International journal of radiation oncology, biology, physics · 2014
The impact of radiation therapy on the risk of lymphedema after treatment for breast cancer: a prospective cohort study.
СтатьяПоддержка NIH: внешняя программаНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Warren Laura E G, Miller Cynthia L, Horick Nora, Skolny Melissa N, Jammallo Lauren S, Sadek Betro T, Shenouda Mina N, O'Toole Jean A, MacDonald Shannon M, Specht Michelle C, Taghian Alphonse G
Аннотация
PURPOSE/OBJECTIVE: Lymphedema after breast cancer treatment can be an irreversible condition with a negative impact on quality of life. The goal of this study was to identify radiation therapy-related risk factors for lymphedema.
METHODS AND MATERIALS: From 2005 to 2012, we prospectively performed arm volume measurements on 1476 breast cancer patients at our institution using a Perometer. Treating each breast individually, 1099 of 1501 patients (73%) received radiation therapy. Arm measurements were performed preoperatively and postoperatively. Lymphedema was defined as ≥10% arm volume increase occurring >3 months postoperatively. Univariate and multivariate Cox proportional hazard models were used to evaluate risk factors for lymphedema.
RESULTS: At a median follow-up time of 25.4 months (range, 3.4-82.6 months), the 2-year cumulative incidence of lymphedema was 6.8%. Cumulative incidence by radiation therapy type was as follows: 3.0% no radiation therapy, 3.1% breast or chest wall alone, 21.9% supraclavicular (SC), and 21.1% SC and posterior axillary boost (PAB). On multivariate analysis, the hazard ratio for regional lymph node radiation (RLNR) (SC ± PAB) was 1.7 (P=.025) compared with breast/chest wall radiation alone. There was no difference in lymphedema risk between SC and SC + PAB (P=.96). Other independent risk factors included early postoperative swelling (P<.0001), higher body mass index (P<.0001), greater number of lymph nodes dissected (P=.018), and axillary lymph node dissection (P=.0001).
CONCLUSIONS: In a large cohort of breast cancer patients prospectively screened for lymphedema, RLNR significantly increased the risk of lymphedema compared with breast/chest wall radiation alone. When considering use of RLNR, clinicians should weigh the potential benefit of RLNR for control of disease against the increased risk of lymphedema.
METHODS AND MATERIALS: From 2005 to 2012, we prospectively performed arm volume measurements on 1476 breast cancer patients at our institution using a Perometer. Treating each breast individually, 1099 of 1501 patients (73%) received radiation therapy. Arm measurements were performed preoperatively and postoperatively. Lymphedema was defined as ≥10% arm volume increase occurring >3 months postoperatively. Univariate and multivariate Cox proportional hazard models were used to evaluate risk factors for lymphedema.
RESULTS: At a median follow-up time of 25.4 months (range, 3.4-82.6 months), the 2-year cumulative incidence of lymphedema was 6.8%. Cumulative incidence by radiation therapy type was as follows: 3.0% no radiation therapy, 3.1% breast or chest wall alone, 21.9% supraclavicular (SC), and 21.1% SC and posterior axillary boost (PAB). On multivariate analysis, the hazard ratio for regional lymph node radiation (RLNR) (SC ± PAB) was 1.7 (P=.025) compared with breast/chest wall radiation alone. There was no difference in lymphedema risk between SC and SC + PAB (P=.96). Other independent risk factors included early postoperative swelling (P<.0001), higher body mass index (P<.0001), greater number of lymph nodes dissected (P=.018), and axillary lymph node dissection (P=.0001).
CONCLUSIONS: In a large cohort of breast cancer patients prospectively screened for lymphedema, RLNR significantly increased the risk of lymphedema compared with breast/chest wall radiation alone. When considering use of RLNR, clinicians should weigh the potential benefit of RLNR for control of disease against the increased risk of lymphedema.