Journal of Genetic Counseling

, Volume 27, Issue 5, pp 1312–1313 | Cite as

Response to “A Psychological Perspective on Factors Predicting Prophylactic Salpingo-Oophorectomy in a Sample of Italian Women from the General Population. Results from a Hypothetical Study in the Context of BRCA Mutations”

  • Devin M. CoxEmail author
Letter to the Editor

This letter is in response to the Gavaruzzi et al. (2017) article detailing their study regarding healthy women’s hypothetical preferences about prophylactic bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy (BSO) after receiving information about BRCA1/2 cancer risks and preventative options. Gavaruzzi et al. (2017) provided women with information regarding the ovarian cancer risk for BRCA1/2 mutation carriers as well as their residual risk for ovarian cancer after receiving prophylactic BSO. The article indicated that they reported to their study participants that the residual risk for ovarian cancer in BRCA1-positive women is 12% and for BRCA2-positive women is 4%. Gavaruzzi et al. (2017) then cited the Mavaddat et al. (2013) article as the source for this information.

A review of the literature on residual ovarian/primary peritoneal cancer risks after prophylactic BSO indicates that these numbers are inaccurate. The Mavaddat et al. (2013) article didn’t investigate or report on information...


Compliance with Ethical Standards

Conflict of Interest

Devin M. Cox declares that he has no conflict of interest.


  1. Finch, A., Beiner, M., Lubinski, J., Lynch, H. T., Moller, P., Rosen, B., et al. (2006). Salpingo-oophorectomy and the risk of ovarian, fallopian tube and peritoneal cancers in women with a BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutation. Journal of American Medical Association, 296(2), 185–191.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Finch, A. P. M., Lubinsky, J., Moller, P., Singer, C. F., Karlan, B., Senter, L., et al. (2014). Impact of oophorectomy on cancer incidence and mortality in women with a BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutation. Journal of Clinical Oncology, 32(15), 1547–1553. Scholar
  3. Gavaruzzi, T., Tasso, A., Franiuk, M., Varesco, L., & Lotto, L. (2017). A psychological perspective on factors predicting prophylactic salpingo-oophorectomy in a sample of italian women from the general population. Results from a hypothetical study in the context of BRCA mutations. Journal of Genetic Counseling, 26, 1144–1152. Scholar
  4. Hallowell, N., Jacobs, I., Richards, M., Mackay, J., & Gore, M. (2001). Surveillance or surgery? A description of the factors that influence high risk premenopausal women’s decisions about prophylactic oophorectomy. Journal of Medical Genetics, 38, 683–726.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  5. Hoffmann, T. C., & Del Mar, C. (2015). Patient’s expectations of the benefits and harms of treatments, screening and tests; a systemic review. JAMA Internal Medicine, 175(2), 274–286. [published online Dec 2014]CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. Mavaddat, N., Peock, S., Frost, D., Ellis, S., Platte, R., Fineberg, E., et al. (2013). Cancer risks for BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers: Results from prospective analysis of EMBRACE. Journal National Cancer Institute, 105, 812–822. Scholar
  7. Olivier, R. I., van Beurden, M., Lubsen, M. A. C., Rookus, M. A., Mooij, T. M., van de Vijver, M. J., et al. (2004). Clinical outcome of prophylactic oophorectomy in BRCA1/2 mutation carriers and events during follow-up. British Journal of Cancer, 90, 1492–1497.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© National Society of Genetic Counselors, Inc. 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.University of Kansas Cancer CenterWestwoodUSA

Personalised recommendations