Reliable prediction of postmastectomy lymphedema: The Risk Assessment Tool Evaluating Lymphedema

Database study of risk factors for breast cancer-related lymphedema: a statistical analysis of 2359 cases over 10 years

PURPOSE

Identifying risk factors for breast cancer-related lymphedema (BCRL) is crucial for its prevention, necessitating large-scale epidemiological studies. Despite their suitability for large-scale surveys, to our knowledge, databases have not been the basis of any study done to investigate BCRL risk factors. This study aimed to test the hypothesis that a database-based study would be useful for identifying BCRL risk factors.

METHODS

Patients with breast cancer diagnosed between April 2009 and March 2020 were identified from the Hiroshima University Hospital's medical database. This retrospective observational study validated the risk factors for BCRL using logistic regression analysis (p < 0.05).

RESULTS

Among the total 4471 breast cancer patients identified, 2359 met the study criteria, with a BCRL incidence of 4.8%. Identified risk factors included obesity with a BMI of 25-30 (OR = 3.066, 95% CI 1.408-6.677), severe obesity with a BMI > 30 (OR = 5.791, 95% CI 2.239-14.97), surgical axillary lymph node dissection (OR = 3.212, 95% CI 1.918-5.378), chemotherapy with docetaxel (OR = 1.795, 95% CI 1.062-3.032), and conventional radiation to the breast or chest wall including lymph nodes in the irradiated area (OR = 3.299, 95% CI 1.842-5.910).

CONCLUSIONS

The BCRL risk factors identified by our database analysis were in line with those documented in previous studies, indicating the usefulness of database-based studies. Future studies should include more patients and study items.

Optimizing Surgical Outcomes and the Role of Preventive Surgery: A Scoping Review

BACKGROUND

 Plastic and reconstructive surgeons are often presented with reconstructive challenges as a sequela of complications in high-risk surgical patients, ranging from exposure of hardware, lymphedema, and chronic pain after amputation. These complications can result in significant morbidity, recovery time, resource utilization, and cost. Given the prevalence of surgical complications managed by plastic and reconstructive surgeons, developing novel preventative techniques to mitigate surgical risk is paramount.

METHODS

 Herein, we aim to understand efforts supporting the nascent field of Preventive Surgery, including (1) enhanced risk stratification, (2) advancements in postoperative care. Through an emphasis on four surgical cohorts who may benefit from preventive surgery, two of which are at high risk of morbidity from wound-related complications (patients undergoing sternotomy and spine procedures) and two at high risk of other morbidities, including lymphedema and neuropathic pain, we aim to provide a comprehensive and improved understanding of preventive surgery. Additionally, the role of risk analysis for these procedures and the relationship between microsurgery and prophylaxis is emphasized.

RESULTS

 (1) medical optimization and prehabilitation, (2) surgical mitigation techniques.

CONCLUSION

 Reconstructive surgeons are ideally placed to lead efforts in the creation and validation of accurate risk assessment tools and to support algorithmic approaches to surgical risk mitigation. Through a paradigm shift, including universal promotion of the concept of "Preventive Surgery," major improvements in surgical outcomes may be achieved.

Preoperative Risk Factors for Lymphedema in Inflammatory Breast Cancer

BACKGROUND

 Prophylactic lymphatic bypass or LYMPHA (LYmphatic Microsurgical Preventive Healing Approach) is increasingly offered to prevent lymphedema following breast cancer treatment, which develops in up to 47% of patients. Previous studies focused on intraoperative and postoperative lymphedema risk factors, which are often unknown preoperatively when the decision to perform LYMPHA is made. This study aims to identify preoperative lymphedema risk factors in the high-risk inflammatory breast cancer (IBC) population.

METHODS

 Retrospective review of our institution's IBC program database was conducted. The primary outcome was self-reported lymphedema development. Multivariable logistic regression analysis was performed to identify preoperative lymphedema risk factors, while controlling for number of lymph nodes removed during axillary lymph node dissection (ALND), number of positive lymph nodes, residual disease on pathology, and need for adjuvant chemotherapy.

RESULTS

 Of 356 patients with IBC, 134 (mean age: 51 years, range: 22-89 years) had complete data. All 134 patients underwent surgery and radiation. Forty-seven percent of all 356 patients (167/356) developed lymphedema. Obesity (body mass index > 30) (odds ratio [OR]: 2.7, confidence interval [CI]: 1.2-6.4, p = 0.02) and non-white race (OR: 4.5, CI: 1.2-23, p = 0.04) were preoperative lymphedema risk factors.

CONCLUSION

 Patients with IBC are high risk for developing lymphedema due to the need for ALND, radiation, and neoadjuvant chemotherapy. This study also identified non-white race and obesity as risk factors. Larger prospective studies should evaluate potential racial disparities in lymphedema development. Due to the high prevalence of lymphedema, LYMPHA should be considered for all patients with IBC.

Impact of neoadjuvant chemotherapy on breast cancer-related lymphedema after axillary lymph node dissection: a retrospective cohort study

PURPOSE

We aimed to evaluate whether neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) could be a risk factor for breast cancer-related lymphedema (BCRL) associated with axillary lymph node dissection (ALND).

PATIENTS AND METHODS

A total of 596 patients with cT0-4N0-3M0 breast cancer who underwent ALND and chemotherapy were retrospectively analyzed between March 2012 and March 2022. NAC was administered in 188 patients (31.5%), while up-front surgery in 408 (68.5%). Univariate and multivariable Cox regression analyses were performed to determine whether NAC was an independent risk factor for BCRL. With propensity score matching (PSM), the NAC group and up-front surgery group were matched 1:1 by age, body mass index (BMI), molecular subtypes, type of breast surgery, and the number of positive lymph nodes. Kaplan-Meier survival analyses were performed for BCRL between groups before and after PSM. Subgroup analyses were conducted to explore whether NAC differed for BCRL occurrence in people with different characteristics.

