Second Neoplasms in Survivors of Childhood Cancer: Findings From the Childhood Cancer Survivor Study Cohort

Children's Hospital of Philadelphia, Philadelphia, PA 19104-4399, USA.
Journal of Clinical Oncology (Impact Factor: 18.43). 04/2009; 27(14):2356-62. DOI: 10.1200/JCO.2008.21.1920
Source: PubMed


To review the reports of subsequent neoplasms (SNs) in the Childhood Cancer Survivor Study (CCSS) cohort that were made through January 1, 2006, and published before July 31, 2008, and to discuss the host-, disease-, and therapy-related risk factors associated with SNs.
SNs were ascertained by survivor self-reports and subsequently confirmed by pathology findings or medical record review. Cumulative incidence of SNs and standardized incidence ratios for second malignant neoplasms (SMNs) were calculated. The impact of host-, disease-, and therapy-related risk factors was evaluated by Poisson regression.
Among 14,358 cohort members, 730 reported 802 SMNs (excluding nonmelanoma skin cancers). This represents a 2.3-fold increase in the number of SMNs over that reported in the first comprehensive analysis of SMNs in the CCSS cohort, which was done 7 years ago. In addition, 66 cases of meningioma and 1,007 cases of nonmelanoma skin cancer were diagnosed. The 30-year cumulative incidence of SMNs was 9.3% and that of nonmelanoma skin cancer was 6.9%. Risk of SNs remains elevated for more than 20 years of follow-up for all primary childhood cancer diagnoses. In multivariate analyses, risks differ by SN subtype, but include radiotherapy, age at diagnosis, sex, family history of cancer, and primary childhood cancer diagnosis. Female survivors whose primary childhood cancer diagnosis was Hodgkin's lymphoma or sarcoma and who received radiotherapy are at particularly increased risk. Analyses of risk associated with radiotherapy demonstrated different dose-response curves for specific SNs.
Childhood cancer survivors are at a substantial and increasing risk for SNs, including nonmelanoma skin cancer and meningiomas. Health care professionals should understand the magnitude of these risks to provide individuals with appropriate counseling and follow-up.

12 Reads
    • "Although their expression of surface markers differs from that of AML blasts, there are some surface molecules that stand out as possible targets for directing drugs to leukemic stem cells. However, leukemic stem cells also share many surface markers with normal haematopoietic stem cells, but the presence of some markers seems to be exclusive to leukemic stem cells; for example that of CD123 (interleukin 3 receptor , alpha), which is now a therapeutic target [4]. "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Chemotherapy for AML is hampered by severe side-effects and failure to eliminate all the blasts that eventually leads to relapse. The use of nanosized particulate drug carriers such as liposomes and polymeric nanoparticles has the potential to improve AML therapy by delivering more of the drug to the disease site, thereby reducing toxicity. For example, encapsulation in liposomes reduces the cardiotoxicity of anthracyclines, giving an improved therapeutic index. Moreover, when the surface properties are engineered appropriately, nanocarriers remain in the circulation and extravasate in tissues with sinusoidal capillaries, one of which is bone marrow, leading to a more favourable distribution of the associated drug. Drug carrier technology contributes to the development of newer drugs, such as nucleic acids that can be protected from degradation and delivered into cells, thus opening the way for gene-silencing strategies. Furthermore, carrier systems provide a means of dispersing poorly water-soluble molecule for in vivo administration and thus increase the “druggability” of new lead compounds, such as heat-shock protein inhibitors. Particulate carriers can transport more than one active agent, allowing synergistic action and theranostic strategies. Notably, phase I and II clinical trials are being performed with CPX-351, a liposomal formulation containing cytarabine and daunorubicin at an optimal ratio. Finally, by attaching suitable ligands to the nanocarrier surface, specific targeting to AML cells can be achieved. In this review, we give examples of successful targeting to folate and transferrin receptors against AML.
    Current Pharmaceutical Biotechnology 08/2015; 16(11). DOI:10.2174/1389201016666150817095045 · 2.51 Impact Factor
  • Source
    • "Mutational loss of RB1 is implicated in the develop - ment of the childhood eye cancer retinoblastoma but also major cancers including breast and small cell lung cancer , sarcomas , and glioblastoma. Germline mutations in the RB1 encoding gene are associated with a highly penetrant predispo - sition to retinoblastoma ( Lohmann , 2010 ) and substantially in - crease the lifetime risk for a spectrum of secondary cancers ( Meadows et al. , 2009 ). RB1 belongs to a family of proteins with similar molecular anatomy and related function. "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Deficiencies in DNA double-strand break (DSB) repair lead to genetic instability, a recognized cause of cancer initiation and evolution. We report that the retinoblastoma tumor suppressor protein (RB1) is required for DNA DSB repair by canonical non-homologous end-joining (cNHEJ). Support of cNHEJ involves a mechanism independent of RB1's cell-cycle function and depends on its amino terminal domain with which it binds to NHEJ components XRCC5 and XRCC6. Cells with engineered loss of RB family function as well as cancer-derived cells with mutational RB1 loss show substantially reduced levels of cNHEJ. RB1 variants disabled for the interaction with XRCC5 and XRCC6, including a cancer-associated variant, are unable to support cNHEJ despite being able to confer cell-cycle control. Our data identify RB1 loss as a candidate driver of structural genomic instability and a causative factor for cancer somatic heterogeneity and evolution. Copyright © 2015 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
    Cell Reports 03/2015; 10(12). DOI:10.1016/j.celrep.2015.02.059 · 8.36 Impact Factor
  • Source
    • "Among this group, those with an inherited susceptibility to cancer will transmit their genetic fault to a proportion of their children. They are also at risk of developing a second cancer during their adult life [3]. "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: We determined the extent and distribution of cancers in relatives of 379 children newly diagnosed with cancer. Family history was collected from 1,337 first-degree and 3,399 second-degree relatives and incidence compared with national age- and gender-specific rates. Overall, 14 children (3.7%) had a relative with a history of childhood cancer and 26 children (6.9%) had a first-degree relative with a history of cancer, with only one of these having an identifiable familial cancer syndrome. There was a higher than expected incidence of childhood cancer among first-degree relatives (parents and siblings) (standardized incidence ratio (SIR) 1.43; 95% CI 0.54-5.08). There was also a higher than expected incidence of adult cancers among first-degree relatives (SIR 1.45; 95% CI 0.93-2.21), particularly in females (SIR 1.82; 95% CI 1.26-3.39). The increased family cancer history in first-degree females was largely attributable to an effect in mothers (SIR 1.78; 95% CI 1.27-3.33). The gender-specific association was reflected in higher than expected incidence rates of breast cancer in both mothers (SIR 1.92; 95% CI 0.72-6.83) and aunts (SIR 1.64; 95% CI 0.98-2.94). These findings support the hypothesis that previously undetected familial cancer syndromes contribute to childhood cancer.
    Journal of Cancer Epidemiology 03/2014; 2014:806076. DOI:10.1155/2014/806076
Show more

Similar Publications


12 Reads
Available from