Secondary cancers after a childhood cancer diagnosis: a nationwide hospital-based retrospective cohort study in Japan

Abstract

The cumulative incidence of secondary cancers in children in Japan was not high; however, the SIR was relatively high. Retinoblastoma or sarcoma in addition to allogeneic stem cell transplantation were significant risk factors for secondary cancers.

Second primary cancers in people who had cancer as children: an Australian Childhood Cancer Registry population‐based study

“…In other countries, reported SIRs for second primary cancer in people who have had childhood cancer range between 3 and 20; our findings are at the lower end of this range. The variance in risk estimates can be attributed to differences in an array of factors that make direct comparisons difficult, including length of follow‐up, the time period of the initial diagnoses, the cancer types included, forms of treatment of the first cancer, criteria regarding age at diagnosis, local cancer incidence rates, and type of study.…”

“…For example, five of the eight cited investigations 1 Second primary cancers diagnosed two months to 33 years after diagnosis of a primary cancer before the age of 15 years in Australia, 1983-2013* 5,6,[13][14][15] four included only people alive 5 years after the initial diagnosis, 5,6,14,15 and five included patients first diagnosed after the age of 15 years; 5,14-16,18 five were populationbased, 6,13,15,16,18 three were institutional studies. 5,14,17 Overall cumulative 30-year incidence of cancer for 5-year survivors in our study (4.6%) was substantially lower than for 5year survivors in the United States Childhood Cancer Survivor Study (CCSS; 7.9%). 5 This may be explained by differences in the time period of the first diagnoses (our study, 1983-2013; CCSS, 1970-1986), in age at first diagnosis (our study, under 15 years; CCSS, under 21 years), and median follow-up time (our study, 16 years; CCSS, 23 years).…”

“…The variance in risk estimates can be attributed to differences in an array of factors that make direct comparisons difficult, including length of follow‐up, the time period of the initial diagnoses, the cancer types included, forms of treatment of the first cancer, criteria regarding age at diagnosis, local cancer incidence rates, and type of study. For example, five of the eight cited investigations included only patients diagnosed before 2000 (and as early as the 1940s), four included only people alive 5 years after the initial diagnosis, and five included patients first diagnosed after the age of 15 years; five were population‐based, three were institutional studies …”

Conservative management of retinoblastoma: Challenging orthodoxy without compromising the state of metastatic grace. “Alive, with good vision and no comorbidity”

“…Targeted chemotherapy (periocular, intra-arterial and intravitreal) does not seem to increase the rate of secondary primary malignancies (Ishida et al, 2016;Suzuki et al, 2011), although follow-up time is too short to draw definite conclusions. Recently, a review of 214 patients with hereditary retinoblastoma treated by intra-arterial chemotherapy over a 10-year period revealed a comparable rate of second primary neoplasm to previously published ones (Habib et al, 2018).…”

Incidence and associated risk factors of cancer in patients after infective endocarditis hospitalization: A propensity score matched analysis

“…In studying cancer risk and prognosis, death could be a potential factor influences the results. And competing mortality has been widely used in evaluating cancer risks and outcomes to minimize the effect (23,24). Our study demonstrates a significantly increased cancer risk in newly diagnosed IE patients than propensity score-matched group.…”