Annals of Surgical Oncology

, Volume 23, Issue 9, pp 2795–2801 | Cite as

Trends in Media Reports of Celebrities’ Breast Cancer Treatment Decisions

  • Michael S. Sabel
  • Sonya Dal Cin
Breast Oncology



Although the increasing use of bilateral mastectomies is multifaceted, one source of influence may be the media, including coverage of celebrity breast cancer treatment. We examined trends in media reporting that might impact decision making among women with breast cancer.


We performed searches of two comprehensive online databases for articles from major U.S. print publications mentioning celebrities and terms related to the word “breast” and terms related to cancer treatment. Automated analysis using custom-created dictionaries was used to determine word frequencies over time. An analysis of net media tone was conducted using Lexicoder Sentiment Dictionaries.


Celebrity breast cancer media reports significantly increased since 2004 (p < .05). Dramatic increases in bilateral mastectomy articles occurred in 2008–2009, with an increase in net positive tone. The surgical treatment was significantly more likely to be mentioned when a celebrity had bilateral mastectomies than unilateral mastectomy or breast conservation (44.8 vs 26.1 %, p < .001). The majority (60 %) of articles on celebrities undergoing bilateral mastectomy for cancer had no mention of genetics, family history, or risk.


Media reports of celebrity breast cancer present a bias toward bilateral mastectomies in both frequency and tone. This may sway public opinion, particularly when factors such as risk and genetics are excluded. Surgeons need to work with the media to improve cancer reporting and identify methods to better educate patients prior to surgical consultations.


Breast Cancer BRCA Mutation Breast Cancer Treatment Media Report Sentiment Analysis 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


  1. 1.
    Jones NB, Wilson J, Kotur L, Stephens J, Farrar WB, Agnese DM. Contralateral prophylactic mastectomy for unilateral breast cancer: an increasing trend at a single institution. Ann Surg Oncol. 2009;16:2691–6.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    King TA, Sakr R, Patil S, Gurevich I, Stempel M, Sampson M, Morrow M. Clinical management factors contribute to the decision for contralateral prophylactic mastectomy. J Clin Oncol. 2011;29:2158–64.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Yao K, Winchester DJ, Czechura T, Huo D. Contralateral prophylactic mastectomy and survival: report from the National Cancer Data Base, 1998–2002. Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2013;142:465–76.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Tuttle TM, Habermann EB, Grund EH, Morris TJ, Virnig BA. Increasing use of contralateral prophylactic mastectomy for breast cancer patients: A trend toward more aggressive surgical treatment. J Clin Oncol. 2007;25:5203–9.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Pesce CE, Leiderbach E, Czechura T, Winchester DJ, Yao K. Changing surgical trends in young patients with early stage breast cancer, 2003 to 2010: A report from the national cancer database. J Am Coll Surg. 2014;219:19–30.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Kurian AW, Lichtensztain DY, Keegan TH, Nelson DO, Clarke CA, Gomez SL. Use of and mortality after bilateral mastectomy compared with other surgical treatments for breast cancer in California, 1998–2011. JAMA. 2014;12:902–14.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Borzekowski DL, Guan Y, Smith KC, Erby LH, Roter DL. The Angelina effect: immediate reach, grasp, and impact of going public. Genet Med. 2014;16:516–21.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Evans DG, Barwell J, Eccles DM, et al. The Angelina Jolie effect: how high celebrity profile can have a major impact on provision of cancer related services. Breast Cancer Res. 2014;16:442.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Noar SM, Althouse BM, Ayers JW, Francis DB, Ribisl KM (2015) Cancer information seeking in the digital age: effects of Angelina Jolie’s prophylactic mastectomy announcement. Med Decis Mak 20;35:16–21.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Nierderdeppe J. Beyond knowledge gaps: examining socioeconomic differences in response to cancer news. Human Comm Res. 2008;34:423–47.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    R Development Core Team. R: A language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna. ISBN: 3-900051-07-0. (2008)
  12. 12.
    Young L, Soroka S. Lexicoder Sentiment Dictionary. McGill University, Montreal. Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Young L, Soroka S. Affective news: the automated coding of sentiment in political texts. Polit Commun. 2012;29:205–31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Hawley ST, Jagsi R, Morrow M, Janz NK, Hamilton A, Graff JJ, Katz SJ. Social and clinical determinants of contralateral prophylactic mastectomy. JAMA Surg. 2014;149:582–9.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Rosenberg SM, Tracy MS, Meyer ME, et al. Perceptions, knowledge and satisfaction with contralateral prophylactic mastectomy among young women with breast cancer. Ann Intern Med. 2013;159:373–81.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Black WC, Nease RF, Tosteson AN. Perceptions of breast cancer risk and screening effectiveness in women younger than 50 years of age. J Natl Cancer Inst. 1995;87:720–31.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Rakovitch E, Franssen E, Kim J, et al. A comparison of risk perception and psychological morbidity in women with DCIS and early invasive breast cancer. Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2003;77:285–93.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Abbott A, Rueth N, Pappas-Varco S, Kuntz K, Kerr E, Tuttle T. Perceptions of contralateral breast cancer: an overestimation of risk. Ann Surg Oncol. 2011;18:3129–36.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Katz SJ, Morrow M. Contralateral prophylactic mastectomy for breast cancer. Addressing peace of mind. JAMA. 2013;310:793–4.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Henderson L, Kitzinger J. The human drama of genetics: ‘hard’ and ‘soft’ media representations of inherited breast cancer. Sociol. Health Ill. 1999;21:560–78.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Peters HP. The interaction of journalists and scientific experts. Media Cult. Soc. 1995;17:31–48.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Silverman SM. Wanda Sykes: I had a double mastectomy., 2011.
  23. 23.
    Kamenova K, Reshef A, Caulfield T. Angelina Jolie’s faulty gene: newspaper coverage of a celebrity’s preventive bilateral mastectomy in Canada, the United States, and the United Kingdom. Genet Med. 2014;16:522–8.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Juthe RH, Zaharchuk A, Wang C. Celebrity disclosures and information seeking: the case of Angelina Jolie. Genet Med. 2015;17:545–53.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Chapman S, McLeod K, Wakefield M, Holding S. Impact of news of celebrity illness on breast cancer screening: Kylie Minogue’s breast cancer diagnosis. Med J Aust. 2005;183:247–50.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Fisher B, Bauer M, Margolese R, et al. Five-year results of a randomized clinical trial comparing total mastectomy and segmental mastectomy with or without radiation in the treatment of breast cancer. N Engl J Med. 1985;312:665–73.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Du X, Freeman Jr. DH, Syblik DA. What drove changes in the use of breast conserving surgery since the early 1980s? The role of the clinical trial, celebrity action and an NH consensus statement. Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2000;62:71–9.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Nattinger AB, Hoffmann RG, Howell-Petz A, Goodwin JS. Effect of Nancy Reagan’s mastectomy on choice of surgery for breast cancer by US women. JAMA. 1998;279:762–6.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Society of Surgical Oncology 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of SurgeryUniversity of Michigan Health SystemAnn ArborUSA
  2. 2.Department of Communication StudiesUniversity of MichiganAnn ArborUSA

Personalised recommendations