Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Mastectomy to Prevent Breast Cancer: Psychosocial Aspects of Women’s Decision-Making

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Psychological Aspects of Cancer

  • 2610 Accesses

Abstract

The advent of genetic testing to determine whether a woman carries a genetic mutation (BRCA1 or BRCA2) that predisposes her to hereditary breast and ovarian cancer has created the situation wherein women are faced with the decision of whether or not to undergo mastectomy to prevent breast cancer, known as risk-reducing mastectomy (RRM). This difficult decision varies from woman to woman and is profoundly shaped by psychosocial factors. Diversity in the uptake of RRM as well as the timing of this decision are important considerations. Perceived risk, decisional conflict and uncertainty, as well as psychological considerations and the family context are key aspects of this decision-making process. The degree of patient involvement in RRM decision-making is also influential. These psychosocial factors have important implications for the provision of decision support. In this chapter we review research pertaining to these issues

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 169.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 219.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  1. Antoniou A, Pharoah PD, Narod S, et al. Average risks of breast and ovarian cancer associated with BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutations detected in case series unselected for family history: A combined analysis of 22 studies. Am J Hum Genet. 2003;72:1117–30.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. Evans DG, Shenton A, Woodward E, Lalloo F, Howell A, Maher ER. Penetrance estimates for BRCA1 and BRCA2 based on genetic testing in a clinical cancer genetics service setting: Risks of breast/ovarian cancer quoted should reflect the cancer burden in the family. BMC Cancer. 2008;8:155.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Ford D, Easton DF, Stratton M, et al. Genetic heterogeneity and penetrance analysis of the BRCA1 and BRCA2 genes in breast cancer families. the breast cancer linkage consortium. Am J Hum Genet. 1998;62:676–89.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Rebbeck TR, Friebel T, Lynch HT, et al. Bilateral prophylactic mastectomy reduces breast cancer risk in BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers: The PROSE study group. J Clin Oncol. 2004;22:1055–62.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Horsman D, Wilson BJ, Avard D, et al. Clinical management recommendations for surveillance and risk-reduction strategies for hereditary breast and ovarian cancer among individuals carrying a deleterious BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutation. J Obstet Gynaecol Can. 2007;29:45–60.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Nelson HD, Huffman LH, Fu R, Harris EL. U.S. Preventive Services Task Force. Genetic risk assessment and BRCA mutation testing for breast and ovarian cancer susceptibility: Systematic evidence review for the U.S. preventive services task force. Ann Intern Med. 2005;143:362–79.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. National Comprehensive Cancer Network. NCCN clinical practice guidelines in oncology. Genetic/Familial high-risk assessment: Breast and ovarian. NCCN; 2009;V.I. Available from: http://www.nccn.org.

