Trial reportAnnals of surgical oncology2024
Timing of Breast Cancer Related Lymphedema Development Over 3 Years: Observations from a Large, Prospective Randomized Screening Trial Comparing Bioimpedance Spectroscopy (BIS) Versus Tape Measure.
Trial report in Annals of surgical oncology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
10 citing papers in PubMed.
- The Importance of a Pre-treatment Baseline When Screening Patients for Breast-Cancer-Related Lymphedema.Annals of surgical oncology · 2025Trial
- Multimodal Assessment of Breast Cancer-Related Lymphedema Using Bioimpedance Analysis, Ultrasound Tissue Thickness, and Shear Wave Elastography.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Hospital Setting Impact on Breast Cancer-Related Lymphedema and Quality of Life after Immediate Lymphatic Reconstruction.Plastic and reconstructive surgery · 2026Article
- Dose to the axillary-lateral thoracic vessel junction predicts breast cancer-related lymphedema after postmastectomy radiotherapy: development and temporal validation of NTCP and nomogram models.World journal of surgical oncology · 2026Article
- Analysis of biological systems using bioimpedance spectroscopy: a critical review of technological convergence and translational challenges.Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology · 2026Review
- Comprehensive overview of management and risk assessment of breast cancer-related lymphedema: a multidisciplinary approach.Frontiers in oncology · 2026Review
- Article
- Imaging and management of lymphedema in the era of precision oncology.The British journal of radiology · 2025Review
- Research hotspots and trends in cancer rehabilitation: a bibliometric analysis (2013-2023).Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2025Review
- Advances in etiology, pathophysiology, diagnosis, and management of lymphedema: a comprehensive review.Frontiers in medicine · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThe PREVENT randomized control trial monitored progression to chronic breast cancer-related lymphedema (cBCRL) following intervention for subclinical breast cancer-related lymphedema (sBCRL) assessed by bioimpedance spectroscopy (BIS) versus tape-measure (TM). This multi-institutional trial demonstrated a 92% risk reduction of developing cBCRL. This secondary analysis reviews the timing of sBCRL and cBCRL following breast cancer (BC) treatment. PATIENTS AND
methodsWomen at risk of cBCRL (n = 919) were screened regularly up to 36 months after BC treatment using either BIS or TM. Following diagnosis of sBCRL, patients underwent a 4-week compression sleeve intervention. The time in months from BC treatment to detection was reviewed at 3-month intervals.
resultsIn total 209 patients developed sBCRL (BIS: n = 89, TM: n = 120) and were eligible for intervention. 30 progressed to cBCRL postintervention (BIS: 7, TM: 23). More than half of patients had measurements consistent with sBCRL within 9 months of BC treatment. Patients continued to have initial detections of sBCRL, regardless of screening method, with rates remaining consistent in years two and three (p > 0.242) post surgery. Additionally, 39 patients progressed to cBCRL without developing sBCRL or receiving intervention across the 3-year period.
conclusionsThe timing of sBCRL detection demonstrates that patients continue to be at risk years after treatment and may continue to progress to cBCRL years after surgery. Early detection of sBCRL allows for early intervention decreasing the likelihood of progression to cBCRL. Patients should continue to be monitored for a minimum of 3 years following completion of cancer treatment. Specifically, careful targeted monitoring over the initial 9-month period is important.
Indexed as
Identifiers
38965099What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.