Trial reportAnnals of surgical oncology2025
The Importance of a Pre-treatment Baseline When Screening Patients for Breast-Cancer-Related Lymphedema.
Trial report in Annals of surgical oncology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Natural History of Subclinical Lower Limb Lymphedema After Gynecologic Cancer Surgery Using Indocyanine Green Lymphography.Plastic and reconstructive surgery. Global open · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe PREVENT randomized clinical trial showed that bioimpedance spectroscopy (BIS) screening for subclinical breast-cancer-related lymphedema (sBCRL) detection with early intervention is associated with lower progression to chronic breast-cancer-related lymphedema (cBCRL) than tape measurement (TM). This study explores the role of a pre-treatment baseline in detecting sBCRL.
methodsA total of 1200 patients with breast cancer were randomized for screening using L-Dex (BIS) or relative interlimb volume difference (RILVD) from TM, with 918 patients being monitored for up to 36 months. sBCRL was identified in 209 patients by either an increase from baseline of ≥ 6.5 L-Dex units (n = 89) or ≥ 5% and < 10% increase in RILVD (n = 120). The pre-treatment and sBCRL trigger L-Dex and RILVD were analyzed using Mann-Whitney, independent t-tests, chi-squared, and analysis of variance (ANOVA) tests.
resultsThe baseline L-Dex or RILVD was less than zero in 587 (48.9%) and 596 (49.0%) patients, respectively. At sBCRL trigger, 70.8% BIS patients had L-Dex inside the normal range (L-Dex < 10), and 40.4% had L-Dex < 6.5, which could result in misclassification without a pre-treatment baseline. For TM patients, 87.5% had an RILVD inside the normal range (RILVD < 10%), and 51.7% had a RILVD < 5%, which would also cause misclassification without a pre-treatment baseline.
conclusionsMany patients who triggered for sBCRL would not have been identified without a pre-treatment baseline, potentially missing opportunities for early intervention and increasing the risk of progression. Regardless of the measurement technique used, a recorded baseline is crucial for accurate detection and timely management of sBCRL.
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.