  8. Metcalfe KA, Birenbaum-Carmeli D, Lubinski J, et al. International variation in rates of uptake of preventive options in BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers. Int J Cancer. 2008;122:2017–22.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Julian-Reynier CM, Bouchard LJ, Evans DG, et al. Women’s attitudes toward preventive strategies for hereditary breast or ovarian carcinoma differ from one country to another: Differences among english, french, and canadian women. Cancer. 2001;92:959–68.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Skytte A. Risk-reducing mastectomy and salpingo-oophorectomy in unaffected BRCA mutation carriers: Uptake and timing*. Clin Genet. 2010;77:342–9.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. Meijers-Heijboer EJ, Verhoog LC, Brekelmans CT, et al. Presymptomatic DNA testing and prophylactic surgery in families with a BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutation. Lancet. 2000;355:2015–20.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Bouchard L, Blancquaert I, Eisinger F, et al. Prevention and genetic testing for breast cancer: Variations in medical decisions. Soc Sci Med. 2004;58:1085–96.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Friebel TM, Domchek SM, Neuhausen SL, et al. Bilateral prophylactic oophorectomy and bilateral prophylactic mastectomy in a prospective cohort of unaffected BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers. Clin Breast Cancer. 2007;7:875–82.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Evans DG, Lalloo F, Ashcroft L, et al. Uptake of risk-reducing surgery in unaffected women at high risk of breast and ovarian cancer is risk, age, and time dependent. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev. 2009;18: 2318–24.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Howard A, Balneaves LG, Bottorff JL, Rodney P. Preserving the self: The process of decision making about hereditary breast cancer and ovarian cancer risk reduction. Qual Health Res. 2011;21:502.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. McQuirter M, Castiglia LL, Loiselle CG, Wong N. Decision-making process of women carrying a BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutation who have chosen prophylactic mastectomy. Onc Nurs Society. 2010;37: 313–20.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Antill Y, Reynolds J, Young MA, et al. Risk-reducing surgery in women with familial susceptibility for breast and/or ovarian cancer. Eur J Cancer. 2006;42: 621–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Bradbury AR, Ibe CN, Dignam JJ, et al. Uptake and timing of bilateral prophylactic salpingo-oophorectomy among BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers. Genet Med. 2008;10:161–6.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. McCullum M, Bottorff JL, Kelly M, Kieffer SA, Balneaves LG. Time to decide about risk-reducing mastectomy: A case series of BRCA1/2 gene mutation carriers. BMC Womens Health. 2007;7:3.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Howard AF, Bottorff JL, Balneaves LG, Kim-Sing C. Women’s constructions of the ‘right time’ to consider decisions about risk-reducing mastectomy and risk-reducing oophorectomy. BMC Womens Health. 2010;10:24.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Pierce PF. Deciding on breast cancer treatment: A description of decision behavior. Nurs Res. 1993;42:22–2.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  22. Hamilton R. Genetics: Breast cancer as an exemplar. Nurs Clin North Am. 2009;44:327–38.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. d’Agincourt-Canning L. The effect of experiential knowledge on construction of risk perception in hereditary breast/ovarian cancer. J Genet Couns. 2005;14:55–69.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Kenen R. Ardern-Jones A, Eeles R. Family stories and the use of heuristics: Women from suspected hereditary breast and ovarian cancer (HBOC) families. Sociol Health Illn. 2003;25:838–65.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Rantala J, Platten U, Lindgren G, et al. Risk perception after genetic counseling in patients with increased risk of cancer. Hered Cancer Clin Pract. 2009;7:15.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Howard AF, Balneaves LG, Bottorff JL. Women’s decision making about risk-reducing strategies in the context of hereditary breast and ovarian cancer: A systematic review. J Genet Couns. 2009;18(6): 578–97.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Metcalfe KA, Poll A, O’Connor A, et al. Development and testing of a decision aid for breast cancer prevention for women with a BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutation. Clin Genet. 2007;72:208–17.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  28. Schwartz MD, Valdimarsdottir HB, DeMarco TA, et al. Randomized trial of a decision aid for BRCA1/BRCA2 mutation carriers: Impact on measures of decision making and satisfaction. Health Psychol. 2009;28:11–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. O’Connor AM, Wennberg JE, Legare F, et al. Toward the ‘tipping point’: Decision aids and informed patient choice. Health Aff (Millwood). 2007;26:716–25.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. van Dijk S, van Roosmalen MS, Otten W, Stalmeier PF. Decision making regarding prophylactic mastectomy: Stability of preferences and the impact of anticipated feelings of regret. J Clin Oncol. 2008;26: 2358–63.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Tan MB, Bleiker EM, Menke-Pluymers MB, et al. Standard psychological consultations and follow up for women at increased risk of hereditary breast cancer considering prophylactic mastectomy. Hered Cancer Clin Pract. 2009;7:6–8P.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Meiser B, Butow P, Friedlander M, et al. Intention to undergo prophylactic bilateral mastectomy in women at increased risk of developing hereditary breast cancer. J Clin Oncol. 2000;18:2250–7.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  33. Metcalfe KA, Liede A, Hoodfar E, Scott A, Foulkes WD, Narod SA. An evaluation of needs of female BRCA1 and BRCA2 carriers undergoing genetic counselling. J Med Genet. 