Advertisement

Breast cancer risk after hysterectomy with and without salpingo-oophorectomy for benign indications

      Background

      Breast cancer risk has been extensively studied in women with genetic predisposition, that is, mutations in breast cancer genes 1 and 2. Although there are guidelines for performing bilateral salpingo-oophorectomies in individuals with specific genetic risks, oophorectomies are also performed in many women considered to be at average risk of developing breast cancer. The risk of breast cancer in women with average risk who undergo hysterectomy with bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy for benign indications is less clear.

      Objective

      This study aimed to estimate breast cancer risk after hysterectomy with and without concomitant bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy for benign indications.

      Study Design

      From 2001 to 2015, women aged 18 years and older from Kaiser Permanente Northern California who underwent hysterectomy alone and hysterectomy with bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy were identified using the International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision, procedure and Current Procedural Terminology codes. Women with a breast cancer gene mutation and previous history of breast cancer or gynecologic cancer were excluded. Descriptive and bivariate analyses were used to describe and compare demographic and clinical characteristics. Breast cancer incidence rates were calculated per 100,000 person-years. Survival analysis and Cox proportional hazard models were conducted to compare the risk of developing breast cancer.

      Results

      Of 49,215 women who underwent hysterectomy, 19,826 had hysterectomy with bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy. Whites, Hispanics, blacks, Asians, and other or unknown comprised 51.2%, 20.3%, 12.7%, 10.4%, and 5.3% of the study population, respectively. The average age of women with hysterectomy alone was 45.5 years compared with 50.8 years for those who had hysterectomy with bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy. During the study period, 915 women received a diagnosis of breast cancer. Age-specific breast cancer incidence rates were higher in women older than 60 years with oophorectomy than hysterectomy alone (471.2 [95% confidence interval, 386.2–556.2] vs 463.0 [95% confidence interval, 349.6–576.5], respectively). After controlling for age, race, income, and Charlson Comorbidity Index, women with bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy had a 14% lower risk of breast cancer than women with hysterectomy alone (hazard ratio, 0.86; 95% confidence interval, 0.75–0.98). All-cause mortality was higher with oophorectomy than hysterectomy alone (64.4% vs 35.6%, P<.0001, respectively).

      Conclusion

      Women with concurrent bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy for benign indications had a lower risk of breast cancer than those who had hysterectomy alone. However, all-cause mortality was higher in women with oophorectomy. Perimenopausal patients undergoing hysterectomy for benign indications should be counseled on the risks and benefits of oophorectomy at the time of surgery.

      Key words

      To read this article in full you will need to make a payment

      Subscribe:

      Subscribe to American Journal of Obstetrics & Gynecology
      Already a print subscriber? Claim online access
      Already an online subscriber? Sign in
      Institutional Access: Sign in to ScienceDirect

