Cargando…

Survival analysis of second primary malignancies after cervical cancer using a competing risk model: implications for prevention and surveillance

BACKGROUND: Previous studies have reported an increased risk for second primary malignancies (SPMs) after cervical cancer (CC). This study aims to quantify and assess the risk of developing SPMs in long-term survivors of CC. METHODS: A population-based cohort of CC patients aged 20–79 years was obta...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Li, Runmei, Zhang, Yue, Ma, Bingqing, Tan, Kangming, Lynn, Henry S., Wu, Zhenyu
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: AME Publishing Company 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7940922/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33708866
http://dx.doi.org/10.21037/atm-20-2003
Descripción
Sumario:BACKGROUND: Previous studies have reported an increased risk for second primary malignancies (SPMs) after cervical cancer (CC). This study aims to quantify and assess the risk of developing SPMs in long-term survivors of CC. METHODS: A population-based cohort of CC patients aged 20–79 years was obtained from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) database. A competing risk model and corresponding nomogram were constructed to predict the 3-, 5-, and 10-year cumulative risks of SPMs. A Fine-Gray plot was created to validate the model. Finally, we performed decision curve analysis (DCA) to evaluate the clinical usefulness of the model by calculating the net benefit. RESULTS: A total of 34,295 patients were identified, and approximately 6.3% of the study participants developed SPMs. According to the multivariable competing-risk model, older black CC survivors with localized disease who were treated with radiation therapy were more susceptible to SPMs. The 3-, 5-, and 10-year cumulative incidences of SPMs were 2.5%, 3.6%, and 6.2%, respectively. Calibration curves showed good agreement between the predicted and observed models. The DCA yielded a wide range of risk thresholds at which the net benefits could be obtained from our proposed model. CONCLUSIONS: This study provides physicians with a practical, individualized prognostic estimate to assess the risk of SPMs among CC survivors. CC survivors remain at a high risk of developing SPMs, and further surveillance should focus especially on the patients with black race, older age, localized disease, or those having received radiation therapy.