2000;37:866–74.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  34. Hamilton JG, Lobel M, Moyer A. Emotional distress following genetic testing for hereditary breast and ovarian cancer: A meta-analytic review. Health Psychol. 2009;28:510–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. Coyne JC, Kruus L, Racioppo M, Calzone KA, Armstrong K. What do ratings of cancer-specific distress mean among women at high risk of breast and ovarian cancer? Am J Med Genet A. 2003;116:222–8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  36. Mikkelsen EM, Sunde L, Johansen C, Johnsen SP. Psychosocial consequences of genetic counseling: A population-based follow-up study. Breast J. 2009;15: 61–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  37. Smith AW, Dougall AL, Posluszny DM, Somers TJ, Rubinstein WS, Baum A. Psychological distress and quality of life associated with genetic testing for breast cancer risk. Psychooncology. 2008;17:767–73.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  38. Meiser B. Psychological impact of genetic testing for cancer susceptibility: An update of the literature. Psychooncology. 2005;14:1060–74.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  39. van Oostrom I, Meijers-Heijboer H, Lodder LN, et al. Long-term psychological impact of carrying a BRCA1/2 mutation and prophylactic surgery: A 5-year follow-up study. J Clin Oncol. 2003;21:3867–74.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  40. Reyna VF. A theory of medical decision making and health: Fuzzy trace theory. Med Decis Making. 2008;28:850–65.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  41. Zajonc RB. Feeling and thinking: Preferences need no inferences. Am Psychol. 1980;35:151.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  42. Claes E, Evers-Kiebooms G, Decruyenaere M, et al. Surveillance behavior and prophylactic surgery after predictive testing for hereditary breast/ovarian cancer. Behav Med. 2005;31:93–105.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  43. Lodder LN, Frets PG, Trijsburg RW, et al. One year follow-up of women opting for presymptomatic testing for BRCA1 and BRCA2: Emotional impact of the test outcome and decisions on risk management (surveillance or prophylactic surgery). Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2002;73:97–112.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  44. Unic I, Verhoef LC, Stalmeier PF, van Daal WA. Prophylactic mastectomy or screening in women suspected to have the BRCA1/2 mutation: A prospective pilot study of women’s treatment choices and medical and decision-analytic recommendations. Med Decis Making. 2000;20:251–62.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  45. Brain K, Gravell C, France E, Fiander A, Gray J. An exploratory qualitative study of women’s perceptions of risk management options for familial ovarian cancer: Implications for informed decision making. Gynecol Oncol. 2004;92:905–13.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  46. Lim J, Macluran M, Price M, Bennett B, Butow P. kConFab Psychosocial Group. Short- and long-term impact of receiving genetic mutation results in women at increased risk for hereditary breast cancer. J Genet Couns. 2004;13:115–33.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  47. D’Agincourt-Canning L. A gift or a yoke? Women’s and men’s responses to genetic risk information from BRCA1 and BRCA2 testing. Clin Genet. 2006;70:462–72.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  48. Helms RL, O’Hea EL, Corso M. Body image issues in women with breast cancer. Psychol Health Med. 2008;13:313–25.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  49. Hamilton R, Williams JK, Skirton H, Bowers BJ. Living with genetic test results for hereditary breast and ovarian cancer. J Nurs Scholarsh. 2009;41:276–83.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  50. Staton AD, Kurian AW, Cobb K, Mills MA, Ford JM. Cancer risk reduction and reproductive concerns in female BRCA1/2 mutation carriers. Fam Cancer. 2008;7:179–86.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  51. Hallowell N. ‘You don’t want to lose your ovaries because you think ‘I might become a man”. Women’s perceptions of prophylactic surgery as a cancer risk management option. Psychooncology. 1998;7:263–75.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  52. Metcalfe KA, Foulkes WD, Kim-Sing C, et al. Family history as a predictor of uptake of cancer preventive procedures by women with a BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutation. Clin Genet. 2008;73:474–9.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  53. Hatcher MB, Fallowfield LJ. A qualitative study looking at the psychosocial implications of bilateral prophylactic mastectomy. Breast. 2003;12:1–9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  54. Kuerer HM, Hwang ES, Anthony JP, et al. Current national health insurance coverage policies for breast and ovarian cancer prophylactic surgery. Ann Surg Oncol. 2000;7:325–32.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  55. Douglas HA, Hamilton RJ, Grubs RE. The effect of BRCA gene testing on family relationships: A thematic analysis of qualitative interviews. J Genet Couns. 2009;18(5):418–35.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  56. Etchegary H, Miller F, deLaat S, Wilson B, Carroll J, Cappelli M. Decision-making about inherited cancer risk: Exploring dimensions of genetic responsibility. J Genet Couns. 2009;18:252–64.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  57. Charles C, Gafni A, Whelan T. Shared decision-making in the medical encounter: What does it mean?(or it takes at least two to tango). Soc Sci Med. 1997;44:681–92.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  58. Schwartz MD, Peshkin BN, Tercyak KP, Taylor KL, Valdimarsdottir H. Decision making and decision support for hereditary breast-ovarian cancer susceptibility. Health Psychol. 2005;24:S78–84.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  59. Sharpe NF, Carter RF. Genetic Testing: Care, Consent, and Liability. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley; 2006.

