Published in

Lippincott, Williams & Wilkins, Obstetrics & Gynecology, 6(127), p. 1054-1063, 2016

DOI: 10.1097/aog.0000000000001448

Links

Tools

Export citation

Search in Google Scholar

Salpingectomy With Delayed Oophorectomy in BRCA1/2 Mutation Carriers

This paper was not found in any repository, but could be made available legally by the author.
This paper was not found in any repository, but could be made available legally by the author.

Full text: Unavailable

Green circle
Preprint: archiving allowed
Orange circle
Postprint: archiving restricted
Red circle
Published version: archiving forbidden
Data provided by SHERPA/RoMEO

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To estimate BRCA1/2 mutation carriers' cumulative ovarian cancer risks after risk-reducing salpingectomy at various ages with delayed oophorectomy several years later compared with risk-reducing salpingo-oophorectomy. METHODS: A literature search was performed on cumulative ovarian cancer risks and effects of risk-reducing salpingo-oophorectomy and salpingectomy. Results were used in a modeling study to estimate cumulative ovarian cancer risks for various scenarios of salpingectomy with delayed oophorectomy and risk-reducing salpingo-oophorectomy using Cox proportional hazard models. RESULTS: Estimated cumulative ovarian cancer risks at age 70 years for risk-reducing salpingectomy with delayed oophorectomy are highest for BRCA1 mutation carriers undergoing surgeries at higher age. Maximum increase in point estimates (from 1.8% to 4.1%) occurs in 40-year-old BRCA1 mutation carriers undergoing oophorectomy at age 45 years after nonprotective salpingectomy instead of salpingo-oophorectomy at age 40 years. In the best-case scenario, assuming 65% risk reduction by salpingectomy and 96% by salpingo-oophorectomy, point estimates increase (from 1.8% to 2.6%) or decrease (from 3.4% to 3.3%) depending on age. In the worst-case scenario for BRCA2, point estimates maximally increase from 0.6% to 1.8% in 45-year-old carriers when oophorectomy is performed at age 50 years instead of risk-reducing salpingo-oophorectomy at age 45 years. In the best-case scenario, point estimates increase (from 1.3% to 1.5%) or decrease (from 1.5 to 1.3%). CONCLUSION: Differences in estimated ovarian cancer risks between risk-reducing salpingo-oophorectomy and salpingectomy with delayed oophorectomy are small, even if salpingectomy is ineffective. Presented estimated ovarian cancer risks can be used in counseling BRCA1/2 mutation carriers, thereby facilitating a personalized and well-informed choice for either strategy.