Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38965099›Full record

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.

Chirag Shah, John Boyages, Louise Koelmeyer, Steven L Chen, Frank Vicini

Abstract readRandomized Controlled TrialMulticenter StudyComparative Study
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

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.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

10 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. 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 · 2025
    Review
  10. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Chirag ShahDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Taussig Cancer Institute, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, USA.
John BoyagesAustralian Lymphoedema Education, Research and Treatment Program, Macquarie University, Sydney, Australia.
Louise KoelmeyerAustralian Lymphoedema Education, Research and Treatment Program, Macquarie University, Sydney, Australia.
Steven L ChenOasisMD, San Diego, USA. schen@oasismd.com.
Frank ViciniMichigan Healthcare Professionals, Farmington Hills, USA.

Funding

CLC NIH HHS NIH/CATS UL1 TR000445
6 · The paper itself

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

Breast NeoplasmsDielectric SpectroscopyAdultAgedBreast Cancer LymphedemaDisease ProgressionFemaleFollow-Up StudiesHumansMiddle AgedPrognosisProspective StudiesTime FactorsBioimpedance spectroscopy (BIS)Breast cancerLymphedemaPreventTape measure

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.