Article first published online: 24 MAY 2005
Copyright © 2005 American Cancer Society
Volume 104, Issue 1, pages 220–221, 1 July 2005
How to Cite
Hughes, L. L. (2005), Author reply. Cancer, 104: 220–221. doi: 10.1002/cncr.21079
- Issue published online: 17 JUN 2005
- Article first published online: 24 MAY 2005
I appreciate the comments of Bóódis et al. regarding our article.1 The patients in the Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group E3193 study received adjuvant ovarian ablation for breast carcinoma using one of three methods (surgical, medical, or radiotherapeutic) that was selected based on patient/physician choice. It was not the intent of our article to discuss the relative pros and cons of the various methods of ovarian ablation for different types of patients. Rather, we wanted to publish the results obtained using radiotherapy with a new radiation dose/fractionation schedule. I agree that, given the current state of knowledge, if a breast carcinoma patient is considered to at high risk for the subsequent development of an ovarian malignancy, prophylactic oophorectomy appears preferable to the other forms of ovarian ablation for accomplishing both hormonal ablation and risk reduction.
Lorie L. Hughes M.D.*, * Department of Radiation Oncology, WellStar Kennestone Hospital, Marietta, Georgia.