NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology. Prostate Cancer, Version 3.2012

Journal of the National Comprehensive Cancer Network: JNCCN (Impact Factor: 4.18). 11/2009; 7(10):1060-96.
Source: PubMed


The goal of these guidelines is to give health care providers a practical and consistent framework for screening and evaluating a spectrum of breast lesions. Clinical judgment should always be an important component of optimal patient management. If the physical breast examination, radiologic imaging, and pathologic findings are not concordant, the clinician should carefully reconsider the assessment of the patient's problem. Involving patients in treatment decisions empowers them to determine an acceptable level of breast cancer risk in the screening and/or follow-up procedures.

Download full-text


Available from: Benjamin Olney Anderson, May 05, 2014
  • Source
    • "For example, women in the current sample are relatively young compared to current recommended guidelines by the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force (2009). However , the women were within the range of guidelines per the American Cancer Society (2014b) and the National Comprehensive Cancer Network (Bevers et al., 2009). Although the current sample included women living in rural and urban areas, the sample was underpowered to test differences in rural and urban women's experiences. "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Purpose/Objectives: To explore ethnic differences in psychological distress and social withdrawal after receiving an abnormal mammogram result and to assess if coping strategies mediate ethnic differences. Design: Descriptive correlational. Setting: Two urban mobile mammography units and a rural community hospital in the state of Washington. Sample: 41 Latina and 41 non-Latina Caucasian (NLC) women who had received an abnormal mammogram result. Methods: Women completed standard sociodemographic questions, Impact of Event Scale-Revised, the social dimension of the Psychological Consequences Questionnaire, and the Brief COPE. Main Research Variables: Ethnicity, psychological distress, social withdrawal, and coping. Findings: Latinas experienced greater psychological distress and social withdrawal compared to NLC counterparts. Denial as a coping strategy mediated ethnic differences in psychological distress. Religious coping mediated ethnic differences in social withdrawal. Conclusions: Larger population-based studies are necessary to understand how ethnic differences in coping strategies can influence psychological outcomes. This is an important finding that warrants additional study among women who are and are not diagnosed with breast cancer following an abnormal mammogram. Implications for Nursing: Nurses may be able to work with Latina patients to diminish denial coping and consequent distress. Nurses may be particularly effective, given cultural values concerning strong interpersonal relationships and respect for authority figures.
    Oncology nursing forum 09/2014; 41(5):523-532. DOI:10.1188/14.ONF.523-532 · 2.79 Impact Factor
  • Source
    • "For example, small breast cancers in BRCA1 carriers are more aggressive than average cancers [7] and over-diagnosis is less of a problem [8], but there is also a high mortality associated with small node-negative hereditary cancers [7] and there is little correlation between tumor size and survival for small BRCA1-positive cancers [7] [9]. MRI has now been adopted widely for screening of mutation carriers [10] [11]. Studies to date that support the use of MRI in BRCA1 carriers are based on sensitivity [12] [13] [14] and not on mortality and we should not take a mortality benefit for granted. "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: •Personalized medicine is a response to emerging technologies and commercialization•Testing for high risk genes will not impact on global cancer rates.•Testing for low risk genes has little promise for preventing cancer.•The impact of new technologies should be evaluated from a population perspective•We must consider alternate ways to deliver information in the clinic.•Genetic tests will have most potential for impact if made available to all.
    Journal of Cancer Policy 09/2014; 2(3). DOI:10.1016/j.jcpo.2014.05.002
  • Source
    • "Alternatively, surgical options include risk reducing mastectomy (RRM) and oophorectomy (RRO). Current guidelines recommend RRO between the ages of 35 and 40 or upon completion of childbearing and that RRM be discussed as an option on a case-by-case basis [2,3]. "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: As BRCA1/2 testing becomes more routine, questions remain about long-term satisfaction and quality of life following testing. Previously, we described long term distress and risk management outcomes among women with BRCA1/2 mutations. This study addresses positive psychological outcomes in BRCA1/2 carriers, describing decision satisfaction and quality of life in the years following testing METHODS: We evaluated satisfaction with testing and management decisions among 144 BRCA1/2 carriers. Prior to genetic testing, we assessed family history, sociodemographics and distress. At a mean of 5.3 years post-testing, we assessed management decisions, satisfaction with decisions and, among women with cancer, quality of life. Overall, satisfaction with decision making was high. Women who had risk reducing mastectomy or oophorectomy were more satisfied with management decisions. Participants who obtained a risk reducing oophorectomy were more satisfied with their genetic testing decision. Among affected carriers, high pretest anxiety was associated with poorer quality of life and having had risk reducing mastectomy prior to testing was associated with better quality of life. The negative impact of pre-test anxiety was diminished among women who had mastectomies before testing. BRCA1/2 carriers are satisfied with their testing and risk management decisions and report good quality of life years after testing. Having risk reducing surgery predicts increased satisfaction and improved quality of life.
    Hereditary Cancer in Clinical Practice 04/2014; 12(1):9. DOI:10.1186/1897-4287-12-9 · 1.47 Impact Factor
Show more