Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42747564›Full record

ArticleBreast cancer research and treatment2026

Trends in contralateral prophylactic mastectomy and genetic testing in the era of new society guidelines.

Anna M Reagan, Christina R Rutherford, Saranya Prathibha, Brittany E Levy, Corinne Praska, Sarah E Thacker, Madison Kolbow, Bethel Ozed-Williams, Kelsey N Karnik, Anthony A Mangino and 4 more

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Breast cancer research and treatment, 2026. 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

14 authors.

Anna M Reagan *Department of Surgery, University of Kentucky, Lexington, KY, US.
Christina R Rutherford *University of Kentucky School of Medicine, Lexington, KY, US.
Saranya PrathibhaDivision of Surgical Oncology, Department of Surgery, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN, US.
Brittany E LevyDepartment of Surgery, University of Kentucky, Lexington, KY, US.
Corinne PraskaDepartment of Surgery, University of Wisconsin School of Medicine and Public Health, Madison, WI, US.
Sarah E ThackerUniversity of Kentucky School of Medicine, Lexington, KY, US.
Madison KolbowUniversity of Minnesota Medical School, Minneapolis, MN, US.
Bethel Ozed-WilliamsDivision of Surgical Oncology, Department of Surgery, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN, US.
Kelsey N KarnikDepartment of Biostatistics, University of Kentucky, Lexington, KY, US.
Anthony A ManginoDepartment of Biostatistics, University of Kentucky, Lexington, KY, US.
Schelomo MarmorDivision of Surgical Oncology, Department of Surgery, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN, US.
Todd M TuttleDivision of Surgical Oncology, Department of Surgery, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN, US.
Jane Yuet Ching HuiDivision of Surgical Oncology, Department of Surgery, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN, US.
Erin E BurkeDivision of Surgical Oncology, Department of Surgery, The Ohio State University, N Doan Hall N908 410 W 10th Avenue, Columbus, OH, 43210, US. erin.burke@osumc.edu.

Funding

National Institutes of Health Training Grant T32CA160003
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeIn 2016 and 2019 respectively, the American Society of Breast Surgeons published consensus statements discouraging contralateral prophylactic mastectomy (CPM) in average-risk women with unilateral breast cancer and recommending genetic testing be made available for all patients with breast cancer. We sought to evaluate trends in CPM and genetic testing across two academic healthcare systems before and after the publication of the 2016 statement.

methodsRetrospective chart review was performed from 2011 to 2020 for women with newly diagnosed unilateral stage 0 to III breast cancer who underwent surgery. Patients treated at the University of Kentucky or within the academic health system at the University of Minnesota were included and divided into two cohorts: before the 2016 CPM publication and after. Rates of CPM and genetic testing and factors associated with CPM were evaluated.

results6,203 patients were identified. 2,619 patients were diagnosed between 2011 and 2015, and 3,584 were diagnosed between 2016 and 2020. Genetic testing was higher in the later cohort, with 2% prior to 2016 and 22% in 2016 or later. Rates of CPM were similar in the earlier and later cohorts (19% and 15%, respectively; p < 0.001). Factors associated with receipt of CPM were younger age, white race, lobular histology, increasing tumor size, HER2 positivity and genetic testing.

conclusionCPM trends at two academic institutions remained relatively stable over a time period when societal guidelines discouraged the use of CPM in average-risk women with unilateral breast cancer. Further work to understand these trends and identify interventions to reduce the rates of CPM is needed.

Indexed as

Breast NeoplasmsGenetic TestingProphylactic MastectomyAdultAgedFemaleHumansMiddle AgedPractice Guidelines as TopicRetrospective StudiesContralateral prophylactic mastectomyGenetic testingUnilateral breast cancer

Identifiers

PMID42747564

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.