Prevention of lymphoedema after axillary clearance by external compression sleeves PLACE randomised trial results. Effects of high BMI.

Around 25% of women undergoing Axillary Clearance (ANC) develop lymphedema (LE). Intervention with a compression garment is recommended to prevent LE but no randomised evidence exists to support this strategy. METHODS: A randomised trial tested standard management versus application of graduated compression garments (20-24 mmHg) to affected arm, for 1 year. Women with node positive breast cancer (n = 1300) undergoing ANC consented to arm volume measurements and those developing a 4-9% relative arm volume increase (RAVI) (subclinical LE) within 9 months post-surgery were randomised. Primary outcome was proportion of patients developing LE (RAVI > 10%) by 24-months in each group. Secondary endpoints included Quality of life in each group. RESULTS: In total 143 patients were randomised (74 no sleeve: 69 compression sleeve) between October 2010 and November 2015. The lymphoedema rate at 24 months in the 'no sleeve' group was at 41%, similar to the 'sleeve' group (30%: p = 0.32). Thirtytwo patients randomised to the 'no sleeve' group had a sleeve applied within 24 months. Body Mass Index (BMI) at randomisation predicted LE at any time point HR 1.04 (CI 1.01-1.08; p = 0.01). Patients with obesity (BMI > 30) had higher rates of LE in both groups (46%) compared to those with BMI < 30 (24%). No difference between patients was found in either group in changes in QoL. Compression sleeves applied after development of LE improved QoL scores (FACT-B p = 0.007:TOI p = 0.042). CONCLUSION: Early intervention with External Compression garments does not prevent clinical LE, particularly in women with a high BMI > 30. The use of prophylactic garments in subclinical LE (RAVI < 9%) is unwarranted.

Increases in arm volume predict lymphoedema and quality of life deficits after axillary surgery: a prospective cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Lymphoedema develops after axillary clearance (ANC) in 25% of patients. This prospective, multi-centre study compared multi-frequency bioimpedance spectroscopy (BIS) with arm volume measurement to: (1) determine which test has better diagnostic accuracy, (2) identify factors predicting development of lymphoedema, and its effect on quality-of-life. METHODS: Participants (N = 1100) underwent measurements pre and post-ANC surgery for breast cancer. Relative arm volume increase (RAVI) of >10% diagnosed lymphoedema. Predictors of lymphoedema were determined using logistic regression. Optimal diagnostic method was assessed using diagnostic accuracy. Quality-of-life was assessed using the FACT B + 4 questionnaire. RESULTS: Lymphoedema was diagnosed in 22.8% women using RAVI > 10%, 45.6% using BIS criteria, while 24.5% underwent compression sleeve application by 24 months. BMI > 30 was an independent factor for both development (p = 0.005) and progression (p = 0.015) of lymphoedema. RAVI at 1 month, BMI > 30 and number of involved nodes contributed to a novel scoring model to predict lymphoedema by 36 months. Larger decreases in QoL scores post-surgery occurred in lymphoedema patients (p < 0.001). Progression to moderate lymphoedema occurred in 15% patients after sleeve application. CONCLUSIONS: RAVI measurement was the best diagnostic tool for lymphoedema. BIS alone is not appropriate for lymphoedema screening or diagnosis. BMI > 30 predicted lymphoedema diagnosis and progression.

Psychological impact of providing women with personalised 10-year breast cancer risk estimates.

BACKGROUND: The Predicting Risk of Cancer at Screening (PROCAS) study estimated 10-year breast cancer risk for 53,596 women attending NHS Breast Screening Programme. The present study, nested within the PROCAS study, aimed to assess the psychological impact of receiving breast cancer risk estimates, based on: (a) the Tyrer-Cuzick (T-C) algorithm including breast density or (b) T-C including breast density plus single-nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs), versus (c) comparison women awaiting results. METHODS: A sample of 2138 women from the PROCAS study was stratified by testing groups: T-C only, T-C(+SNPs) and comparison women; and by 10-year risk estimates received: 'moderate' (5-7.99%), 'average' (2-4.99%) or 'below average' (<1.99%) risk. Postal questionnaires were returned by 765 (36%) women. RESULTS: Overall state anxiety and cancer worry were low, and similar for women in T-C only and T-C(+SNPs) groups. Women in both T-C only and T-C(+SNPs) groups showed lower-state anxiety but slightly higher cancer worry than comparison women awaiting results. Risk information had no consistent effects on intentions to change behaviour. Most women were satisfied with information provided. There was considerable variation in understanding. CONCLUSIONS: No major harms of providing women with 10-year breast cancer risk estimates were detected. Research to establish the feasibility of risk-stratified breast screening is warranted.

Breast cancer risk in a screening cohort of Asian and white British/Irish women from Manchester UK.

BACKGROUND: The differences between breast cancer risk factors in white British/Irish and Asian women attending screening in the UK are not well documented. METHODS: Between 2009-15 ethnicity and traditional breast cancer risk factors were self-identified by a screening cohort from Greater Manchester, with follow up to 2016. Risk factors and incidence rates were compared using age-standardised statistics (European standard population). RESULTS: Eight hundred and seventy-nine Asian women and 51,779 unaffected white British/Irish women aged 46-73 years were recruited. Asian women were at lower predicted breast cancer risk from hormonal and reproductive risk factors than white British/Irish women (mean 10 year risk 2.6% vs 3.1%, difference 0.4%, 95%CI 0.3-0.5%). White British/Irish women were more likely to have had a younger age at menarche, be overweight or obese, taller, used hormone replacement therapy and not to have had children.. However, despite being less overweight Asian women had gained more weight from age 20 years and were less likely to undertake moderate physical activity. Asian women also had a slightly higher mammographic density. Asian age-standardised incidence was 3.2 (95%CI 1.6-5.2, 18 cancers) per thousand women/year vs 4.5 (95%CI 4.2-4.8, 1076 cancers) for white British/Irish women. CONCLUSIONS: Asian women attending screening in Greater Manchester are likely to have a lower risk of breast cancer than white British/Irish women, but they undertake less physical activity and have more adult weight gain.

Breast cancer risk feedback to women in the UK NHS breast screening population.

INTRODUCTION: There are widespread moves to develop risk-stratified approaches to population-based breast screening. The public needs to favour receiving breast cancer risk information, which ideally should produce no detrimental effects. This study investigates risk perception, the proportion wishing to know their 10-year risk and whether subsequent screening attendance is affected. METHODS: Fifty thousand women attending the NHS Breast Screening Programme completed a risk assessment questionnaire. Ten-year breast cancer risks were estimated using a validated algorithm (Tyrer-Cuzick) adjusted for visually assessed mammographic density. Women at high risk (⩾8%) and low risk (<1%) were invited for face-to-face or telephone risk feedback and counselling. RESULTS: Of those invited to receive risk feedback, more high-risk women, 500 out of 673 (74.3%), opted to receive a consultation than low-risk women, 106 out of 193 (54.9%) (P<0.001). Women at high risk were significantly more likely to perceive their risk as high (P<0.001) and to attend their subsequent mammogram (94.4%) compared with low-risk women (84.2%; P=0.04) and all attendees (84.3%; ⩽0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: Population-based assessment of breast cancer risk is feasible. The majority of women wished to receive risk information. Perception of general population breast cancer risk is poor. There were no apparent adverse effects on screening attendance for high-risk women whose subsequent screening attendance was increased.