Background: In addition to fatigue, pain is the most frequent persistent symptom in cancer survivors. Clear guidelines for both the diagnosis and treatment of pain in cancer survivors are lacking. Classification of pain is important as it may facilitate more specific targeting of treatment. In this paper we present an overview of nociceptive, neuropathic and central sensitization pain following cancer treatment, as well as the rationale, criteria and process for stratifying pain classification. Material and methods: Recently, a clinical method for classifying any pain as either predominant central sensitization pain, neuropathic or nociceptive pain was developed, based on a large body of research evidence and international expert opinion. We, a team of 15 authors from 13 different centers, four countries and two continents have applied this classification algorithm to the cancer survivor population. Results: The classification of pain following cancer treatment entails two steps: (1) examining the presence of neuropathic pain; and (2) using an algorithm for differentiating predominant nociceptive and central sensitization pain.Step 1 builds on the established criteria for neuropathic pain diagnosis, whileStep 2 applies a recently developed clinical method for classifying any pain as either predominant central sensitization pain, neuropathic or nociceptive pain to the cancer survivor population. Conclusion: The classification criteria allow identifying central sensitization pain following cancer treatment. The recognition of central sensitization pain in practice is an important development in the integration of pain neuroscience into the clinic, and one that is relevant for people undergoing and following cancer treatment.

BMI > 30, education < 12-13 years, lymphedema, not smoking, axillary lymph node dissection, chemotherapy, hormone therapy, and radiotherapy were significantly associated with higher odds for the development of chronic pain, with lymphedema being the biggest risk factor. Lack of uniformity across the studies in defining pain, follow-up, measurement tools, and cut-off values for the diagnosis of pain was noted, resulting in greater inter-study variability.

Despite the established benefits of AI, an important portion of the patients experiences AIA. More research is needed to investigate the efficacy of treatments such as exercise therapy for AIA.

Introduction The differentiation between acute and chronic pain can be insufficient for appropriate pain management. The aim of this study was to evaluate the prevalence of the predominant pain type (nociceptive, neuropathic, or central sensitization [CS] pain) in breast cancer survivors (BCS) with chronic pain. The secondary aims were to examine (1) differences in health‐related quality of life (HRQoL) between the different pain groups; and (2) the associations between patient‐, disease‐, and treatment‐related factors and the different pain types. Methods To determine the prevalence of the predominant type of pain, a recently proposed classification system was used. BCS were asked to complete the VAS for pain, Douleur Neuropathique 4 Questionnaire, Margolis Pain Diagram, Central Sensitization Inventory, and Short Form 36 (SF‐36). Results Ninety‐one BCS participated, among whom 25.3% presented neuropathic pain, 18.7% nociceptive pain, and 15.4% CS pain. Mixed pain was found in 40.6%. A significant intergroup difference in HRQoL was found for SF‐36 “general health” (P = 0.04). The odds for the presence of CS rather than nociceptive pain are 26 times higher in patients exposed to hormone therapy in comparison to the nonexposed (odds ratio 25.95, 95% confidence interval 1.33 to 504.37, P = 0.03). Conclusion Neuropathic pain is most frequent in BCS. Strong associations were found between CS pain and hormone therapy.

Background.Lymphoedema of the operated and irradiated breast is a common complication following early breast cancer treatment. There is no consensus on objective diagnostic criteria and standard measurement tools. This study investigates the use of ultrasound elastography as an objective quantitative measurement tool for the diagnosis of parenchymal breast oedema.Patients and methods.The elasticity ratio of the subcutis, measured with ultrasound elastography, was compared with high-frequency ultrasound parameters and subjective symptoms in twenty patients, bilaterally, prior to and following breast conserving surgery and breast irradiation.Results.Elasticity ratio of the subcutis of the operated breast following radiation therapy increased in 88.9% of patients, was significantly higher than prior to surgery, unlike the non operated breast and significantly higher than the non operated breast, unlike preoperative results. These results were significantly correlated with visibility of the echogenic line, measured with high-frequency ultrasound. Big preoperative bra cup size was a significant risk factor for the development of breast oedema.Conclusions.Ultrasound elastography is an objective quantitative measurement tool for the diagnosis of parenchymal breast oedema, in combination with other objective diagnostic criteria. Further research with longer follow-up and more patients is necessary to confirm our findings.