↓ Skip to main content

Comparison of relative versus absolute arm size change as criteria for quantifying breast cancer-related lymphedema: the flaws in current studies and need for universal methodology

Overview of attention for article published in Breast Cancer Research and Treatment, June 2012
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (68th percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (52nd percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user
patent
1 patent

Readers on

mendeley
61 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Comparison of relative versus absolute arm size change as criteria for quantifying breast cancer-related lymphedema: the flaws in current studies and need for universal methodology
Published in
Breast Cancer Research and Treatment, June 2012
DOI 10.1007/s10549-012-2111-8
Pubmed ID
Authors

Marek Ancukiewicz, Cynthia L. Miller, Melissa N. Skolny, Jean O’Toole, Laura E. Warren, Lauren S. Jammallo, Michelle C. Specht, Alphonse G. Taghian

Abstract

The purpose of this article is to evaluate arm measurements of breast cancer patients to critically assess absolute change in arm size compared to relative arm volume change as criteria for quantifying breast cancer-related lymphedema (BCRL). We used pre-operative measurements of 677 patients screened for BCRL before and following treatment of unilateral breast cancer at Massachusetts General Hospital between 2005 and 2008 to model the effect of an absolute change in arm size of 200 mL or 2 cm compared to relative arm volume change. We also used sequential measurements to analyze temporal variation in unaffected arm volume. Pre-operative arm volumes ranged from 1,270 to 6,873 mL and correlated strongly (Kendall's τ = 0.55) with body mass index (BMI). An absolute arm volume change of 200 mL corresponded to relative arm volume changes ranging from 2.9 to 15.7 %. In a subset of 45 patients, modeling of a 2-cm change in arm circumference predicted relative arm volume changes ranging from 6.0 to 9.8 %. Sequential measurements of 124 patients with >6 measurements demonstrated remarkable temporal variation in unaffected arm volume (median within-patient change 10.5 %). The magnitude of such fluctuations correlated (τ = 0.36, P < 0.0001) with pre-operative arm volume, patient weight, and BMI when quantified as absolute volume change, but was independent of these variables when quantified as relative arm volume change (P > .05). Absolute changes in arm size used as criteria for BCRL are correlated with pre-operative and temporal changes in body size. Therefore, utilization of absolute volume or circumference change in clinical trials is flawed because specificity depends strongly on patient body size. Relative arm volume change is independent of body size and should thus be used as the standard criterion for diagnosis of BCRL.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 61 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 61 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 9 15%
Researcher 6 10%
Other 5 8%
Student > Bachelor 5 8%
Student > Postgraduate 5 8%
Other 20 33%
Unknown 11 18%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 29 48%
Nursing and Health Professions 6 10%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 3%
Physics and Astronomy 2 3%
Sports and Recreations 2 3%
Other 4 7%
Unknown 16 26%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 06 August 2015.
All research outputs
#6,912,518
of 22,669,724 outputs
Outputs from Breast Cancer Research and Treatment
#1,495
of 4,615 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#49,167
of 164,469 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Breast Cancer Research and Treatment
#22
of 48 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,669,724 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 68th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,615 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.2. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 66% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 164,469 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 68% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 48 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 52% of its contemporaries.