RESULTS

At a median follow-up of 36.3 months, 130 patients (21.8%) experienced BCRL [NAC, 50/188 (26.60%) vs. up-front surgery, 80/408 (19.61%); P = 0.030]. Multivariable analysis identified that NAC [hazard ratio, 1.503; 95% CI (1.03, 2.19); P = 0.033] was an independent risk factor for BCRL. In addition, the hormone receptor-negative/human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative (HR-/HER2-) subtype, breast-conserving surgery (BCS), and increased positive lymph nodes significantly increased BCRL risk. After PSM, NAC remained a risk factor for BCRL [hazard ratio, 1.896; 95% CI (1.18, 3.04); P = 0.007]. Subgroup analyses showed that NAC had a consistent BCRL risk in most clinical subgroups.

CONCLUSION

NAC receipt has a statistically significant increase in BCRL risk in patients with ALND. These patients should be closely monitored and may benefit from early BCRL intervention.

Comparison of machine learning models to predict the risk of breast cancer-related lymphedema among breast cancer survivors: a cross-sectional study in China

Objective

The aim of this study was to develop and validate a series of breast cancer-related lymphoedema risk prediction models using machine learning algorithms for early identification of high-risk individuals to reduce the incidence of postoperative breast cancer lymphoedema.

Methods

This was a retrospective study conducted from January 2012 to July 2022 in a tertiary oncology hospital. Subsequent to the collection of clinical data, variables with predictive capacity for breast cancer-related lymphoedema (BCRL) were subjected to scrutiny utilizing the Least Absolute Shrinkage and Selection Operator (LASSO) technique. The entire dataset underwent a randomized partition into training and test subsets, adhering to a 7:3 distribution. Nine classification models were developed, and the model performance was evaluated based on accuracy, sensitivity, specificity, recall, precision, F-score, and area under curve (AUC) of the ROC curve. Ultimately, the selection of the optimal model hinged upon the AUC value. Grid search and 10-fold cross-validation was used to determine the best parameter setting for each algorithm.

Results

A total of 670 patients were investigated, of which 469 were in the modeling group and 201 in the validation group. A total of 174 had BCRL (25.97%). The LASSO regression model screened for the 13 features most valuable in predicting BCRL. The range of each metric in the test set for the nine models was, in order: accuracy (0.75-0.84), sensitivity (0.50-0.79), specificity (0.79-0.93), recall (0.50-0.79), precision (0.51-0.70), F score (0.56-0.69), and AUC value (0.71-0.87). Overall, LR achieved the best performance in terms of accuracy (0.81), precision (0.60), sensitivity (0.79), specificity (0.82), recall (0.79), F-score (0.68), and AUC value (0.87) for predicting BCRL.

Conclusion

The study established that the constructed logistic regression (LR) model exhibits a more favorable amalgamation of accuracy, sensitivity, specificity, recall, and AUC value. This configuration adeptly discerns patients who are at an elevated risk of BCRL. Consequently, this precise identification equips nurses with the means to undertake timely and tailored interventions, thus averting the onset of BCRL.

Prevention of Breast Cancer-Related Lymphedema: An Up-to-Date Systematic Review of Different Surgical Approaches

Breast cancer-related lymphedema (BCRL) affects approximately 20% of women after breast cancer therapy. Advances in treatment have increased the life expectancy; thus, the prevalence of BCRL will continue to rise with the number of cancer survivors, hence the need to develop strategies to prevent this condition. We provide a systematic review of the literature on the primary prevention of BCRL by prophylactic lymphatic surgery (PLS). Between June and August 2022, we conducted a search of PubMed, Google Scholar and Cochrane. In the end, a total of eighteen papers were selected. The eleven studies without a control group reported only 15 of 342 patients who developed lymphedema at least six months after PLS (4.59%). The seven studies with a control group included 569 patients, 328 cases and 241 controls. Among the cases, 36 (10%) developed lymphedema. In contrast, the incidence of lymphedema in the controls was 40% (98 of 241 patients). The formulation of definite recommendations in favor of PLS is hindered by low-quality studies. There is no consensus on which technique should be preferred, nor on whether adjuvant radiotherapy might affect the efficacy of PLS. Randomized controlled trials are mandatory to conceive evidence-based recommendations.

Temporal validation of a risk prediction model for breast cancer-related lymphoedema in European population: A retrospective study

AIMS

To perform temporal validation of a risk prediction model for breast cancer-related lymphoedema in the European population.

DESIGN

Temporal validation of a previously developed prediction model using a new retrospective cohort of women who had undergone axillary lymph node dissection between June 2018 and June 2020.

METHODS

We reviewed clinical records to identify women who did and did not develop lymphoedema within 2 years of surgery and to gather data regarding the variables included in the prediction model. The model was calibrated by calculating Spearman's correlation between observed and expected cases. Its accuracy in discriminating between patients who did versus did not develop lymphoedema was assessed by calculating the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC).

RESULTS

The validation cohort comprised 154 women, 41 of whom developed lymphoedema within 2 years of surgery. The value of Spearman's coefficient indicated a strong correlation between observed and expected cases. Sensitivity of the model was higher than in the derivation cohort, as was the value of the AUC.

CONCLUSION

The model shows a good capacity to discriminate women at risk of lymphoedema and may therefore help in developing improved care pathways for individual patients.

IMPLICATIONS FOR THE PROFESSION AND/OR PATIENT CARE

Identifying risk factors for lymphoedema secondary to breast cancer treatment is vital given its impact on women's physical and emotional well-being.

IMPACT

What problem did the study address? Risk of BCRL. What were the main findings? The prediction model has a good capacity to discriminate women at risk of lymphoedema. Where and on whom will the research have an impact? In clinical practice with women at risk of BCRL.

REPORTING METHOD

STROBE checklist. WHAT DOES THIS PAPER CONTRIBUTE TO THE WIDER GLOBAL CLINICAL COMMUNITY?: It presents a validated risk prediction model for BCRL.

NO PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION

There was no patient or public contribution in the conduct of this study.