    Google Scholar 

  60. Elwyn G, Gray J, Clarke A. Shared decision making and non-directiveness in genetic counselling. J Med Genet. 2000;37:135–8.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  61. Smets E, van Zwieten M, Michie S. Comparing genetic counseling with non-genetic health care interactions: Two of a kind? Patient Educ Couns. 2007;68:225–34.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  62. Levinson W, Kao A, Kuby A, Thisted RA. Not all patients want to participate in decision making. J Gen Intern Med. 2005;20:531–5.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  63. Janz NK, Wren PA, Copeland LA, Lowery JC, Goldfarb SL, Wilkins EG. Patient-physician ­concordance: Preferences, perceptions, and factors influencing the breast cancer surgical decision. J Clin Oncol. 2004;22:3091.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  64. Sabo B, St-Jacques N, Rayson D. The decision-making experience among women diagnosed with stage I and II breast cancer. Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2007;102:51–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  65. Beaver K, Luker KA, Owens RG, Leinster SJ, Degner LF, Sloan JA. Treatment decision making in women newly diagnosed with breast cancer. Cancer Nurs. 1996;19:8.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  66. Hack TF, Degner LF, Watson P, Sinha L. Do patients benefit from participating in medical decision making? longitudinal follow-up of women with breast cancer. Psychooncology. 2006;15:9–19.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  67. Katz SJ, Hawley ST. From policy to patients and back: Surgical treatment decision making for patients with breast cancer. Health Aff. 2007;26:761.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  68. Lantz PM, Janz NK, Fagerlin A, et al. Satisfaction with surgery outcomes and the decision process in a Population-Based sample of women with breast cancer. Health Serv Res. 2005;40:745–68.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  69. Keating NL, Guadagnoli E, Landrum MB, Borbas C, Weeks JC. Treatment decision making in early-stage breast cancer: Should surgeons match patients’ desired level of involvement? J Clin Oncol. 2002; 20:1473.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  70. MacDonald DJ, Sarna L, Weitzel JN, Ferrell B. Women’s perceptions of the personal and family impact of genetic cancer risk assessment: Focus group findings. J Genet Couns. 2010;19:148–60.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  71. van Dooren S, Duivenvoorden HJ, Passchier J, et al. The distress thermometer assessed in women at risk of developing hereditary breast cancer. Psycho-oncology 2009;18:1080–87.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  72. Esplen MJ, Cappelli M, Rayson D, et al. Psychosocial health service implications for genetic testing: A clinical and training needs assessment. Canadian Institute of Health Research Operating Grant. Retrieved December 6, 2009, from: http://www.cihr-irsc.gc.ca/e/28776.html#Oustanding

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  73. Esplen MJ, Stuckless N, Hunter J, et al. The BRCA self-concept scale: A new instrument to measure self-concept in BRCA1/2 mutation carriers. Psychooncology 2009;18:1216–29.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  74. Patenaude AF, Orozco S, Li X, et al. Support needs and acceptability of psychological and peer consultation: Attitudes of 108 women who had undergone or were considering prophylactic mastectomy. Psychooncology 2008;17:831–43.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  75. Esplen MJ, Hunter J, Leszcz M, et al. A multicenter study of supportive-expressive group therapy for women with BRCA1/BRCA2 mutations. Cancer. 2004;101:2327–40.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  76. McKinnon W, Naud S, Ashikaga T, Colletti R, Wood M. Results of an intervention for individuals and families with BRCA mutations: A model for providing medical updates and psychosocial support following genetic testing. J Genet Couns. 2007;16:433–56.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. School of Population and Public Health, Faculty of Medicine, The University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC, Canada

    A. Fuchsia Howard R.N., Ph.D. & Arminée Kazanjian Dr. Soc

  2. School of Nursing, The University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC, Canada

    Lynda G. Balneaves R.N., Ph.D.

Authors
  1. A. Fuchsia Howard R.N., Ph.D.
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Lynda G. Balneaves R.N., Ph.D.
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Arminée Kazanjian Dr. Soc
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to A. Fuchsia Howard R.N., Ph.D. .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Kimmel Cancer Center, Thomas Jefferson University, S. 10th Street 233, Philadelphia, 19107, Pennsylvania, USA

    Brian I. Carr

  2. STARZL TRANSPLAN INST, University of Pittsburgh, 5TH AVE 7 MONTEFIORE 3459, PITTSBURGH, 15213, Pennsylvania, USA

    JENNIFER STEEL

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2013 Springer Science+Business Media, LLC

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Howard, A.F., Balneaves, L.G., Kazanjian, A. (2013). Mastectomy to Prevent Breast Cancer: Psychosocial Aspects of Women’s Decision-Making. In: Carr, B., STEEL, J. (eds) Psychological Aspects of Cancer. Springer, Boston, MA. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4614-4866-2_4

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4614-4866-2_4

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Boston, MA

  • Print ISBN: 978-1-4614-4865-5

  • Online ISBN: 978-1-4614-4866-2

  • eBook Packages: MedicineMedicine (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation