Context

Approximately 60% to 100% of women with breast cancer experience at least one menopausal-related symptom. Little is known about associations between menopausal status and symptoms in women 12 months after breast cancer surgery.

Objectives

The purpose of this study was to evaluate for differences in occurrence, severity, and distress of symptoms between pre- and postmenopausal women 12 months after breast cancer surgery.

Methods

Women with breast cancer (n = 327) completed the Menopausal Symptoms Scale, which evaluated the occurrence, severity, and distress of 46 common menopausal-related symptoms. Regression analyses were used to evaluate between-group differences in the seven symptoms that occurred in 30% and more of the sample (i.e., hot flashes, night sweats, depression, daytime sweats, joint pain or stiffness, wake during the night, and numbness or tingling).

Results

Of the 327 patients with breast cancer, who completed the 12-month assessment, 35.2% were premenopausal and 64.8% were postmenopausal before surgery. In the conditional models, when significant interactions were found, the differences in symptom occurrence rates between pre- and postmenopausal patients depended on their age.

Conclusion

Regardless of menopausal status, women reported relatively high occurrence rates for several menopausal symptoms. Associations between symptom occurrence rates and menopausal status depended on the patient's age. During the development of a survivorship care plan, clinicians need to assess symptom burden within the context of a woman's menopausal status and salient demographic and clinical characteristics. This approach will assist with the prescription of more effective interventions.

Background

Breast cancer treatments can change women's hormonal milieu and alter their symptom experience. Little is known about associations between menopausal status and menopausal symptoms in women with breast cancer before surgery.

Objective

The purpose of this study was to evaluate for differences in occurrence, severity, and distress of symptoms between premenopausal and postmenopausal women before breast cancer surgery.

Methods

A total of 312 women with breast cancer completed the Menopausal Symptoms Scale, a self-report measure that evaluated the occurrence, severity, and distress of 46 common symptoms associated with menopause. Regression analyses were used to evaluate for between-group differences in these symptoms.

Results

Of the 312 patients enrolled, 37.4% (n = 116) were premenopausal, and 62.6% (n = 196) were postmenopausal. In the multivariate analysis that adjusted for 7 covariates, premenopausal patients reported higher occurrence rates for urinary frequency (P = .006) and reported lower occurrence rates for joint pain/stiffness (P = .011), difficulty falling asleep (P = .025), and vaginal dryness (P = .002). A significant interaction was found between age and menopausal status for hot flashes (P = .002), wake during the night (P = .025), and headache (P = .040).

Conclusion

Regardless of menopausal status, women reported high occurrence rates for several menopausal symptoms. Associations between some symptom occurrence rates and menopausal status depended on the patients' age.

Implications for practice

As part of a preoperative symptom assessment, clinicians need to consider a woman's menopausal status and salient demographic and clinical characteristics. The identification of women with a higher symptom burden will assist with more effective management.

Background: Lymphedema (LE) is a significant clinical problem for breast cancer survivors. While the water displacement test and circumferential assessment using a tape measure (TM) are common methods to assess differences in arm volumes, faster and more reliable methods are needed. Study purposes, in breast cancer survivors (n = 294), were to compare the average total arm volumes and interlimb volume ratios for women with and without a history of LE, using a TM and three-dimensional (3D), whole-body surface scanner (3D scan); compare the level of agreement between arm volumes and interlimb volume ratios obtained using the two devices; and evaluate the percent agreement between the two measures in classifying cases of LE using three accepted thresholds. Methods and Results: Measurements were done using a spring-loaded TM and Fit3D ProScanner. Paired t-tests and Bland-Altman analyses were used to achieve the study aims. For circumference and volume comparisons, compared with the 3D scan, values obtained using the TM were consistently smaller. In terms of level of agreement, the Bland-Altman analyses demonstrated large biases and wide limits of agreement for the calculated arm volumes and volume ratios. In terms of the classification of caseness, using the 200-mL interlimb volume difference criterion resulted in 81.6% overall agreement; using the >10% volume difference between the affected and unaffected arms resulted in 78.5% overall agreement; and using the volume ratio ≥1.04 criterion resulted in 62.5% overall agreement. For all three accepted threshold criteria, the percentage of cases was significantly different between the TM and 3D scan techniques. Conclusions: The 3D technology evaluated in this study has the potential to be used for self-initiated surveillance for LE. With improvements in landmark identification and software modifications, it is possible that accurate and reliable total arm volumes can be calculated and used for early detection.