Risk factors for long-term arm morbidities following breast cancer treatments: A systematic review

PURPOSE

To examine the risk factors for arm morbidity following breast cancer treatments, taking a broad view of all types of physical morbidity, including prolonged pain, lymphedema, decreased range of motion, and functional limitations.

METHODS

A systematic literature review was performed according to Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) Guidelines. Studies exploring the risk factors for prolonged arm morbidity following breast cancer surgery and treatments were included. The studies were assessed independently according to pre-eligibility criteria, following data extraction and methodological quality assessment.

RESULTS

1,242 articles were identified. After removing duplicates, the full texts of 1,153 articles were examined. Sixty-nine of these articles met the criteria and were included in the review. These 69 articles identified 29 risk factors for arm morbidity following treatments for breast cancer. The risk of bias was evaluated using NIH study quality assessment tools. The studies reviewed were published between 2001 and 2021 and included a total of 22,886 patients who were followed up for between three months and 10 years.

CONCLUSIONS

The main risk factors for long-term morbidity are removal of lymph nodes from the axilla, body mass index >30, having undergone a mastectomy, the stage of the disease, radiation therapy, chemotherapy, infection and trauma to the affected arm after surgery. An understanding of the risk factors for prolonged arm morbidity after surgery can help doctors and therapists in making personalized decisions about the need and timing of rehabilitation treatments.

Feasibility and Clinical Utility of Prediction Models for Breast Cancer-Related Lymphedema Incorporating Racial Differences in Disease Incidence

Importance

Breast cancer-related lymphedema (BCRL) is a common complication of axillary lymph node dissection (ALND) but can also develop after sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNB). Several models have been developed to predict the risk of disease development before and after surgery; however, these models have shortcomings that include the omission of race, inclusion of variables that are not readily available to patients, low sensitivity or specificity, and lack of risk assessment for patients treated with SLNB.

Objective

To create simple and accurate prediction models for BCRL that can be used to estimate preoperative or postoperative risk.

Design, Setting, and Participants

In this prognostic study, women with breast cancer who underwent ALND or SLNB from 1999 to 2020 at Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center and the Mayo Clinic were included. Data were analyzed from September to December 2022.

Main Outcomes and Measures

Diagnosis of lymphedema based on measurements. Two predictive models were formulated via logistic regression: a preoperative model (model 1) and a postoperative model (model 2). Model 1 was externally validated using a cohort of 34 438 patients with an International Classification of Diseases diagnosis of breast cancer.

Results

Of 1882 included patients, all were female, and the mean (SD) age was 55.6 (12.2) years; 80 patients (4.3%) were Asian, 190 (10.1%) were Black, 1558 (82.8%) were White, and 54 (2.9%) were another race (including American Indian and Alaska Native, other race, patient refused to disclose, or unknown). A total of 218 patients (11.6%) were diagnosed with BCRL at a mean (SD) follow-up of 3.9 (1.8) years. The BCRL rate was significantly higher among Black women (42 of 190 [22.1%]) compared with all other races (Asian, 10 of 80 [12.5%]; White, 158 of 1558 [10.1%]; other race, 8 of 54 [14.8%]; P < .001). Model 1 included age, weight, height, race, ALND/SLNB status, any radiation therapy, and any chemotherapy. Model 2 included age, weight, race, ALND/SLNB status, any chemotherapy, and patient-reported arm swelling. Accuracy was 73.0% for model 1 (sensitivity, 76.6%; specificity, 72.5%; area under the receiver operating characteristic curve [AUC], 0.78; 95% CI, 0.75-0.81) at a cutoff of 0.18, and accuracy was 81.1% for model 2 (sensitivity, 78.0%; specificity, 81.5%; AUC, 0.86; 95% CI, 0.83-0.88) at a cutoff of 0.10. Both models demonstrated high AUCs on external (model 1: 0.75; 95% CI, 0.74-0.76) or internal (model 2: 0.82; 95% CI, 0.79-0.85) validation.

Conclusions and Relevance

In this study, preoperative and postoperative prediction models for BCRL were highly accurate and clinically relevant tools comprised of accessible inputs and underscored the effects of racial differences on BCRL risk. The preoperative model identified high-risk patients who require close monitoring or preventative measures. The postoperative model can be used for screening of high-risk patients, thus decreasing the need for frequent clinic visits and arm volume measurements.

Prophylactic Lymphovenous Bypass at the Time of Axillary Lymph Node Dissection Decreases Rates of Lymphedema

Background

Breast cancer-related lymphedema impacts 30% to 47% of women who undergo axillary lymph node dissection (ALND). Studies evaluating the effectiveness of prophylactic lymphovenous bypass (LVB) at the time of ALND have had small patient populations and/or short follow-up. The aim of this study is to quantitatively and qualitatively evaluate prophylactic LVB in patients with breast cancer.

Methods

A retrospective review of patients who underwent ALND from 2018 to 2022 was performed. Patients were divided into cohorts based on whether they underwent prophylactic LVB at the time of ALND. Primary outcomes included 30-day complications and lymphedema. Lymphedema was quantitatively evaluated by bioimpedance analysis, with L-dex scores >7.1 indicating lymphedema.

Results

One-hundred five patients were identified. Sixty-four patients (61.0%) underwent ALND and 41 patients (39.0%) underwent ALND+LVB. Postoperative complications were similar between the cohorts. At a median follow-up of 13.3 months, lymphedema occurred significantly higher in the ALND only group compared with ALND+LVB group (50.0% vs 12.2%; P < 0.001). ALND without LVB was an independent risk factor for lymphedema development (odds ratio, 4.82; P = 0.003).

Conclusions

Prophylactic LVB decreases lymphedema and is not associated with increased postoperative complications. A multidisciplinary team approach is imperative to decrease lymphedema development in this patient population.

