Cargando…

Second primary cancer risk - the impact of applying different definitions of multiple primaries: results from a retrospective population-based cancer registry study

BACKGROUND: There is evidence that cancer survivors are at increased risk of second primary cancers. Changes in the prevalence of risk factors and diagnostic techniques may have affected more recent risks. METHODS: We examined the incidence of second primary cancer among adults in the West of Scotla...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Coyte, Aishah, Morrison, David S, McLoone, Philip
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2014
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4005906/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24742063
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1471-2407-14-272
_version_ 1782314166274490368
author Coyte, Aishah
Morrison, David S
McLoone, Philip
author_facet Coyte, Aishah
Morrison, David S
McLoone, Philip
author_sort Coyte, Aishah
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: There is evidence that cancer survivors are at increased risk of second primary cancers. Changes in the prevalence of risk factors and diagnostic techniques may have affected more recent risks. METHODS: We examined the incidence of second primary cancer among adults in the West of Scotland, UK, diagnosed with cancer between 2000 and 2004 (n = 57,393). We used National Cancer Institute Surveillance Epidemiology and End Results and International Agency for Research on Cancer definitions of multiple primary cancers and estimated indirectly standardised incidence ratios (SIR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI). RESULTS: There was a high incidence of cancer during the first 60 days following diagnosis (SIR = 2.36, 95% CI = 2.12 to 2.63). When this period was excluded the risk was not raised, but it was high for some patient groups; in particular women aged <50 years with breast cancer (SIR = 2.13, 95% CI = 1.58 to 2.78), patients with bladder (SIR = 1.41, 95% CI = 1.19 to 1.67) and head & neck (SIR = 1.93, 95% CI = 1.67 to 2.21) cancer. Head & neck cancer patients had increased risks of lung cancer (SIR = 3.75, 95% CI = 3.01 to 4.62), oesophageal (SIR = 4.62, 95% CI = 2.73 to 7.29) and other head & neck tumours (SIR = 6.10, 95% CI = 4.17 to 8.61). Patients with bladder cancer had raised risks of lung (SIR = 2.18, 95% CI = 1.62 to 2.88) and prostate (SIR = 2.41, 95% CI = 1.72 to 3.30) cancer. CONCLUSIONS: Relative risks of second primary cancers may be smaller than previously reported. Premenopausal women with breast cancer and patients with malignant melanomas, bladder and head & neck cancers may benefit from increased surveillance and advice to avoid known risk factors.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-4005906
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2014
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-40059062014-05-02 Second primary cancer risk - the impact of applying different definitions of multiple primaries: results from a retrospective population-based cancer registry study Coyte, Aishah Morrison, David S McLoone, Philip BMC Cancer Research Article BACKGROUND: There is evidence that cancer survivors are at increased risk of second primary cancers. Changes in the prevalence of risk factors and diagnostic techniques may have affected more recent risks. METHODS: We examined the incidence of second primary cancer among adults in the West of Scotland, UK, diagnosed with cancer between 2000 and 2004 (n = 57,393). We used National Cancer Institute Surveillance Epidemiology and End Results and International Agency for Research on Cancer definitions of multiple primary cancers and estimated indirectly standardised incidence ratios (SIR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI). RESULTS: There was a high incidence of cancer during the first 60 days following diagnosis (SIR = 2.36, 95% CI = 2.12 to 2.63). When this period was excluded the risk was not raised, but it was high for some patient groups; in particular women aged <50 years with breast cancer (SIR = 2.13, 95% CI = 1.58 to 2.78), patients with bladder (SIR = 1.41, 95% CI = 1.19 to 1.67) and head & neck (SIR = 1.93, 95% CI = 1.67 to 2.21) cancer. Head & neck cancer patients had increased risks of lung cancer (SIR = 3.75, 95% CI = 3.01 to 4.62), oesophageal (SIR = 4.62, 95% CI = 2.73 to 7.29) and other head & neck tumours (SIR = 6.10, 95% CI = 4.17 to 8.61). Patients with bladder cancer had raised risks of lung (SIR = 2.18, 95% CI = 1.62 to 2.88) and prostate (SIR = 2.41, 95% CI = 1.72 to 3.30) cancer. CONCLUSIONS: Relative risks of second primary cancers may be smaller than previously reported. Premenopausal women with breast cancer and patients with malignant melanomas, bladder and head & neck cancers may benefit from increased surveillance and advice to avoid known risk factors. BioMed Central 2014-04-18 /pmc/articles/PMC4005906/ /pubmed/24742063 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1471-2407-14-272 Text en Copyright © 2014 Coyte et al.; licensee BioMed Central Ltd. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0 This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly credited. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.
spellingShingle Research Article
Coyte, Aishah
Morrison, David S
McLoone, Philip
Second primary cancer risk - the impact of applying different definitions of multiple primaries: results from a retrospective population-based cancer registry study
title Second primary cancer risk - the impact of applying different definitions of multiple primaries: results from a retrospective population-based cancer registry study
title_full Second primary cancer risk - the impact of applying different definitions of multiple primaries: results from a retrospective population-based cancer registry study
title_fullStr Second primary cancer risk - the impact of applying different definitions of multiple primaries: results from a retrospective population-based cancer registry study
title_full_unstemmed Second primary cancer risk - the impact of applying different definitions of multiple primaries: results from a retrospective population-based cancer registry study
title_short Second primary cancer risk - the impact of applying different definitions of multiple primaries: results from a retrospective population-based cancer registry study
title_sort second primary cancer risk - the impact of applying different definitions of multiple primaries: results from a retrospective population-based cancer registry study
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4005906/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24742063
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1471-2407-14-272
work_keys_str_mv AT coyteaishah secondprimarycancerrisktheimpactofapplyingdifferentdefinitionsofmultipleprimariesresultsfromaretrospectivepopulationbasedcancerregistrystudy
AT morrisondavids secondprimarycancerrisktheimpactofapplyingdifferentdefinitionsofmultipleprimariesresultsfromaretrospectivepopulationbasedcancerregistrystudy
AT mcloonephilip secondprimarycancerrisktheimpactofapplyingdifferentdefinitionsofmultipleprimariesresultsfromaretrospectivepopulationbasedcancerregistrystudy