Breast Cancer After Childhood, Adolescent, and Young Adult Cancer: It's Not Just About Chest Radiation

Long-term second primary cancer risk in adolescent and young adult (15-39 years) cancer survivors: a population-based study in the Netherlands between 1989 and 2018

BACKGROUND

Few studies have comprehensively investigated the long-term second cancer risk among adolescent and young adult (AYA, aged 15-39 years) cancer survivors. This study investigated the long-term second cancer risk by including the full range of first and second cancer combinations with at least 10 observations in the Netherlands between 1989 and 2018.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

First and second primary cancer data of all 6-month AYA cancer survivors were obtained from the nationwide population-based Netherlands Cancer Registry. Excess cancer risk compared to the general population was assessed with standardized incidence ratio (SIR) and absolute excess risk (AER) statistics up to 25 years after diagnosis. Cumulative incidences were estimated, using death as a competing risk factor. Analyses were carried out with and without applying multiple cancer rules.

RESULTS

The cohort included 99 502 AYA cancer survivors. Male survivors had a 2-fold higher risk of developing any cancer compared to the general population, whereas this was around 1.3-fold in females. AERs were 17.5 and 10.1 per 10 000 person-years for males and females. The long-term excess risk of cancer was significantly higher for most first and second primary cancer combinations, but comparable and lower risk estimates were also observed. Application of the multiple cancer rules resulted in a noticeable risk underestimation in melanoma, testicular, and breast cancer survivors. Risk outcomes remained similar in most cases otherwise. The cumulative incidence of second cancer overall increased over time up to 8.9% in males and 10.3% in females at 25 years' follow-up. Highest long-term cumulative incidences were observed among lymphoma survivors (13.3% males and 18.9% females).

CONCLUSIONS

AYA cancer survivors have a higher cancer risk compared to the general population for most cancers up to 25 years after their initial cancer diagnosis. Additional studies that investigate risk factors for the specific cancer type combinations are needed to develop personalized follow-up strategies.

Gene expression variability in long-term survivors of childhood cancer and cancer-free controls in response to ionizing irradiation

BACKGROUND

Differential expression analysis is usually adjusted for variation. However, most studies that examined the expression variability (EV) have used computations affected by low expression levels and did not examine healthy tissue. This study aims to calculate and characterize an unbiased EV in primary fibroblasts of childhood cancer survivors and cancer-free controls (N0) in response to ionizing radiation.

METHODS

Human skin fibroblasts of 52 donors with a first primary neoplasm in childhood (N1), 52 donors with at least one second primary neoplasm (N2 +), as well as 52 N0 were obtained from the KiKme case-control study and exposed to a high (2 Gray) and a low dose (0.05 Gray) of X-rays and sham- irradiation (0 Gray). Genes were then classified as hypo-, non-, or hyper-variable per donor group and radiation treatment, and then examined for over-represented functional signatures.

RESULTS

We found 22 genes with considerable EV differences between donor groups, of which 11 genes were associated with response to ionizing radiation, stress, and DNA repair. The largest number of genes exclusive to one donor group and variability classification combination were all detected in N0: hypo-variable genes after 0 Gray (n = 49), 0.05 Gray (n = 41), and 2 Gray (n = 38), as well as hyper-variable genes after any dose (n = 43). While after 2 Gray positive regulation of cell cycle was hypo-variable in N0, (regulation of) fibroblast proliferation was over-represented in hyper-variable genes of N1 and N2+. In N2+, 30 genes were uniquely classified as hyper-variable after the low dose and were associated with the ERK1/ERK2 cascade. For N1, no exclusive gene sets with functions related to the radiation response were detected in our data.

CONCLUSION

N2+ showed high degrees of variability in pathways for the cell fate decision after genotoxic insults that may lead to the transfer and multiplication of DNA-damage via proliferation, where apoptosis and removal of the damaged genome would have been appropriate. Such a deficiency could potentially lead to a higher vulnerability towards side effects of exposure to high doses of ionizing radiation, but following low-dose applications employed in diagnostics, as well.

Radiation-response in primary fibroblasts of long-term survivors of childhood cancer with and without second primary neoplasms: the KiKme study

Background

The etiology and most risk factors for a sporadic first primary neoplasm in childhood or subsequent second primary neoplasms are still unknown. One established causal factor for therapy-associated second primary neoplasms is the exposure to ionizing radiation during radiation therapy as a mainstay of cancer treatment. Second primary neoplasms occur in 8% of all cancer survivors within 30 years after the first diagnosis in Germany, but the underlying factors for intrinsic susceptibilities have not yet been clarified. Thus, the purpose of this nested case–control study was the investigation and comparison of gene expression and affected pathways in primary fibroblasts of childhood cancer survivors with a first primary neoplasm only or with at least one subsequent second primary neoplasm, and controls without neoplasms after exposure to a low and a high dose of ionizing radiation.

