Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39785678›Full record

ArticleCancer research communications2025

Evaluating Ovarian Cancer Risk-Reducing Salpingectomy Acceptance: A Survey.

Alexandra Lukey, Ramlogan Sowamber, David Huntsman, Celeste Leigh Pearce, A Fuchsia Howard, Rafael Meza, Michael R Law, Minh Tung Phung, Gillian E Hanley

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Cancer research communications, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing 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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

9 authors.

Alexandra LukeyFaculty of Medicine, School of Population and Public Health, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, Canada.ORCID 0000-0001-9661-7790
Ramlogan SowamberDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Faculty of Medicine, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, Canada.ORCID 0000-0001-8798-6965
David HuntsmanDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Faculty of Medicine, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, Canada.ORCID 0000-0003-4934-3322
Celeste Leigh PearceFaculty of Applied Sciences, School of Nursing, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, Canada.ORCID 0000-0002-8023-7846
A Fuchsia HowardDepartment of Epidemiology, School of Public Health, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan.ORCID 0000-0001-5704-1733
Rafael MezaFaculty of Medicine, School of Population and Public Health, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, Canada.ORCID 0000-0002-1076-5037
Michael R LawFaculty of Medicine, School of Population and Public Health, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, Canada.ORCID 0000-0002-5637-6053
Minh Tung PhungDepartment of Population Health Sciences, University of Wisconsin-Madison, Madison, Wisconsin.ORCID 0000-0002-3573-4501
Gillian E HanleyDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Faculty of Medicine, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, Canada.ORCID 0000-0001-9594-0545

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

abstractWith evidence that salpingectomy is effective in preventing high-grade serous carcinoma, it is time to consider offering this procedure to people at higher-than-average lifetime risk for ovarian cancer, despite not having a pathogenic genetic variant that increases the risk for ovarian cancer. This targeted approach has potential to be effective at reducing ovarian cancer incidence, and unlike opportunistic salpingectomy, it is focused on people with an increased lifetime risk of ovarian cancer. However, the acceptability of this approach within the population of potential patients remains unknown. We conducted an online survey of adults in British Columbia, Canada, who were defined as “at risk” for ovarian cancer (i.e., people born with ovaries). Participants completed a questionnaire on demographics, ovarian cancer risk and protective factors, concerns about risk-reducing salpingectomy (RSS), and the risk they considered high enough to warrant RRS. We included 211 participants. Among these participants, 42% (n = 88) indicated that they would consider RRS at any lifetime risk or any risk above the population average. Another 20 participants chose risks between 1.5% and 4% for a cumulative 51% of the sample choosing risks below thresholds for oophorectomy. In contrast, 6% (n = 12) indicated that they would not consider the procedure at any risk level. None of the factors collected were associated with the likelihood that a person would find RRS acceptable. Overall, our participants showed broad interest in RRS as an ovarian cancer prevention strategy. These results suggest that there would likely be uptake if RRS was offered. SIGNIFICANCE: This study found that many participants were willing to consider RRS to prevent ovarian cancer. Further research on RRS should be undertaken to understand how this can be best used for ovarian cancer prevention.

Indexed as

Ovarian NeoplasmsPatient Acceptance of Health CareSalpingectomyAdultAgedFemaleHumansMiddle AgedSurveys and Questionnaires

Identifiers

PMID39785678
PMCPMC11780486

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.