Journal of Global Oncology (Apr 2017)

Second Primary Cancers After Primary Breast Cancer Diagnosis in Israeli Women, 1992 to 2006

  • Barbara G. Silverman,
  • Irena Lipshitz,
  • Lital Keinan-Boker

DOI
https://doi.org/10.1200/JGO.2016.003699
Journal volume & issue
Vol. 3, no. 2
pp. 135 – 142

Abstract

Read online

Purpose: Improvements in early detection and treatment have resulted in improved long-term survival from breast cancer, which increases the likelihood of the occurrence of second primary cancers. We calculated the risk of second primary cancers among Israeli women receiving a first primary breast cancer diagnosis. Methods: By using data from the Israel National Cancer Registry, we identified 46,090 women with invasive breast cancer diagnosed between 1990 and 2006 and non–breast primary cancers diagnosed subsequent to breast cancer diagnosis. We used life table analysis to calculate the risk of a second primary cancer and calculated standardized incidence ratios (SIRs) by using age-specific cancer risk in the general population of Israeli women as the standard and stratifying by diagnosis period (1992 to 1996, 1997 to 2001, 2002 to 2006) and age at diagnosis (< 50 and ≥ 50 years). Results: The probability of a second malignancy was 3.6% within 5 years, 8.2% within 10 years, and 13.9% within 15 years. The SIR for any second non–breast primary cancer was 1.26 (95% CI, 1.23 to 1.30). Significantly increased risks of colorectal, uterine, lung, ovarian, and thyroid cancer and leukemia were observed for the full follow-up period, which persisted after excluding the first 6 months after index diagnosis, although increased leukemia and colorectal cancer risks were no longer statistically significant. Women younger than age 50 years at initial diagnosis had a greater excess risk than women age 50 years and older (SIR, 1.77 [95% CI, 1.63 to 1.91] and 1.20 [95% CI, 1.15 to 1.24], respectively). Conclusion: The findings likely reflect a combination of personal risk factors (genetics, hormonal therapy, environmental exposures) as well as the effects of the initial cancer treatment and are unlikely to be explained by enhanced surveillance alone.