Efficacy of Immediate Lymphatic Reconstruction in Prevention of Breast Cancer-Related Lymphedema

INTRODUCTION

Breast cancer-related lymphedema (BCRL) is a chronic condition that can negatively affect the quality of life of breast cancer survivors. Immediate lymphatic reconstruction (ILR) at the time of axillary lymph node dissection is emerging as a technique for the prevention of BCRL. This study compared the incidence of BRCL in patients who received ILR and those who were not amenable to ILR.

METHODS

Patients were identified through a prospectively maintained database between 2016 and 2021. Some patients were deemed nonamenable to ILR due to a lack of visualized lymphatics or anatomic variability (eg, spatial relationships or size discrepancies). Descriptive statistics, independent t test, and Pearson χ 2 test were used. Multivariable logistic regression models were created to assess the association between lymphedema and ILR. A loose age-matched subsample was created for subanalysis.

RESULTS

Two hundred eighty-one patients were included in this study (252 patients who underwent ILR and 29 patients who did not). The patients had a mean age of 53 ± 12 years and body mass index of 28.6 ± 6.8 kg/m 2 . The incidence of developing lymphedema in patients with ILR was 4.8% compared with 24.1% in patients who underwent attempted ILR without lymphatic reconstruction ( P = 0.001). Patients who did not undergo ILR had significantly higher odds of developing lymphedema compared with those who had ILR (odds ratio, 10.7 [3.2-36.3], P < 0.001; matched OR, 14.2 [2.6-77.9], P < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Our study showed that ILR was associated with lower rates of BCRL. Further studies are needed to determine which factors place patients at highest risk of developing BCRL.

The Impact of Lymphedema on Patient-Reported Outcomes After Breast Reconstruction: A Preliminary Propensity Score-Matched Analysis

BACKGROUND

Studies on the impact of secondary lymphedema on patient-reported satisfaction and quality of life following postmastectomy breast reconstruction are limited by their heterogeneity. We aimed to reduce heterogeneity in study sample populations and compare BREAST-Q Reconstruction Module scores of patients with lymphedema matched to patients without lymphedema.

METHODS

We identified patients who underwent postmastectomy breast reconstruction from 2009 to 2017 and performed a propensity score-matched analysis to compare patient-reported outcomes of patients who developed lymphedema with those who did not. Matched covariates included age, body mass index, race/ethnicity, smoking history, radiation or chemotherapy exposure, postoperative infection, and reconstruction modality and laterality. Outcomes of interest were pre- and postoperative BREAST-Q scores for Satisfaction with Breasts, Physical Well-being of the Chest, Sexual Well-Being, and Psychosocial Well-Being; the minimal clinically important difference (MCID) was four points.

RESULTS

Matched cohorts included 322 patients per group. Preoperative BREAST-Q scores did not differ between lymphedema and non-lymphedema matched cohorts. Postoperative BREAST-Q scores were significantly lower in lymphedema patients: Physical Well-Being of the Chest (all time points), Satisfaction with Breast (at 1 and 2 years), Sexual Well-Being (at 2 years), and Psychosocial Well-Being (at 2 and 3 years). All significant differences in average scores were greater than the MCID.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients with breast cancer-related lymphedema reported significantly lower Physical Well-Being of the Chest, Satisfaction with Breasts, Sexual Well-Being, and Psychosocial Well-Being at various time points. Our findings may prove useful for patient counseling and justify the need for further research on the prevention and treatment of this devastating disease.

Risk prediction models for breast cancer-related lymphedema: A systematic review and meta-analysis

PURPOSE

To review and critically evaluate currently available risk prediction models for breast cancer-related lymphedema (BCRL).

METHODS

PubMed, Embase, CINAHL, Scopus, Web of Science, the Cochrane Library, CNKI, SinoMed, WangFang Data, VIP Database were searched from inception to April 1, 2022, and updated on November 8, 2022. Study selection, data extraction and quality assessment were conducted by two independent reviewers. The Prediction Model Risk of Bias Assessment Tool was used to assess the risk of bias and applicability. Meta-analysis of AUC values of model external validations was performed using Stata 17.0.

RESULTS

Twenty-one studies were included, reporting twenty-two prediction models, with the AUC or C-index ranging from 0.601 to 0.965. Only two models were externally validated, with the pooled AUC of 0.70 (n = 3, 95%CI: 0.67 to 0.74), and 0.80 (n = 3, 95%CI: 0.75 to 0.86), respectively. Most models were developed using classical regression methods, with two studies using machine learning. Predictors most frequently used in included models were radiotherapy, body mass index before surgery, number of lymph nodes dissected, and chemotherapy. All studies were judged as high overall risk of bias and poorly reported.

CONCLUSIONS

Current models for predicting BCRL showed moderate to good predictive performance. However, all models were at high risk of bias and poorly reported, and their performance is probably optimistic. None of these models is suitable for recommendation in clinical practice. Future research should focus on validating, optimizing, or developing new models in well-designed and reported studies, following the methodology guidance and reporting guidelines.

Age as a risk factor for breast cancer-related lymphedema: a systematic review

PURPOSE

Breast cancer-related lymphedema (BCRL) has been widely reported in the medical literature. Various patient characteristics, including age, have been investigated as possible risk factors for this disease entity, but the existence and direction of the cause-and-effect relationship are still unclear. In this review, we aimed to evaluate the effect of age on development of BRCL.

METHODS

PubMed, Scopus, and Ovid MEDLINE were searched for relevant articles, which were found to be published between 1974 and 2020.

RESULTS

Twenty-six studies involving 19,396 patients were selected. The average age of patients was 54.9. 26 studies were included in the final analysis, and 13 articles reported no association between age and BCRL development.

CONCLUSIONS

Though studies presented different findings, the majority did not identify age as a risk factor for development of lymphedema. However, the level of evidence of individual studies was low. In this article, we call attention to the need for uniform design of lymphedema studies and diagnosis.

IMPLICATIONS FOR CANCER SURVIVORS

All patients should be informed and screened regularly for lymphedema during and after the treatment independent of their age.

