Mehta, Jaya

Background: Understanding the accuracy of a woman's perceived breast cancer risk can enhance shared decision-making about breast cancer screening through provider and patient discussion. We aim to report and compare women's perceived lifetime breast cancer risk to calculated lifetime breast cancer risk. Methods: Women presenting to Mayo Clinic in Arizona and Minnesota in July 2016 completed a survey assessing their perceived breast cancer risk. Lifetime Gail risk scores were calculated from questions pertaining to health history and were then compared with perceived breast cancer risk. Results: A total of 550 predominantly white, married, and well-educated (≥college) women completed surveys. Using lifetime Gail risk scores, 5.6% were classified as high risk (>20% lifetime risk), 7.7% were classified as intermediate risk (15%–20%), and 86.6% were classified as average risk (<15%). Of the 27 women who were classified as high risk, 18 (66.7%) underestimated their risk and of the 37 women who were intermediate risk, 12 (32.4%) underestimated risk. Women more likely to underestimate their risk had a reported history of an abnormal mammogram and at least one or more relative with a history of breast cancer. Surveyed women tended to overestimate risk 4.3 (130/30) times as often as they underestimated risk. Conclusion: In a group of predominantly white, educated, and married cohort of women, there was a large portion of women in the elevated risk groups who underestimated risk. Specific aspects of medical history were associated with underestimation including a history of abnormal mammogram and family history of breast cancer. Overall, in our sample, more women overestimated than underestimated risk.

The risks and benefits of menopausal hormonal therapy (HT) have been evaluated extensively over the past three decades. While the efficacy of HT for management of menopausal symptoms, including vasomotor symptoms and vaginal dryness is well established, its relationship to cardiovascular outcomes is complex. The timing hypothesis, which posits that the cardiovascular effects of HT depend on the timing of initiation of HT in relation to menopause, has helped shape our understanding of the cardiovascular outcomes related to HT. Based on results from female monkey studies, the timing hypothesis provides a framework to explain discrepancies in results between multiple observation studies and the Women's Health Initiative (WHI) hormone therapy trials. The WHI trials closed early in 2002 in part because of increased cardiovascular events seen in women on treatment. Subanalysis of the WHI results by age group, and more recent randomized control studies, including the Kronos Early Estrogen and Prevention Study (KEEPS) and Early Versus Late Intervention Trial (ELITE), demonstrate that the risk of adverse cardiovascular events for HT are low for women <60 years of age or within 10 year from menopause. Although current data does not support using HT for primary prevention of cardiovascular disease, it does suggest that HT can be safely used to treat symptoms in appropriately selected women close to menopause.