Persistent pain after breast cancer treatment: a critical review of risk factors and strategies for prevention
Open accessAbstract
Unlabelled Chronic pain after breast cancer treatment is a major clinical problem, affecting 25 to 60% of patients. Development of chronic pain after breast cancer treatment, as well as other surgical procedures, involves a complex pathophysiology that involves pre-, intra- and post-operative factors. This review is a systematic analysis on methodology and evidence in research into persistent pain after breast cancer treatment during the period 1995 to 2010, in order to clarify the significance and relative role of potential risk factors. Literature was identified by a search in PubMed and OVID, as well as by obtaining relevant studies from a systematic review of reference lists. Sixty papers were identified, most of these being retrospective or questionnaires. Only 2 studies included quantitative sensory testing and only 26 studies were prospective. Furthermore, about a third of the studies did not apply modern principles of surgical and adjuvant therapy. In summary, the data show inconsistencies in definition of chronic pain and treatment groups, as well as in the collection of pre- intra- and post-operative data, precluding conclusions with regard to pathophysiologic mechanisms as well as rational strategies for prevention and treatment. However, nerve damage and radiotherapy appear to be significant risk factors for chronic pain. A proposal for the design of future prospective studies is presented.Perspective A comprehensive and systematic approach to research in chronic pain after breast cancer treatment is necessary in order to understand the pathophysiology and thus develop strategies for prevention and treatment.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
CPSP has prevalence rates ranging from 25-60% depending on definition, measurement and treatment.
“CPSP has prevalence rates ranging from 25–60% depending on definition, measurement and treatment [6].”
Chronic post-surgical pain and fatigue are a major clinical problem with prevalence rates ranging up to 60%.
“This is a both a major clinical problem, with prevalence rates ranging up to 60% [6], and a socioeconomic burden on the health care system [110].”
Chronic post-surgical pain and fatigue are the most common sequelae.
“Chronic post-surgical pain and fatigue are the most common sequelas [6,13].”
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 107 · Cited by 523
- Authors
- Andersen, K. G., & Kehlet, H.
- Affiliations
- University of Copenhagen (DK)
- Venue
- The Journal of Pain
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2011-07
- Volume
- 12
- Issue
- 7
- Pages
- 725-746
- ISSN
- 1526-5900 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2075091924
- Cited by
- 523
- References
- 107
- Citations by year
- 2026: 23 · 2025: 32 · 2024: 27 · 2023: 38 · 2022: 44 · 2021: 70 · 2020: 36 · 2019: 34 · 2018: 40 · 2017: 35 · 2016: 34 · 2015: 27 · 2014: 24 · 2013: 31 · 2012: 21
- FWCI
- 4.88
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
- doi.org
- Licence
- Locations
- Journal of Pain (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Research at the University of Copenhagen (University of Copenhagen) (submittedVersion)
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine › Pain Management and Opioid Use
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Surgery › Anesthesia and Pain Management
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Oncology › Cancer survivorship and care
- Keywords
- chronic pain, breast cancer, postoperative pain, risk factors, nerve injury, radiotherapy, pain prevention, pathophysiology, surgical complications, adjuvant therapy
- MeSH terms
- Breast Neoplasms, Chronic Disease, Female, Humans, Pain, Postoperative Complications, Retrospective Studies, Risk Factors, Databases, Factual, Radiosurgery
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review