Literature DB >> 15825209

Preferences of Women Evaluating Risks of Tamoxifen (POWER) study of preferences for tamoxifen for breast cancer risk reduction.

Joy Melnikow1, Debora Paterniti, Rahman Azari, Christina Kuenneth, Stephen Birch, Miriam Kuppermann, James Nuovo, Janet Keyzer, Stuart Henderson.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: The objective of this study was to understand the attitudes and preferences of risk-eligible women regarding use of tamoxifen for breast cancer risk reduction.
METHODS: A cross-sectional, mixed-methods interview study was conducted at a university medical center and at community sites. Participants were women who had an estimated 5-year breast cancer risk > or = 1.7% and no prior breast cancer. Interviews were conducted in English or Spanish. The interview included a 15-minute, standardized educational session on the potential benefits and harms of tamoxifen followed by close-ended and open-ended questions about participants' inclinations to take tamoxifen and factors important to their decision. A demographic questionnaire, a test on knowledge of potential benefits and harms of tamoxifen, and an interview evaluation were included.
RESULTS: Two hundred fifty-five women completed interviews. Their estimated mean 5-year breast cancer risk was 2.8%; and their mean self-perceived 5-year risk was 32.7%. After the educational intervention, 45 women (17.6%) were inclined to take tamoxifen. Very high risk women (> 3.5%) were no more inclined to take it than women with lower risk (1.7-3.5%). In a multivariable analysis, lower income, confidence in the effectiveness of tamoxifen, and concern about fractures were associated with being inclined to take it; concern about pulmonary embolism, dyspareunia, cataracts, and low self-perceived breast cancer risk were associated negatively with taking tamoxifen. Participants expressed concerns about adverse effects.
CONCLUSIONS: Less than 20% of women were interested in tamoxifen after education about potential benefits and harms, despite a very high self-perceived breast cancer risk. Candidate chemoprevention agents must have few potential adverse effects to achieve widespread acceptance.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2005        PMID: 15825209     DOI: 10.1002/cncr.20981

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Cancer        ISSN: 0008-543X            Impact factor:   6.860


  30 in total

Review 1.  Patient decisions about breast cancer chemoprevention: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  Mary E Ropka; Jess Keim; John T Philbrick
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  2010-05-10       Impact factor: 44.544

2.  Breast Cancer Chemoprevention among High-risk Women and those with Ductal Carcinoma In Situ.

Authors:  Laura L Reimers; Parijatham S Sivasubramanian; Dawn Hershman; Mary Beth Terry; Heather Greenlee; Julie Campbell; Kevin Kalinsky; Matthew Maurer; Ramona Jayasena; Rossy Sandoval; Maria Alvarez; Katherine D Crew
Journal:  Breast J       Date:  2015-04-16       Impact factor: 2.431

3.  Affective forecasting and medication decision making in breast-cancer prevention.

Authors:  Michael Hoerger; Laura D Scherer; Angela Fagerlin
Journal:  Health Psychol       Date:  2016-02-11       Impact factor: 4.267

4.  Willingness to use tamoxifen to prevent breast cancer among diverse women.

Authors:  Celia Patricia Kaplan; Sue E Kim; Sabrina T Wong; George F Sawaya; Judith M E Walsh; Eliseo J Pérez-Stable
Journal:  Breast Cancer Res Treat       Date:  2012-05       Impact factor: 4.872

5.  A randomized phase II presurgical trial of transdermal 4-hydroxytamoxifen gel versus oral tamoxifen in women with ductal carcinoma in situ of the breast.

Authors:  Oukseub Lee; Katherine Page; David Ivancic; Irene Helenowski; Vamsi Parini; Megan E Sullivan; Julie A Margenthaler; Robert T Chatterton; Borko Jovanovic; Barbara K Dunn; Brandy M Heckman-Stoddard; Kathleen Foster; Miguel Muzzio; Julia Shklovskaya; Silvia Skripkauskas; Piotr Kulesza; David Green; Nora M Hansen; Kevin P Bethke; Jacqueline S Jeruss; Raymond Bergan; Seema A Khan
Journal:  Clin Cancer Res       Date:  2014-07-15       Impact factor: 12.531

6.  My Lived Experiences Are More Important Than Your Probabilities: The Role of Individualized Risk Estimates for Decision Making about Participation in the Study of Tamoxifen and Raloxifene (STAR).

Authors:  Christine Holmberg; Erika A Waters; Katie Whitehouse; Mary Daly; Worta McCaskill-Stevens
Journal:  Med Decis Making       Date:  2015-07-16       Impact factor: 2.583

7.  Addressing barriers to uptake of breast cancer chemoprevention for patients and providers.

Authors:  Katherine D Crew
Journal:  Am Soc Clin Oncol Educ Book       Date:  2015

8.  Acceptance and adherence to chemoprevention among women at increased risk of breast cancer.

Authors:  Richard G Roetzheim; Ji-Hyun Lee; William Fulp; Elizabeth Matos Gomez; Elissa Clayton; Sharon Tollin; Nazanin Khakpour; Christine Laronga; Marie Catherine Lee; John V Kiluk
Journal:  Breast       Date:  2014-12-06       Impact factor: 4.380

9.  Explanations for side effect aversion in preventive medical treatment decisions.

Authors:  Erika A Waters; Neil D Weinstein; Graham A Colditz; Karen Emmons
Journal:  Health Psychol       Date:  2009-03       Impact factor: 4.267

10.  Women's decisions regarding tamoxifen for breast cancer prevention: responses to a tailored decision aid.

Authors:  Angela Fagerlin; Brian J Zikmund-Fisher; Vijayan Nair; Holly A Derry; Jennifer B McClure; Sarah Greene; Azadeh Stark; Sharon Hensley Alford; Paula Lantz; Daniel F Hayes; Cheryl Wiese; Sarah Claud Zweig; Rosemarie Pitsch; Aleksandra Jankovic; Peter A Ubel
Journal:  Breast Cancer Res Treat       Date:  2010-02       Impact factor: 4.872

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.