Methods

Primary fibroblasts were obtained from skin biopsies from 52 adult donors with a first primary neoplasm in childhood (N1), 52 with at least one additional primary neoplasm (N2+), as well as 52 without cancer (N0) from the KiKme study. Cultured fibroblasts were exposed to a high [2 Gray (Gy)] and a low dose (0.05 Gy) of X-rays. Messenger ribonucleic acid was extracted 4 h after exposure and Illumina-sequenced. Differentially expressed genes (DEGs) were computed using limma for R, selected at a false discovery rate level of 0.05, and further analyzed for pathway enrichment (right-tailed Fisher’s Exact Test) and (in-) activation (z ≥|2|) using Ingenuity Pathway Analysis.

Results

After 0.05 Gy, least DEGs were found in N0 (n = 236), compared to N1 (n = 653) and N2+ (n = 694). The top DEGs with regard to the adjusted p-value were upregulated in fibroblasts across all donor groups (SESN1, MDM2, CDKN1A, TIGAR, BTG2, BLOC1S2, PPM1D, PHLDB3, FBXO22, AEN, TRIAP1, and POLH). Here, we observed activation of p53 Signaling in N0 and to a lesser extent in N1, but not in N2+. Only in N0, DNA (excision-) repair (involved genes: CDKN1A, PPM1D, and DDB2) was predicted to be a downstream function, while molecular networks in N2+ were associated with cancer, as well as injury and abnormalities (among others, downregulation of MSH6, CCNE2, and CHUK). After 2 Gy, the number of DEGs was similar in fibroblasts of all donor groups and genes with the highest absolute log₂ fold-change were upregulated throughout (CDKN1A, TIGAR, HSPA4L, MDM2, BLOC1SD2, PPM1D, SESN1, BTG2, FBXO22, PCNA, and TRIAP1). Here, the p53 Signaling-Pathway was activated in fibroblasts of all donor groups. The Mitotic Roles of Polo Like Kinase-Pathway was inactivated in N1 and N2+. Molecular Mechanisms of Cancer were affected in fibroblasts of all donor groups. P53 was predicted to be an upstream regulator in fibroblasts of all donor groups and E2F1 in N1 and N2+. Results of the downstream analysis were senescence in N0 and N2+, transformation of cells in N0, and no significant effects in N1. Seven genes were differentially expressed in reaction to 2 Gy dependent on the donor group (LINC00601, COBLL1, SESN2, BIN3, TNFRSF10A, EEF1AKNMT, and BTG2).

Conclusion

Our results show dose-dependent differences in the radiation response between N1/N2+ and N0. While mechanisms against genotoxic stress were activated to the same extent after a high dose in all groups, the radiation response was impaired after a low dose in N1/N2+, suggesting an increased risk for adverse effects including carcinogenesis, particularly in N2+.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s10020-022-00520-6.

The risk of cancer following high, and very high, doses of ionising radiation

It is established that moderate-to-high doses of ionising radiation increase the risk of subsequent cancer in the exposed individual, but the question arises as to the risk of cancer from higher doses, such as those delivered during radiotherapy, accidents, or deliberate acts of malice. In general, the cumulative dose received during a course of radiation treatment is sufficiently high that it would kill a person if delivered as a single dose to the whole body, but therapeutic doses are carefully fractionated and high/very high doses are generally limited to a small tissue volume under controlled conditions. The very high cumulative doses delivered as fractions during radiation treatment are designed to inactivate diseased cells, but inevitably some healthy cells will also receive high/very high doses. How the doses (ranging from <1 Gy to tens of Gy) received by healthy tissues during radiotherapy affect the risk of second primary cancer is an increasingly important issue to address as more cancer patients survive the disease. Studies show that, except for a turndown for thyroid cancer, a linear dose-response for second primary solid cancers seems to exist over a cumulative gamma radiation dose range of tens of gray, but with a gradient of excess relative risk per Gy that varies with the type of second cancer, and which is notably shallower than that found in the Japanese atomic bomb survivors receiving a single moderate-to-high acute dose. The risk of second primary cancer consequent to high/very high doses of radiation is likely to be due to repopulation of heavily irradiated tissues by surviving stem cells, some of which will have been malignantly transformed by radiation exposure, although the exact mechanism is not known, and various models have been proposed. It is important to understand the mechanisms that lead to the raised risk of second primary cancers consequent to the receipt of high/very high doses, in particular so that the risks associated with novel radiation treatment regimens-for example, intensity modulated radiotherapy and volumetric modulated arc therapy that deliver high doses to the target volume while exposing relatively large volumes of healthy tissue to low/moderate doses, and treatments using protons or heavy ions rather than photons-may be properly assessed.

Subsequent primary cancer risk among five-year survivors of adolescent and young adult cancers

BACKGROUND

A comprehensive examination of the incidence and mortality of subsequent primary cancers (SPCs) among adolescent and young adult (AYA) cancer survivors in the US is lacking.

METHODS

Cancer incidence and mortality among 170,404 ≥ 5-year cancer survivors aged 15-39 years at first primary cancer diagnosis during 1975-2013 in 9 Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results registries were compared to those in the general population using standardized incidence ratio (SIR), absolute excess incidence (AEI), standardized mortality ratio (SMR), and absolute excess mortality (AEM).