Development and validation of a risk prediction model for breast cancer-related lymphedema in postoperative patients with breast cancer

OBJECTIVE

Breast cancer-related lymphedema (BCRL) is a common post-operative complication in patients with breast cancer. Here, we sought to develop and validate a predictive model of BCRL in Chinese patients with breast cancer.

METHODS

Clinical and demographic data on patients with breast cancer were collected between 2016 and 2021 at a Cancer Hospital in China. A nomogram for predicting the risk of lymphedema in postoperative patients with breast cancer was constructed and verified using R 3.5.2 software. Model performance was evaluated using area under the ROC curve (AUC) and goodness-of-fit statistics, and the model was internally validated.

RESULTS

A total of 1732 postoperative patients with breast cancer, comprising 1212 and 520 patients in the development and validation groups, respectively, were included. Of these 438 (25.39%) developed lymphedema. Significant predictors identified in the predictive model were time since breast cancer surgery, level of lymph node dissection, number of lymph nodes dissected, radiotherapy, and postoperative body mass index. At the 31.9% optimal cut-off the model had AUC values of 0.728 and 0.710 in the development and validation groups, respectively. Calibration plots showed a good match between predicted and observed rates. In decision curve analysis, the net benefit of the model was better between threshold probabilities of 10%-80%.

CONCLUSION

The model has good discrimination and accuracy for lymphedema risk assessment, which can provide a reference for individualized clinical prediction of the risk of BCRL. Multicenter prospective trials are required to verify the predictive value of the model.

Prediction models for breast cancer-related lymphedema: a systematic review and critical appraisal

PURPOSE

The development of risk prediction models for breast cancer lymphedema is increasing, but few studies focus on the quality of the model and its application. Therefore, this study aimed to systematically review and critically evaluate prediction models developed to predict breast cancer-related lymphedema.

METHODS

PubMed, Web of Science, Embase, MEDLINE, CNKI, Wang Fang DATA, Vip Database, and SinoMed were searched for studies published from 1 January 2000 to 1 June 2021. And it will be re-run before the final analysis. Two independent investigators will undertake the literature search and screening, and discrepancies will be resolved by another investigator. The Prediction model Risk Of Bias Assessment Tool will be used to assess the prediction models' risk of bias and applicability.

RESULTS

Seventeen studies were included in the systematic review, including 7 counties, of which 6 were prospective studies, only 7 models were validation studies, and 4 models were externally validated. The area under the curve of 17 models was 0.680~0.908. All studies had a high risk of bias, primarily due to the participants, outcome, and analysis. The most common predictors included body mass index, radiotherapy, chemotherapy, and axillary lymph node dissection.

CONCLUSIONS

The predictive factors' strength, external validation, and clinical application of the breast cancer lymphedema risk prediction model still need further research. Healthcare workers should choose prediction models in clinical practice judiciously.

SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION

PROSPERO CRD42021258832.

Reverse Lymphatic Mapping and Immediate Microsurgical Lymphatic Reconstruction Reduces Early Risk of Breast Cancer-Related Lymphedema

BACKGROUND

Breast cancer-related lymphedema is a progressive disease that poses tremendous physical, psychosocial, and financial burden on patients. Immediate lymphaticovenular anastomosis at the time of axillary lymph node dissection is emerging as a potential therapeutic paradigm to decrease the incidence of breast cancer-related lymphedema in high-risk patients.

METHODS

Eighty-one consecutive patients underwent reverse lymphatic mapping and, when feasible, supermicrosurgical immediate lymphaticovenular anastomosis at the time of axillary lymph node dissection at a tertiary care cancer center. Patients were followed prospectively in a multidisciplinary lymphedema clinic (plastic surgery, certified lymphatic therapy, dietary, case management) at 3-month intervals with clinical examination, circumferential limb girth measurements, and bioimpedance spectroscopy. An institutional control cohort was assessed for the presence of objectively diagnosed and treated breast cancer-related lymphedema. Data were analyzed by a university statistician.

RESULTS

Seventy-eight patients met inclusion, and 66 underwent immediate lymphaticovenular anastomosis. Mean follow-up was 250 days. When compared to a retrospective control group, the rate of lymphedema in patients who underwent immediate lymphaticovenular anastomosis was significantly lower (6 percent versus 44 percent; p < 0.0001). Patients with 6-month follow-up treated with combined adjuvant radiation therapy and chemotherapy had significantly greater risk of developing breast cancer-related lymphedema (p = 0.04) compared to those without combined adjuvant therapy. Arborized anastomotic technique had a statistically shorter operative time than end-to-end anastomosis (p = 0.005).

CONCLUSIONS

This series of consecutive patients demonstrate a 6 percent incidence of early-onset breast cancer-related lymphedema with immediate lymphaticovenular anastomosis and an increased risk in those undergoing combined adjuvant treatment. These early data represent an encouraging and substantial decrease of breast cancer-related lymphedema in high-risk patients.

CLINICAL QUESTION/LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Therapeutic, III.

Use of adipose-derived stem cells in lymphatic tissue engineering and regeneration

The potential to differentiate into different cell lines, added to the easy and cost-effective method of extraction, makes adipose-derived stem cells (ADSCs) an object of interest in lymphedema treatment. Our study’s goal was to conduct a comprehensive systematic review of the use of ADSCs in lymphatic tissue engineering and regeneration. On July 23, 2019, using PubMed/MEDLINE, Cochrane Clinical Answers, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and Embase databases, we conducted a systematic review of published literature on the use of ADSCs in lymphatic tissue engineering and regeneration. There were no language or time frame limitations, and the following search strategy was applied: ((Adipose stem cell) OR Adipose-derived stem cell)) AND ((Lymphedema) OR Breast Cancer Lymphedema). Only original research manuscripts were included. Fourteen studies fulfilled the inclusion criteria. Eleven studies were experimental (in vitro or in vivo in animals), and only three were clinical. Publications on the topic demonstrated that ADSCs promote lymphangiogenesis, and its effect could be enhanced by modulation of vascular endothelial growth factor-C, interleukin-7, prospero homeobox protein 1, and transforming growth factor-β1. Pilot clinical studies included 11 patients with breast cancer-related lymphedema, and no significant side effects were present at 12-month follow-up. Literature on the use of ADSCs in lymphatic tissue engineering and regeneration demonstrated promising data. Clinical evidence is still in its infancy, but the scientific community agrees that ADSCs can be useful in regenerative lymphangiogenesis. Data collected in this review indicate that unprecedented advances in lymphedema treatment can be anticipated in the upcoming years.