Given the paucity of information on local tissue water (LTW) in the upper extremity and trunk of women after breast cancer surgery, the purpose of this study was to compare tissue dielectric constant (TDC) values between the affected and unaffected sides of breast cancer survivors with and without upper extremity lymphoedema (LE). Differences in LTW were assessed using the TDC method for three sites in the upper limbs, three sites in the lateral thorax and two sites on the back. Additional measures included demographic and clinical characteristics, arm circumference and bioimpedance analysis. For the 112 survivors without LE, no differences in TDC values were found between the affected and unaffected sides for the first dorsal web space, ventral forearm and upper arm, and upper and lower back. Compared to the unaffected side, TDC values were significantly higher on the affected side for the upper, mid and lower lateral thorax. For the 78 survivors with LE, compared to the unaffected side, TDC was significantly higher on the affected side for all of the sites evaluated except the hand web space. Our findings support the use of the TDC method to detect differences in upper extremity and truncal oedema in survivors with LE following breast cancer treatment. Measurement of LTW may provide a useful method to determine truncal as well as extremity LE. The ability to detect early signs of truncal oedema may lead to pre-emptive interventions in breast cancer survivors.

PURPOSE:Given the inter-relatedness among symptoms, research efforts are focused on an evaluation of symptom clusters. The purposes of this study were to evaluate for differences in the number and types of menopausal-related symptom clusters assessed prior to and at 12-months after surgery using ratings of occurrence and severity and to evaluate for changes in these symptom clusters over time. METHODS:Prior to and at 12 months after surgery, 392 women with breast cancer completed the Menopausal Symptoms Scale. Exploratory factor analyses were used to identify the symptom clusters. RESULTS:Of the 392 women evaluated, the mean number of symptoms (out of 46) was 13.2 (±8.5) at enrollment and 10.9 (±8.2) at 12 months after surgery. Using occurrence and severity, three symptom clusters were identified prior to surgery. Five symptom clusters were identified at 12 months following surgery. Two symptom clusters (i.e., pain/discomfort and hormonal) were relatively stable across both dimensions and time points. Two symptom clusters were relatively stable across both dimensions either prior to surgery (i.e., sleep/psychological/cognitive) or at 12 months after surgery (i.e., sleep). The other four clusters (i.e., irritability, psychological/cognitive, cognitive, psychological) were identified at one time point using a single dimension. CONCLUSIONS:While some menopausal-related symptom clusters were consistent across time and dimensions, the majority of symptoms clustered together differently depending on whether they were evaluated prior to or at 12 months after breast cancer surgery. An increased understanding of how symptom clusters change over time may assist clinicians to focus their symptom assessments and management strategies.

Background: While supine bioimpedance devices are used to evaluate for lymphedema (LE), stand-on devices are gaining popularity. Because research on differences in bioimpedance values between the two devices is limited, this study's purposes were to: (1) determine the average upper limb impedance values and inter-limb ratios for women who self-reported having (n = 34) or not having (n = 61) a history of LE, using a single-frequency supine device and a multifrequency stand-on device; (2) compare the level of agreement in inter-limb impedance ratios between the two devices; evaluate the percent agreement between the two devices in classifying cases of LE using established supine thresholds; and evaluate the percent agreement in classifying cases of LE between the supine device using previously established supine thresholds and the stand-on device using two published standing thresholds. Methods and Results: Bioimpedance measures were done using the two devices. For the entire sample, absolute impedance values for both the affected and unaffected limbs were significantly higher for the stand-on device in women with and without LE. Impedance values for the two methods were highly correlated. Bland-Altman analysis determined that for the entire range of impedance ratios the values for the two devices could not be used interchangeably. Conclusions: Findings suggest that the stand-on device can be a useful and valid tool to assess for LE. However, because agreement is not perfect, values obtained from the two devices should not be used interchangeably to evaluate for changes in impedance ratios, particularly for ratios of >1.20.