ReviewFrontiers in oncology2026
Effects of photobiomodulation therapy on upper limb lymphedema secondary to breast cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Review in Frontiers in oncology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Breast cancer-related lymphedema (BCRL) is a common complication that impairs function and quality of life. The effectiveness of photobiomodulation (PBM) therapy remains unclear, necessitating a systematic review and meta-analysis. Methods: This review followed the PRISMA guidelines and was registered in PROSPERO (CRD420261296197). PubMed, CENTRAL, and Embase were systematically searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) evaluating PBM therapy for BCRL up to January 20, 2026. Outcomes of interest included upper limb volume, circumference, grip strength, and pain. Pooled effects were synthesized using appropriate meta-analytic models and reported as mean differences with 95% confidence intervals. Risk of bias, methodological quality, and certainty of evidence were assessed using RoB 2, the PEDro scale, and GRADE, respectively. Results: Nine RCTs involving 312 participants with BCRL were included. Compared with control conditions, PBM therapy resulted in significant reductions in affected limb volume (SMD = -0.78, 95% CI -1.03 to -0.54; I² = 22%) and limb circumference (MD = -3.61 cm, 95% CI -4.85 to -2.38; I² = 44%). Functional outcomes also improved, with increased grip strength (MD = 1.72 kg, 95% CI 1.07 to 2.37; I² = 14%) and reduced pain intensity (MD = -0.29, 95% CI -0.52 to -0.05; I² = 0%). Overall risk of bias was low to moderate, with some concerns about allocation concealment; evidence certainty was mostly moderate by GRADE. Conclusions: PBM therapy is associated with significant improvements in limb volume, circumference, grip strength, and pain in patients with BCRL. Despite these favorable findings, the overall certainty of evidence is moderate, and safety conclusions are limited by sparse adverse-event reporting. Larger, well-designed RCTs are needed to confirm efficacy and optimize treatment parameters.
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.