Secondary Logo

Journal Logo

Institutional members access full text with Ovid®

Rising Rates of Contralateral Prophylactic Mastectomy as a Treatment for Early-Stage Breast Cancer

Jerome-D'Emilia, Bonnie, PhD, MPH, CBCN, RN; Kushary, Debashis, PhD; Suplee, Patricia D., PhD, RNC-OB

doi: 10.1097/NCC.0000000000000564

Background The rate of contralateral prophylactic mastectomy (CPM) in women with unilateral mastectomy is increasing with no plateau.

Objectives The aim of this study was to improve the understanding of patient- and tumor-related factors that influenced the choice of mastectomy with CPM as treatment for early-stage breast cancer at an academic medical center in New Jersey.

Methods This was a retrospective analysis of 10 years of breast cancer data including 1556 women aged 40 to 80 years treated for breast cancer at an academic medical center. Logistic regression models identified possible associations between type of surgery and various patient- and tumor-related characteristics.

Results Women most likely to be treated with CPM were younger (P < .0001), white (P = .003), and privately insured (P < .0001). Factors that increased the odds of receiving CPM included year of surgery (odds ratio, 1.441; confidence interval, 1.328–1.564) and residing in a relatively wealthy community (odds ratio, 11.159; confidence interval, 3.467–35.917).

Conclusions The rate of CPM as a treatment for unilateral breast cancer continues to rise, and this treatment decision seems to be relatively independent of tumor-related factors and clinical evidence of efficacy. More research is needed to ascertain why women are choosing this surgical option.

Implications for Practice The large majority who are choosing CPM are doing so regardless of the lack of clinical efficacy, yet there are few articles in the nursing literature preparing nurses to understand and counsel these women who may be asking for advice. Nurses are well situated to provide unbiased and fact-based information to help women making potentially life-altering decisions in response to a cancer diagnosis.

Author Affiliations: School of Nursing, Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey, Camden (Drs Jerome-D'Emilia and Suplee); and School of Arts and Sciences, Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey, New Brunswick (Dr Kushary).

This publication was supported by grant or cooperative agreement no. NU58DP006279, funded by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Its contents are solely the responsibility of the authors and do not necessarily represent the official views of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention or the Department of Health and Human Services.

The New Jersey State Cancer Registry, Cancer Epidemiology Services, New Jersey Department of Health, is funded by the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results Program of the National Cancer Institute under contract HHSN261201300021I, the National Program of Cancer Registries, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention under grant 5U58DP003931-02, and the State of New Jersey and the Rutgers Cancer Institute of New Jersey.

The authors have no conflicts of interest to disclose.

Correspondence: Patricia D. Suplee, PhD, RNC-OB, School of Nursing, Rutgers, the State University of New Jersey, 530 Federal St, Camden, NJ 08102 (

Accepted for publication September 7, 2017.

Copyright © 2019 Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All rights reserved