SynthesisSupportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer2024
Evidence for the clinical effectiveness of decongestive lymphoedema treatment for breast cancer-related arm lymphoedema, a systematic review.
Synthesis in Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Complete decongestive therapy for breast cancer-related lymphedema: An evidence summary.Asia-Pacific journal of oncology nursing · 2026Review
- Article
- Women's and practitioners' views of early intensive decongestive lymphoedema treatment for breast cancer-related arm lymphoedema: a focus group study.Journal of cancer survivorship : research and practice · 2025Article
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
purposeEarly treatment is advised for breast cancer-related arm lymphoedema (BCRL), a common sequelae of breast cancer treatment. Expert guidance recommends two-phase decongestive lymphoedema treatment (DLT), although evidence is lacking for current treatment protocols and UK women are routinely offered self-treatment with hosiery. This systematic review considered evidence regarding treatment of early BCRL, that is, within 12 months of developing BCRL.
methodsA systematic review of evidence for clinical effectiveness of DLT for women with less than 12-month BCRL duration (early BCRL) was undertaken using the Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) method. Studies included women with < 12-month or mean < 9-month BCRL duration; some studies reported only one eligible group. The original search was conducted in 2016 and updated in 2018 and 2022. Methodological quality of identified studies was assessed using JBI critical appraisal instruments. Outcomes of interest were extracted with eligible results displayed in narrative and tabular format. Strength of evidence was rated using the GRADE system.
resultsSeven trials and three descriptive studies provided weak evidence (grade B) for effectiveness of DLT for early BCRL. Heterogeneous protocols limited comparison of findings. There was no evidence for the most effective treatment or treatment combination or optimal frequency or duration of treatment.
conclusionThere is no evidence to justify change in current lymphoedema treatment, whether self-treatment with hosiery (UK) or two-phase DLT (other countries). Further research for the early BCRL population is required. IMPLICATIONS FOR CANCER SURVIVORS: Women with early BCRL require early and effective treatment although this updated review shows there is still no evidence for what that treatment should be.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.