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.
Bioimpedance spectroscopy (BIS)
Breast cancer
Lymphedema
Prevent
Tape measure
Journal
Annals of surgical oncology
ISSN: 1534-4681
Titre abrégé: Ann Surg Oncol
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 9420840
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
04 Jul 2024
04 Jul 2024
Historique:
received:
04
04
2024
accepted:
22
05
2024
medline:
5
7
2024
pubmed:
5
7
2024
entrez:
4
7
2024
Statut:
aheadofprint
Résumé
The 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. Women 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. In 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. The 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.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
The 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 METHODS
METHODS
Women 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.
RESULTS
RESULTS
In 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.
CONCLUSIONS
CONCLUSIONS
The 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.
Identifiants
pubmed: 38965099
doi: 10.1245/s10434-024-15706-x
pii: 10.1245/s10434-024-15706-x
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Subventions
Organisme : CLC NIH HHS
ID : NIH/CATS UL1 TR000445
Pays : United States
Informations de copyright
© 2024. Society of Surgical Oncology.
Références
Whitworth PW, Shah C, Vicini F, Cooper A. Preventing breast cancer-related lymphedema in high-risk patients: the impact of a structured surveillance protocol using bioimpedance spectroscopy. Front Oncol. 2018;8:197.
doi: 10.3389/fonc.2018.00197
pubmed: 29946531
pmcid: 6006520
Ridner SH, Dietrich MS, Boyages J, et al. A comparison of bioimpedance spectroscopy or tape measure triggered compression intervention in chronic breast cancer lymphedema prevention. Lymphat Res Biol. 2022;20:618–28.
doi: 10.1089/lrb.2021.0084
pubmed: 35099283
pmcid: 9810346
Stout Gergich NL, Pfalzer LA, McGarvey C, Springer B, Gerber LH, Soballe P. Preoperative assessment enables the early diagnosis and successful treatment of lymphedema. Cancer. 2008;112:2809–19.
doi: 10.1002/cncr.23494
pubmed: 18428212
Soran A, Ozmen T, McGuire KP, et al. The importance of detection of subclinical lymphedema for the prevention of breast cancer-related clinical lymphedema after axillary lymph node dissection: a prospective observational study. Lymphat Res Biol. 2014;12:289–94.
doi: 10.1089/lrb.2014.0035
pubmed: 25495384
Koelmeyer LA, Gaitatzis K, Dietrich MS, et al. Risk factors for breast cancer-related lymphedema in patients undergoing 3 years of prospective surveillance with intervention. Cancer. 2020;128(18):3408–15.
doi: 10.1002/cncr.34377
Boyages John, et al. Axillary treatment and chronic breast cancer–related lymphedema: implications for prospective surveillance and intervention from a randomized controlled trial. JCO Oncol Pract. 2023;19:1116–24.
doi: 10.1200/OP.23.00060
pubmed: 37816208
Shah C, Arthur DW, Wazer D, Khan A, Ridner S, Vicini F. The impact of early detection and intervention of breast cancer-related lymphedema: a systematic review. Cancer Med. 2016;5(6):1154–62.
doi: 10.1002/cam4.691
pubmed: 26993371
pmcid: 4924374
Vicini F, Shah C, Whitworth P, et al. Correlation of bioimpedance spectroscopy with risk factors for the development of breast cancer-related lymphedema. Lymphat Res Biol. 2018;16:533–7.
doi: 10.1089/lrb.2017.0078
pubmed: 30133336
pmcid: 6306658
National Comprehensive Cancer Network. NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology. Breast Cancer (Version 2.2024) https://www.nccn.org/professionals/physician_gls/pdf/breast.pdf
National Comprehensive Cancer Network. NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology. Survivorship (Version 1.2024) https://www.nccn.org/professionals/physician_gls/pdf/survivorship.pdf
Cornish BH, Chapman M, Hirst C, et al. Early diagnosis of lymphedema using multiple frequency bioimpedance. Lymphology. 2001;34:2–11.
pubmed: 11307661
Laidley A, Anglin B. The impact of L-Dex measurements in assessing breast cancer related lymphedema (BCRL) as part of routine clinical practice. Front Oncol. 2016;6:192.
doi: 10.3389/fonc.2016.00192
pubmed: 27656420
pmcid: 5011139
Whitworth P, Vicini F, Valente SA, et al. Reducing rates of chronic breast cancer-related lymphedema with screening and early intervention: an update of recent data. J Cancer Surviv. 2022;18(1):344–51.
pubmed: 35947288
Barrio AV, Eaton A, Frazier TG. A prospective validation study of bioimpedance with volume displacement in early-stage breast cancer patients at risk for lymphedema. Ann Surg Oncol. 2015;22(Suppl (3)):370–5.
doi: 10.1245/s10434-015-4683-0
pmcid: 4684482
Ward LC, Thompson B, Gaitatzis K, Koelmeyer LA. Comparison of volume measurements and bioimpedance spectroscopy using a stand-on device for assessment of unilateral breast cancer-related lymphedema. Eur J Breast Health. 2024;20(2):141–8.
doi: 10.4274/ejbh.galenos.2024.2023-12-8
pubmed: 38571690
pmcid: 10985575