Multiple tumours in survival estimates

Rosso, Stefano; Angelis, Roberta De; Ciccolallo, Laura; Carrani, E.; Soerjomataram, Isabelle; Grande, Enrico; Zigon, Giulia; Brenner, Hermann

doi:10.1016/j.ejca.2008.11.030

Cited by 123 publications

(128 citation statements)

References 8 publications

(13 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

107

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…This study confirmed the finding from previous studies [23,24] that survival estimates based on first cancers-only exclude a large, varied, and increasing number of subsequent primary cancers and generally produce less conservative (i.e., higher) 5-year survival estimates than estimates produced by using all primary cancers based on SEER or IACR multiple primary cancer coding rules. Therefore, attempting to exclude subsequent cancers could introduce a systematic bias into survival analyses if the rules for registering multiple primaries are not applied consistently among all registries, or over time within a registry, or if information on previous cancer diagnoses is missing.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 81%

“…Furthermore, survival estimates based on first cancers-only do not represent the clinical experience of the entire cancer patient population [23]. For example, the introduction of screening practices, such as the prostate-specific antigen (PSA) test, may advance the diagnosis date of prostate cancer by many years before the cancer would be, if at all, clinically detectable.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…As the authors noted, the proportion of cancer patients with a known prior cancer may depend on the length of operation of the cancer registry: Cancer registries that have been in operation for many years will have more information (i.e., past cancer diagnoses) with which to correctly identify a prior cancer than a cancer registry that has been in operation for fewer years. Because the prognosis of a subsequent cancer often differs from that of a first cancer (i.e., the inclusion of all cancers tends to produce somewhat lower survival estimates than those based solely on first cancers) [23,24], the exclusion of cancer patients with a known prior cancer may introduce a bias in comparative studies because some cancers will be erroneously designated as first cancers when, in fact, they are subsequent cancers. The potential effect of this bias-if estimates are restricted to first cancers-only-will increase as the number and proportion of multiple primary cancers increases because of improved survival for many leading cancers [3,8,21,25].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Although several studies have compared survival estimates by using first versus multiple cancers using IACR multiple primary rules [22][23][24], this study is the first, to our knowledge, to compare survival estimates by using both IACR and SEER multiple primary cancer rules among the same patient population.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

The effect of multiple primary rules on population-based cancer survival

Weir

Johnson²,

Thompson

2013

Cancer Causes Control

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose-Different rules for registering multiple primary (MP) cancers are used by cancer registries throughout the world, making international data comparisons difficult. This study evaluates the effect of Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) and International Association of Cancer Registries (IACR) MP rules on population-based cancer survival estimates.Methods-Data from five US states and six metropolitan area cancer registries participating in the SEER Program were used to estimate age-standardized relative survival (RS%) for first cancers-only and all first cancers matching the selection criteria according to SEER and IACR MP rules for all cancer sites combined and for the top 25 cancer site groups among men and women. [1995][1996][1997][1998][1999][2000][2001][2002][2003][2004][2005][2006][2007][2008], the percentage of MP cancers (all sites, both sexes) increased 25.4 % by using SEER rules (from 14.6 to 18.4 %) and 20.1 % by using IACR rules (from 13.2 to 15.8 %). More MP cancers were registered among females than among males, and SEER rules registered more MP cancers than IACR rules (15.8 vs. 14.4 % among males; 17.2 vs. 14.5 % among females). The top 3 cancer sites with the largest differences were melanoma (5.8 %), urinary bladder (3.5 %), and kidney and renal pelvis (2.9 %) among males, and breast (5.9 %), melanoma (3.9 %), and urinary bladder (3.4 %) among females. Five-year survival estimates (all sites combined) restricted to first primary cancers-only were higher than estimates by using first site-specific primaries (SEER or IACR rules), and for 11 of 21 sites among males and 11 of 23 sites among females. SEER estimates are comparable to IACR estimates for all site-specific cancers and marginally higher for all sites combined among females (RS 62.28 vs. 61.96 %). Results-During HHS Public Access

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 81%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

The effect of multiple primary rules on population-based cancer survival

Weir

Johnson²,

Thompson

2013

Cancer Causes Control

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…3 Indeed, a review of 69 European cancer registries revealed that 6.3% of registered tumours were part of an MPMT clinical picture. 4 Furthermore, registry-based evidence suggests that the incidence of cancer in previously diagnosed individuals is greater than the expected population incidence with an increased risk of a wide variety of concordant and discordant tumours after an initial primary malignancy. 5 Multiple factors may contribute to the occurrence of MPMT.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

A clinical and genetic analysis of multiple primary cancer referrals to genetics services

et al. 2014

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Multiple primary malignant tumours (MPMT) are frequently taken as an indicator of potential inherited cancer susceptibility and occur at appreciable frequency both among unselected cancer patients and, particularly, among referrals to cancer genetics services. However, there is a paucity of information on the clinical genetic evaluation of cohorts of MPMT patients representing a variety of tumour types. We ascertained a referral-based series of MPMT cases and describe the patterns of tumours observed. Service-based molecular genetic testing had demonstrated a pathogenic germline variant in an inherited cancer gene in fewer than one in four unselected referrals. To assess for evidence of thus far unidentified variants in those who tested negative, comparisons were made with those who tested positive. This revealed considerable overlap between the two groups with respect to clinical characteristics indicative of an inherited cancer syndrome. We therefore proceeded to test a subset of unexplained MPMT cases (n ¼ 62) for pathogenic germline variants in TP53 and PTEN but none were detected. Individuals with MPMT may receive negative genetic test results for a number of reasons, which are discussed. Many of these may be addressed by the increasing application of next generation sequencing techniques such as inherited cancer gene panels.

show abstract

Landscapes of synchronous multiple primary cancers detected by next‐generation sequencing

Kong

Lin

et al. 2022

FEBS Open Bio

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

An increase in the detection rate of multiple primary cancers has been accompanied with declining cancer death rates over the past few decades. However, synchronous multiple primary tumors have gradually increased, and the molecular mechanisms involved in the synchronous occurrence of multiple primary cancers of different origins are unclear. To investigate these mechanisms, we sequenced cancer tissues by FoundationOne CDx. Data were annotated with annovar, and we then performed pathway enrichment analysis. A total of 109 genes that were mutated in all samples were clustered into different diseases, biological processes, and molecular functions. GO and KEGG analyses indicated that the P53 and PKB signaling pathways may be relevant to the occurrence of synchronous multiple primary cancers. In summary, patients with a concordance of mutations in pathogenetic genes may have a higher risk of developing a second cancer. Our research may provide a basis for the development of individualized treatments for synchronous multiple primary cancers.

show abstract

Multiple tumours in survival estimates

Cited by 123 publications

References 8 publications

The effect of multiple primary rules on population-based cancer survival

The effect of multiple primary rules on population-based cancer survival

A clinical and genetic analysis of multiple primary cancer referrals to genetics services

Landscapes of synchronous multiple primary cancers detected by next‐generation sequencing

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About