ArticleJAMA network open2025
External Validation of a 5-Factor Risk Model for Breast Cancer-Related Lymphedema.
Article in JAMA network open, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 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
8 citing papers in PubMed.
- Dosimetric comparison of the shoulder region between paired photon and proton plans in breast cancer patients.Technical innovations & patient support in radiation oncology · 2026Article
- Identification of a Cytokine Biomarker for Prognostic Modeling of Breast Cancer-Related Lymphedema.Cancer research communications · 2026Article
- Comprehensive overview of management and risk assessment of breast cancer-related lymphedema: a multidisciplinary approach.Frontiers in oncology · 2026Review
- Identification of chemotherapy-related risk factors for lymphedema in breast cancer patients using Lasso regression and model development.American journal of translational research · 2026Article
- AI-Empowered Mechanomedicine for Cancer-Related Lymphedema.Research (Washington, D.C.) · 2026Review
- The Canadian Breast Cancer Symposium 2025: Meeting Report.Current oncology (Toronto, Ont.) · 2025Article
- Lymphedema and Axillary-Lateral Thoracic Vessel Juncture Irradiation: A Clinical Dilemma.European journal of breast health · 2025Article
- 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
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Importance: Secondary lymphedema is a common, harmful side effect of breast cancer treatment. Robust risk models that are externally validated are needed to facilitate clinical translation. A published risk model used 5 accessible clinical factors to predict the development of breast cancer-related lymphedema; this model included a patient's mammographic breast density as a novel predictive factor. Objective: To investigate the external validity of a previously reported 5-factor model by applying it to an independent cohort of patients with breast cancer. Design, Setting, and Participants: This prognostic study collected data on a longitudinal cohort of patients with predominantly early-stage breast cancer treated with curative intent at the Princess Margaret Cancer Centre in Toronto, Canada between February 1, 2010, and July 31, 2014, with a median (IQR) follow-up of 4.3 (2.4-7.6) years. The 5 factors (age, body mass index, breast density, nodal burden, and use of axillary lymph node dissection [ALND]) were used as input into the established regression-based model. The analysis was performed from July 2 through August 29, 2024. Exposure: Lymphedema after breast cancer treatment. Main Outcomes and Measures: Lymphedema-free survival (LFS) was analyzed using Kaplan-Meier analysis, and sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy performance metrics of predicting breast cancer-related lymphedema were calculated. Results: A total of 101 female patients (median [IQR] age, 54.8 [48.8-62.3] years) were included in the analysis. These patients had localized or locoregional breast cancer treated with primary lumpectomy (90 [89%]) or mastectomy (11 [11%]); 75 (74%) had no axillary biopsy or sentinel lymph node biopsy; 26 (26%) had undergone ALND; and 38 (38%) had received chemotherapy, 101 (100%) received radiotherapy, and 64 (63%) received hormone therapy. Kaplan-Meier analysis showed a 2-year LFS of 97.5% (95% CI, 94.0%-100.0%) vs 65.0% (95% CI, 47.1%-89.7%) for the low- vs high-risk groups as defined by the 5-factor model (P < .001). The model sensitivity was 0.83 (95% CI, 0.52-0.98), specificity was 0.89 (95% CI, 0.80-0.94), and accuracy was 0.88 (95% CI, 0.80-0.94) for predicting breast cancer-related lymphedema. Conclusions and Relevance: These findings validate the performance of a 5-factor risk model for its prediction of 2-year LFS. Future clinical translation of this model can help with identifying patients at the highest risk of breast cancer-related lymphedema to facilitate closer surveillance and/or preventive management to improve health outcomes and quality of life.
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.