Breast cancer-related lymphoedema: Risk factors and prediction model

AIMS

To identify the risk factors for lymphoedema following axillary lymph node dissection (ALND) in a European sample and to propose a lymphoedema prediction model for this population.

DESIGN

Predictive retrospective cohort study comparing women who developed lymphoedema in 2 years of undergoing ALND with those who did not developed lymphoedema.

METHODS

We reviewed the clinical records of 504 women who, between January 2008 and May 2018, underwent surgery for breast cancer that involved ALND. Logistic regression was used to identify significant risk factors for lymphoedema. The prediction accuracy of the model was assessed by calculating the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve.

RESULTS

Of the 504 women whose records were analysed, 156 developed lymphoedema. Significant predictors identified in the regression model were level of lymph node dissection, lymph node status, post-operative complications, body mass index (BMI) and number of lymph nodes extracted. The prediction model showed good sensitivity (80%) in the study population.

CONCLUSIONS

The factor contributing most to the risk of lymphoedema was the level of lymph node dissection, and the only patient-related factor in the prediction model was BMI. The model offers good predictive capacity in this population and it is a simple tool that breast care units could use to assess the risk of lymphoedema following ALND. Nurses with specialist knowledge of lymphoedema have a key role to play in ensuring that women receive holistic and individualized care.

IMPACT

What problem did the study address? Secondary lymphoedema is one of the main complications in the treatment of breast cancer. What were the main findings? The prediction model included five factors associated with the risk of lymphoedema following ALND. The strongest predictor was the level of lymph node dissection, and the only patient-related factor was BMI. Where and on whom will the research have an impact? The prediction model offers breast care units a tool for assessing the risk of lymphoedema in women undergoing surgery involving ALND. The results highlight the importance of weight reduction as a preventive measure and support a more conservative surgical approach.

Development and Validation of an Intraoperative Nomogram to Predict Breast Cancer-Related Lymphedema Based on the Arm Lymphatics Distribution

BACKGROUND

Preoperatively determining those patients who are at high risk of encountering breast cancer-related lymphedema (BCRL) is still not well understood.

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to develop a simple intraoperative nomogram for BCRL, incorporating a protective factor.

METHODS

Overall, 320 breast cancer patients at Zhongnan Hospital (training set) and 221 patients at Dongfeng General Hospital (external validation cohort) treated between November 2017 and December 2018 were included. Prior to axillary lymph node dissection (ALND), 1 mL (2.5 mg) of indocyanine green was administered to the area of the internal bicipital sulcus of the upper limb. The fluorescence image was obtained and the proportion of arm lymph flow above the level of the axillary vein was calculated. Multivariate logistic regression was performed using this proportion together with clinical data. A nomogram was then constructed and assessed for its discrimination and calibration ability and clinical utility in the training and external validation sets.

RESULTS

The cumulative incidence of BCRL was 18.7% (60/320), with a median follow-up of 29 months (20-34). In the multivariate logistic regression analysis, body mass index, taxane, radiotherapy, and proportion of arm lymph flow above the level of the axillary vein were identified as independent risk factors. In the training and validation cohorts, the calibration curve performed well (p = 0.721 and p = 0.315, respectively), and the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve values were 0.829 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.773-0.885) and 0.804 (95% CI 0.732-0.877), respectively.

CONCLUSION

High-risk patients could be identified intraoperatively with this nomogram, and timely intervention could be performed with preservation of the arm lymphatics.

Breast cancer-related upper limb lymphoedema: an overview

Breast cancer-related lymphoedema can be commonly encountered within a community nurse's role. The severity of lymphoedema can range considerably, from those who are considered 'at risk' due to breast cancer treatment, to individuals with highly complex oedema from advanced disease. This article provides an overview of breast cancer-related lymphoedema, including the risk factors for developing lymphoedema and the impact lymphoedema has physically, psychologically and socially. The treatments for lymphoedema, including clinical practical advice and skills, are presented to support ongoing personal development. A collaborative approach between community nurses and lymphoedema clinics is recommended to ensure that patients receive the best care possible.

The impact of monitoring techniques on progression to chronic breast cancer-related lymphedema: a meta-analysis comparing bioimpedance spectroscopy versus circumferential measurements

BACKGROUND

Chronic breast cancer-related lymphedema (BCRL) is a potentially serious complication following treatment. Monitoring for progression to BCRL may allow for earlier detection and intervention, reducing the rate of progression to chronic BCRL. Therefore, the purpose of this meta-analysis is to evaluate the impact of monitoring techniques on the incidence of chronic BCRL among patients monitored by bioimpedance spectroscopy (BIS) and circumference as compared to background rates.

METHODS

Eligible peer-reviewed studies from PubMed, CINHAL, or Google Scholar that were published in English from 2013 onward and conducted in North America, Europe, or Oceania. Incidence rates abstracted from studies were classified by BCRL monitoring method: background (no standardized BIS or circumference assessments), BIS or circumference. A random-effects model was used to calculate a pooled annualized estimate of BCRL incidence while accounting for clinical and methodological heterogeneity. Subgroup analyses examined differences in duration of follow-up as well as breast and axillary surgery.

