| Title |
Is Hormone Replacement Therapy Safe in Women With a BRCA Mutation?
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
American Journal of Clinical Oncology: Cancer Clinical Trials, March 2018
|
| DOI | 10.1097/coc.0000000000000269 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Nicole Birrer, Carolina Chinchilla, Marcela Del Carmen, Don S. Dizon |
| Abstract |
Women with a BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutation are recommended to undergo prophylactic (or risk reducing) bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy (BSO) before age 40, resulting in surgical menopause. Given the concerns of estrogen deprivation on overall health, hormone therapy (HT) is often discussed, yet safety concerns persist. We performed a systematic literature review of the safety of HT in women with a BRCA mutation undergoing prophylactic BSO. Although there remains a paucity of data on this topic, as evidenced by this systematic review of the contemporary literature, these patients do benefit from treatment, especially as it relates to menopausal symptoms without an apparently increased risk of breast cancer. Decisions regarding the use of HT in women who undergo BSO after detection of a BRCA mutation must be individualized based on careful consideration of the risks and benefits. However, the risks of a subsequent cancer diagnosis appear small, particularly in regards to the benefits of treatment afforded by HT. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 17 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 7 | 41% |
| Ireland | 1 | 6% |
| Canada | 1 | 6% |
| United Kingdom | 1 | 6% |
| Unknown | 7 | 41% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 13 | 76% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 3 | 18% |
| Scientists | 1 | 6% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 37 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 37 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 7 | 19% |
| Other | 3 | 8% |
| Student > Bachelor | 3 | 8% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 3 | 8% |
| Professor > Associate Professor | 3 | 8% |
| Other | 6 | 16% |
| Unknown | 12 | 32% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 15 | 41% |
| Engineering | 3 | 8% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 1 | 3% |
| Social Sciences | 1 | 3% |
| Business, Management and Accounting | 1 | 3% |
| Other | 0 | 0% |
| Unknown | 16 | 43% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 12. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 06 March 2018.
All research outputs
#3,137,395
of 25,405,598 outputs
Outputs from American Journal of Clinical Oncology: Cancer Clinical Trials
#63
of 1,754 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#62,468
of 344,913 outputs
Outputs of similar age from American Journal of Clinical Oncology: Cancer Clinical Trials
#7
of 36 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,405,598 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 87th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,754 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.5. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 96% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 344,913 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 81% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 36 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 83% of its contemporaries.