      References

        • Wilcox L.S.
        • Koonin L.M.
        • Pokras R.
        • Strauss L.T.
        • Xia Z.
        • Peterson H.B.
        Hysterectomy in the United States, 1988–1990.
        Obstet Gynecol. 1994; 83: 549-555
        • Whiteman M.K.
        • Hillis S.D.
        • Jamieson D.J.
        • et al.
        Inpatient hysterectomy surveillance in the United States, 2000-2004.
        Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2008; 198: 34.e1-34.e7
        • Wright J.D.
        • Ananth C.V.
        • Lewin S.N.
        • et al.
        Robotically assisted vs laparoscopic hysterectomy among women with benign gynecologic disease.
        JAMA. 2013; 309: 689-698
        • Moscucci O.
        • Clarke A.
        Prophylactic oophorectomy: a historical perspective.
        J Epidemiol Community Health. 2007; 61: 182-184
        • Jacoby V.L.
        • Vittinghoff E.
        • Nakagawa S.
        • et al.
        Factors associated with undergoing bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy at the time of hysterectomy for benign conditions.
        Obstet Gynecol. 2009; 113: 1259-1267
        • Chan J.K.
        • Urban R.
        • Capra A.M.
        • et al.
        Ovarian cancer rates after hysterectomy with and without salpingo-oophorectomy.
        Obstet Gynecol. 2014; 123: 65-72
        • National Cancer Institute
        Cancer Stat Facts: female breast cancer. Updated 2020.
        (Available at:)
        • Howlader N.
        • Noone A.M.
        • Krapcho M.
        • et al.
        SEER cancer statistics review (CSR) 1975-2014. Updated 2018.
        (Available at:)
        https://seer.cancer.gov/csr/1975_2014/
        Date accessed: May 20, 2019
        • Gaudet M.M.
        • Gapstur S.M.
        • Sun J.
        • Teras L.R.
        • Campbell P.T.
        • Patel A.V.
        Oophorectomy and hysterectomy and cancer incidence in the Cancer Prevention Study-II Nutrition Cohort.
        Obstet Gynecol. 2014; 123: 1247-1255
        • Parker W.H.
        • Broder M.S.
        • Chang E.
        • et al.
        Ovarian conservation at the time of hysterectomy and long-term health outcomes in the Nurses’ Health Study.
        Obstet Gynecol. 2009; 113: 1027-1037
        • Parker W.H.
        • Feskanich D.
        • Broder M.S.
        • et al.
        Long-term mortality associated with oophorectomy compared with ovarian conservation in the Nurses’ Health Study.
        Obstet Gynecol. 2013; 121: 709-716
        • Groen E.J.
        • Elshof L.E.
        • Visser L.L.
        • et al.
        Finding the balance between over- and under-treatment of ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS).
        Breast. 2017; 31: 274-283
        • Zaritsky E.
        • Tucker L.Y.
        • Neugebauer R.
        • et al.
        Minimally invasive hysterectomy and power morcellation trends in a West Coast integrated health system.
        Obstet Gynecol. 2017; 129: 996-1005
        • Jacoby V.L.
        • Grady D.
        • Wactawski-Wende J.
        • et al.
        Oophorectomy vs ovarian conservation with hysterectomy: cardiovascular disease, hip fracture, and cancer in the Women’s Health Initiative Observational Study.
        Arch Intern Med. 2011; 171: 760-768
        • Evans E.C.
        • Matteson K.A.
        • Orejuela F.J.
        • et al.
        Salpingo-oophorectomy at the time of benign hysterectomy: a systematic review.
        Obstet Gynecol. 2016; 128: 476-485
        • Howard B.V.
        • Kuller L.
        • Langer R.
        • et al.
        Risk of cardiovascular disease by hysterectomy status, with and without oophorectomy: the Women’s Health Initiative Observational Study.
        Circulation. 2005; 111: 1462-1470
        • Rocca W.A.
        • Gazzuola-Rocca L.
        • Smith C.Y.
        • et al.
        Accelerated accumulation of multimorbidity after bilateral oophorectomy: a population-based cohort study.
        Mayo Clin Proc. 2016; 91: 1577-1589
        • Hines L.M.
        • Sedjo R.L.
        • Byers T.
        • et al.
        The interaction between genetic ancestry and breast cancer risk factors among Hispanic women: the Breast Cancer Health Disparities Study.
        Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev. 2017; 26: 692-701
        • Miller K.D.
        • Goding Sauer A.
        • Ortiz A.P.
        • et al.
        Cancer statistics for Hispanics/Latinos, 2018.
        CA Cancer J Clin. 2018; 68: 425-445
        • American Cancer Society
        Lifestyle-related breast cancer risk factors. Updated 2020.
        (Available at:)
        • Harris H.R.
        • Willett W.C.
        • Terry K.L.
        • Michels K.B.
        Body fat distribution and risk of premenopausal breast cancer in the Nurses’ Health Study II.
        J Natl Cancer Inst. 2011; 103: 273-278
        • van den Brandt P.A.
        • Spiegelman D.
        • Yaun S.S.
        • et al.
        Pooled analysis of prospective cohort studies on height, weight, and breast cancer risk.
        Am J Epidemiol. 2000; 152: 514-527
        • Renehan A.G.
        • Tyson M.
        • Egger M.
        • Heller R.F.
        • Zwahlen M.
        Body-mass index and incidence of cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis of prospective observational studies.
        Lancet. 2008; 371: 569-578
        • Nichols H.B.
        • Schoemaker M.J.
        • Cai J.
        • et al.
        Breast cancer risk after recent childbirth: a pooled analysis of 15 prospective studies.
        Ann Intern Med. 2019; 170: 22-30
        • Collaborative Group on Hormonal Factors in Breast Cancer
        Type and timing of menopausal hormone therapy and breast cancer risk: individual participant meta-analysis of the worldwide epidemiological evidence.
        Lancet. 2019; 394: 1159-1168
        • Anderson G.L.
        • Limacher M.
        • Assaf A.R.
        • et al.
        Effects of conjugated equine estrogen in postmenopausal women with hysterectomy: the Women’s Health Initiative randomized controlled trial.
        JAMA. 2004; 291: 1701-1712
        • Rossouw J.E.
        • Anderson G.L.
        • Prentice R.L.
        • et al.
        Risks and benefits of estrogen plus progestin in healthy postmenopausal women: principal results from the Women’s Health Initiative randomized controlled trial.
        JAMA. 2002; 288: 321-333
        • Power M.L.
        • Schulkin J.
        • Rossouw J.E.
        Evolving practice patterns and attitudes toward hormone therapy of obstetrician-gynecologists.
        Menopause. 2007; 14: 20-28
        • Marchbanks P.A.
        • McDonald J.A.
        • Wilson H.G.
        • et al.
        Oral contraceptives and the risk of breast cancer.
        N Engl J Med. 2002; 346: 2025-2032
        • Krieger N.
        Overcoming the absence of socioeconomic data in medical records: validation and application of a census-based methodology.
        Am J Public Health. 1992; 82: 703-710