RESULTS

50 studies were included, representing over 67,000 women. The annualized incidence of BCRL was 4.9% (95% CI: 4.3-5.5) for background studies (n = 35), 1.5% (95% CI: 0.6-2.4) for BIS-monitored studies (n = 7), and 7.7% (95% CI: 5.6-9.8) for circumference-monitored studies (n = 11). The cumulative BCRL incidence rate in BIS-monitored patients was 3.1% as compared to 12.9% with background monitoring (69% reduction) and 17.0% with circumference-monitored patients (81% reduction).

CONCLUSIONS

Evidence suggests that monitoring with BIS allowing for early intervention significantly reduces the relative risk of chronic BCRL with a 69% and 81% reduction compared to background and circumference, respectively. Circumference monitoring did not appear to provide a benefit with respect to chronic BCRL incidence. Based on these results, BIS should be considered for BCRL screening in order to detect subclinical BCRL and reduce rates of chronic BCRL, particularly in high-risk patients.

Features, Predictors, and Treatment of Breast Cancer-related Lymphedema

Purpose of review

Breast cancer-related lymphedema (BCRL) is a common sequelae among breast cancer survivors. This review provides updated information on recent studies to prevent, diagnose, and actively treat women with BCRL.

Recent findings

In total, 63 articles were identified from 2015 and 2020 that assessed incidence, risk factors, surveillance, measurement and definition, treatment, and awareness of BCRL. Depending on the approach and timing of assessment, BCRL incidence rates ranged from 9.1% to 39%. Modified radical mastectomy, number of positive lymph nodes, and postoperative complications were linked to BCRL risk, in addition to chemotherapy, radiation, axillary lymph node dissection, advanced cancer stage, and higher body mass index. Early detection showed favorable BCRL outcomes (e.g., severity, symptoms). Exercise, self-management, complete decongestive therapy, bandaging, and surgery had positive effects on BCRL outcomes.

Summary

Numerous gaps exist within BCRL literature, such as the value of self-reported surveillance options to identify BCRL early, measurement strategies, and definitions of BCRL. In terms of policies, efforts are needed to educate providers, patients, payers, and legislators about the need for consensus to reduce the burden of BCRL in women being treated for breast cancer.

Factors Associated With Lymphedema in Women With Node-Positive Breast Cancer Treated With Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy and Axillary Dissection

Importance

Most lymphedema studies include a heterogeneous population and focus on patients treated with adjuvant chemotherapy.

Objective

To examine factors associated with lymphedema after neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) and axillary lymph node dissection in women with node-positive breast cancer.

Design, Setting, and Participants

This cohort study included data from 701 women 18 years or older with cT0-T4N1-2M0 breast cancer with documented axillary nodal metastasis at diagnosis who were enrolled in the American College of Surgeons Oncology Group Z1071 (Alliance for Clinical Trials in Oncology) trial, which took place from January 1, 2009, to December 31, 2012. Data analysis was performed from January 11, 2018, to November 9, 2018.

Interventions

All participants received NAC, breast operation, and axillary lymph node dissection. Participants underwent prospective arm measurements and symptom assessment after NAC completion and at 6-month intervals to 36 months postoperatively.

Main Outcomes and Measures

Factors associated with lymphedema were defined as self-reported arm heaviness or swelling (lymphedema symptoms) or an arm volume increase of 10% or more (V10) or 20% or more (V20).

Results

A total of 486 patients (mean [SD] age, 50.1 [10.8] years) were included in this study. Median follow-up for the 3 measures was 2.2 to 3.0 years. Cumulative lymphedema incidence at 3 years was 37.8% (95% CI, 33.1%-43.2%) for lymphedema symptoms, 58.4% (95% CI, 53.2%-64.1%) for V10, and 36.9% (95% CI, 31.9%-42.6%) for V20. Increasing body mass index (hazard ratio [HR], 1.04; 95% CI, 1.01-1.06) and NAC for 144 days or longer (HR, 1.48; 95% CI, 1.01-2.17) were associated with lymphedema symptoms. The V20 incidence was higher among patients who received NAC for 144 days or longer (HR, 1.79; 95% CI, 1.19-2.68). The V10 incidence was highest in patients with 30 nodes or more removed (HR, 1.70; 95% CI, 1.15-2.52) and increased with number of positive nodes (HR, 1.03; 95% CI, 1.00-1.06). On multivariable analysis, obesity was significantly associated with lymphedema symptoms (HR, 1.03; 95% CI, 1.01-1.06), and NAC length was significantly associated with V20 (HR, 1.74; 95% CI, 1.15-2.62).

Conclusions and Relevance

In this study, longer NAC duration and obesity were associated with increased lymphedema incidence, suggesting that patients in these groups may benefit from enhanced prospective lymphedema surveillance.

Surgical versus Nonsurgical Management of Postmastectomy Lymphedema: A Prospective Quality of Life Investigation

Background Postmastectomy secondary lymphedema can cause substantial morbidity. However, few studies have investigated longitudinal quality of life (QoL) outcomes in patients with postmastectomy lymphedema, especially with regard to surgical versus nonoperative management. This study prospectively investigated QoL in surgically versus nonsurgically managed patients with postmastectomy upper extremity lymphedema.

Methods This was a longitudinal cohort study of breast cancer-related lymphedema patients at a single institution, between February 2017 and January 2020. Lymphedema Quality of Life Instrument (LyQLI) and RAND-36 QoL instrument were used. Mann–Whitney U and Fisher's exact tests were used for descriptive statistics. Wilcoxon's signed-rank testing and linear modeling were used to analyze longitudinal changes in QoL.

Results Thirty-two lymphedema patients were recruited to the study (20 surgical and 12 nonsurgical). Surgical and nonsurgical cohorts did not significantly differ in clinical/demographic characteristics or baseline QoL scores, but at the 12-month time point surgical patients had significantly greater LyQLI overall health scores than nonsurgical patients (79.3 vs. 58.3, p = 0.02), as well as higher composite RAND-36 physical (68.5 vs. 38.3, p = 0.04), and mental (77.0 vs. 52.7, p = 0.02) scores. Furthermore, LyQLI overall health scores significantly improved over time in surgical patients (60.0 at baseline vs. 79.3 at 12 months, p = 0.04). Besides surgical treatment, race, and age were also found to significantly impact QoL on multivariable analysis.

