Preferences of Women Evaluating Risks of Tamoxifen (POWER) study of preferences for tamoxifen for breast cancer risk reduction Academic Article uri icon

  • Overview
  • Research
  • Identity
  • Additional Document Info
  • View All


  • BACKGROUND: The objective of this study was to understand the attitudes and preferences of risk-eligible women regarding use of tamoxifen for breast cancer risk reduction. METHODS: A cross-sectional, mixed-methods interview study was conducted at a university medical center and at community sites. Participants were women who had an estimated 5-year breast cancer risk > or = 1.7% and no prior breast cancer. Interviews were conducted in English or Spanish. The interview included a 15-minute, standardized educational session on the potential benefits and harms of tamoxifen followed by close-ended and open-ended questions about participants' inclinations to take tamoxifen and factors important to their decision. A demographic questionnaire, a test on knowledge of potential benefits and harms of tamoxifen, and an interview evaluation were included. RESULTS: Two hundred fifty-five women completed interviews. Their estimated mean 5-year breast cancer risk was 2.8%; and their mean self-perceived 5-year risk was 32.7%. After the educational intervention, 45 women (17.6%) were inclined to take tamoxifen. Very high risk women (> 3.5%) were no more inclined to take it than women with lower risk (1.7-3.5%). In a multivariable analysis, lower income, confidence in the effectiveness of tamoxifen, and concern about fractures were associated with being inclined to take it; concern about pulmonary embolism, dyspareunia, cataracts, and low self-perceived breast cancer risk were associated negatively with taking tamoxifen. Participants expressed concerns about adverse effects. CONCLUSIONS: Less than 20% of women were interested in tamoxifen after education about potential benefits and harms, despite a very high self-perceived breast cancer risk. Candidate chemoprevention agents must have few potential adverse effects to achieve widespread acceptance.


  • Melnikow, Joy
  • Paterniti, Debora
  • Azari, Rahman
  • Kuenneth, Christina
  • Birch, Stephen
  • Kuppermann, Miriam
  • Nuovo, James
  • Keyzer, Janet
  • Henderson, Stuart

publication date

  • May 15, 2005

has subject area

published in