by several conflicting parameters such as the patient's fears and desire to achieve a survival advantage, the surgeon's financial motivations, or the oncologist's paternalistic approach to the above trend. Physicians should support their patients throughout the decision-making process, guide them through the dense fog of information, and encourage them to reconsider all options and alternatives before embarking on an irreversible surgical intervention. Healthy and diseased women should be comprehensively informed about their absolute individual risks for cancer, the benefits and harms of the surgery, alternative preventive strategies, and last but not least the competing risks of preceding carcinomas and cancer in general. Within the framework of non-directive counseling in the specialized centers of the German Consortium for Hereditary Breast and Ovarian Cancer (GC-HBOC), decision-making aids are being developed with grants from the Federal Ministry of Health and the German Cancer Aid to support women in making conclusive and satisfactory decisions.

Indexed as

BRCA1BRCA2High-risk genesProphylactic mastectomy

Identifiers

PMID25759620
PMCPMC4317675

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.