Conclusion Our results suggest that when compared with nonoperative management, surgery improved QoL for chronic, secondary upper extremity lymphedema patients within 12-month postoperatively. Our results also suggested that insurance status may have influenced decisions to undergo lymphedema surgery. Further study is needed to investigate the various sociodemographic factors that were also found to impact QoL outcomes in these lymphedema patients.

Physical activity level and age contribute to functioning problems in patients with breast cancer-related lymphedema: a multicentre cross-sectional study

PURPOSE

Breast cancer survivors face a high risk of developing breast cancer-related lymphedema (BCRL). Besides physical symptoms such as swelling, BCRL can have a psychosocial impact and lead to problems in daily functioning. Understanding contributing variables to problems in functioning yields possibilities to improve treatment modalities and consequently patients' quality of life. Therefore, the aim of this study was to explore the association between patient-, lymphedema-, and cancer treatment-related variables with problems in functioning in patients with BCRL.

METHODS

A cross-sectional study was performed in 185 patients with BCRL. Problems in daily functioning (dependent variable) were evaluated with the Lymph-ICF-UL questionnaire. Following independent variables were analysed by bi-variate and multivariable analyses, including a stepwise regression analysis: patient-related variables (age, BMI, physical activity level, education), lymphedema-related variables (excessive arm volume, duration of lymphedema, total pitting score, presence of hand edema, hardness of the tissue, lymphedema stage), and cancer treatment-related variables (type of surgery, surgery at the dominant side, radiotherapy, chemotherapy, hormone therapy, immunotherapy, TNM-classification).

RESULTS

The Lymph-ICF-UL mean total score was 38% (± 21), representing a moderate amount of problems in general functioning. Multivariable regression analyses revealed that lower physical activity level and lower age are contributing factors to more problems in daily functioning. Stepwise regression analysis indicated that up to 8% of the variance in problems in functioning could be explained by physical activity level and age of patients with BCRL.

CONCLUSION

Especially patients with low physical activity level and younger patients experience more problems in functioning. For the determination of certain causal interactions, future longitudinal studies including other independent variables that might explain a higher amount of problems in functioning in this population, are warranted.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

The study makes part of a double-blind, multi-center, randomized controlled trial (EFforT-BCRL trial), which is registered in clinicaltrials.gov (NCT02609724). CME reference S58689, EudraCT Number 2015-004822-33.

A scoring system for predicting the risk of breast cancer-related lymphedema

Objective

We aimed to establish a scoring system to predict the risk of breast cancer-related lymphedema.

Methods

From April 2017 to December 2018, 533 patients who previously underwent surgery for breast cancer were enrolled in this cross-sectional study. Univariate analysis was performed to explore and define the risk factors. A scoring system was then established on the basis of odds ratio values in the regression analysis.

Results

The additive scoring system values ranged from 6 to 22. The receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve of this scoring system showed a sensitivity and specificity of 83.3% and 57.3%, respectively, to predict the risk of lymphedema at a cut-off of 15.5 points; the area under the curve was 0.736 (95% confidence interval: 0.662–0.811), with χ² = 5.134 (P = 0.274) for the Hosmer–Lemeshow test.

Conclusions

The predictive efficiency and accuracy of the scoring system were acceptable, and the system could be used to predict and screen groups at high risk for breast cancer-related lymphedema.

Is Immediate Lymphatic Reconstruction Cost-effective?

OBJECTIVE

This manuscript is the first to employ rigorous methodological criteria to critically appraise a surgical preventative technique for breast cancer-related lymphedema from a cost-utility standpoint.

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA

Breast cancer-related lymphedema is a well-documented complication of breast cancer survivors in the US. In this study, we conduct a cost-utility analysis to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of the LYMPHA.

METHODS

Lymphedema rates after each of the following surgical options: (1) ALND, (2) ALND + LYMPHA, (3) ALND + RLNR, (4) ALND + RLNR + LYMPHA were extracted from a recently published meta-analysis. Procedural costs were calculated using Medicare reimbursement rates. Average utility scores were obtained for each health state using a visual analog scale, then converted to quality-adjusted life years (QALYs). A decision tree was generated and incremental cost-utility ratios (ICUR) were calculated. Multiple sensitivity analyses were performed to evaluate our findings.

RESULTS

ALND with LYMPHA was more cost-effective with an ICUR of $1587.73/QALY. In the decision tree rollback analysis, a clinical effectiveness gain of 1.35 QALY justified an increased incremental cost of $2140. Similarly, the addition of LYMPHA to ALND with RLNR was more cost-effective with an ICUR of $699.84/QALY. In the decision tree rollback analysis, a clinical effectiveness gain of 2.98 QALY justified a higher incremental cost of $2085.00.

CONCLUSIONS

Our study supports that the addition of LYMPHA to both ALND or ALND with RLNR is the more cost-effective treatment option.

Lymphedema: From diagnosis to treatment

Lymphedema is a chronic and progressive disorder resulting from impaired lymphatic system function. In developed countries, upper extremity lymphedema is mainly the consequence of breast cancer surgery in which axillary lymph node dissection and radiation alter upper extremity lymphatic flow. Diagnosis of lymphedema is made clinically. Nevertheless, there are numerous diagnostic tools available for disease staging. Recently, a new technology namely magnetic resonance lymphangiography has emerged in the medical field to assist in both diagnosis and management. There are non-surgical and surgical treatment options available. Non-surgical methods are always the first-line treatment; however, surgical options can be explored in appropriate patients. Recent studies focus on the prevention of lymphedema using surgical techniques utilizing axillary reverse mapping to delineate arm lymphatics from axillary lymphatics. Finding the most suitable technique for each type of lymphedema with variable stages is one of the most complicated decisions for practitioners. More studies are needed to reveal the exact biology of lymphedema to ensure complete understanding of the disease and improve outcomes.