RESULTS

During a mean follow-up of 14.6 years, 13,420 SPC cases and 5,008 SPC deaths occurred among survivors (excluding the same-site as index cancer), corresponding to 25% higher incidence (95%CI = 1.23-1.27; AEI = 10.8 per 10,000) and 84% higher mortality (95%CI = 1.79-1.89; AEM = 9.2 per 10,000) than that in the general population. Overall SPC risk was statistically significantly higher for 20 of 29 index cancers for incidence and 26 for mortality, with the highest SIR among female Hodgkin lymphoma survivors (SIR = 3.05, 95%CI = 2.88-3.24; AEI = 73.0 per 10,000) and the highest SMR among small intestine cancer survivors (SMR = 6.97, 95%CI = 4.80-9.79; AEM = 64.1 per 10,000). Type-specific SPC risks varied substantially by index cancers; however, SPCs of the female breast, lung, and colorectum combined constituted 36% of all SPC cases and 39% of all SPC deaths, with lung cancer alone representing 11% and 24% of all cases and deaths, respectively.

CONCLUSION

AYA cancer survivors are almost twice as likely to die from a new primary cancer as the general population, highlighting the need for primary care clinicians to prioritize cancer prevention and targeted surveillance strategies in these individuals.

Identification of Genetic Predispositions Related to Ionizing Radiation in Primary Human Skin Fibroblasts From Survivors of Childhood and Second Primary Cancer as Well as Cancer-Free Controls: Protocol for the Nested Case-Control Study KiKme

BACKGROUND

Therapy for a first primary neoplasm (FPN) in childhood with high doses of ionizing radiation is an established risk factor for second primary neoplasms (SPN). An association between exposure to low doses and childhood cancer is also suggested; however, results are inconsistent. As only subgroups of children with FPNs develop SPNs, an interaction between radiation, genetic, and other risk factors is presumed to influence cancer development.

OBJECTIVE

Therefore, the population-based, nested case-control study KiKme aims to identify differences in genetic predisposition and radiation response between childhood cancer survivors with and without SPNs as well as cancer-free controls.

METHODS

We conducted a population-based, nested case-control study KiKme. Besides questionnaire information, skin biopsies and saliva samples are available. By measuring individual reactions to different exposures to radiation (eg, 0.05 and 2 Gray) in normal somatic cells of the same person, our design enables us to create several exposure scenarios for the same person simultaneously and measure several different molecular markers (eg, DNA, messenger RNA, long noncoding RNA, copy number variation).

RESULTS

Since 2013, 101 of 247 invited SPN patients, 340 of 1729 invited FPN patients, and 150 of 246 invited cancer-free controls were recruited and matched by age and sex. Childhood cancer patients were additionally matched by tumor morphology, year of diagnosis, and age at diagnosis. Participants reported on lifestyle, socioeconomical, and anthropometric factors, as well as on medical radiation history, health, and family history of diseases (n=556). Primary human fibroblasts from skin biopsies of the participants were cultivated (n=499) and cryopreserved (n=3886). DNA was extracted from fibroblasts (n=488) and saliva (n=510).

CONCLUSIONS

This molecular-epidemiological study is the first to combine observational epidemiological research with standardized experimental components in primary human skin fibroblasts to identify genetic predispositions related to ionizing radiation in childhood and SPNs. In the future, fibroblasts of the participants will be used for standardized irradiation experiments, which will inform analysis of the case-control study and vice versa. Differences between participants will be identified using several molecular markers. With its innovative combination of experimental and observational components, this new study will provide valuable data to forward research on radiation-related risk factors in childhood cancer and SPNs.

INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID)

DERR1-10.2196/32395.

Excess risk of subsequent malignant neoplasms in adolescent and young adult cancer survivors: Results from the first Italian population-based cohort

BACKGROUND

Evidence about late effects in adolescent and young adult (AYA) cancer survivors is scarce. This study assessed the risk of subsequent malignant neoplasms (SMNs) to identify the most common SMNs to be considered in follow-up care.

METHODS

Population-based cancer registries retrospectively identified first primary tumors (between 1976 and 2013) and SMNs in AYAs (15-39 years old at their cancer diagnosis). AYA cancer survivors were those alive at least 5 years after their first cancer diagnosis. The excess risk of SMNs was measured as standardized incidence ratios (SIRs) and absolute excess risk together with the cumulative incidence of SMNs.

RESULTS

The cohort included 67,692 AYA cancer survivors. The excess risk of developing any SMN (SIR, 1.6; 95% confidence interval, 1.5-1.7) was 60%. The excess risk of SMNs was significantly high for survivors of lymphomas; cancers of the breast, thyroid, female genital tract, digestive organs, gonads, and urinary tract; and melanomas. The cumulative incidence of all SMNs in AYA cancer survivors within 25 years of their first cancer diagnosis was approximately 10%. Subsequent tumors contributing to approximately 60% of all SMNs were breast cancer, colorectal cancer, corpus uteri cancer, and ovarian cancer in females and colorectal cancer, bladder cancer, prostate cancer, lung cancer, and lymphomas in males.

CONCLUSIONS

These results highlight the need to personalize follow-up strategies for AYA cancer survivors.