Published in

American Society of Clinical Oncology, Journal of Clinical Oncology, 15(33), p. 1640-1646, 2015

DOI: 10.1200/jco.2014.58.6693

Links

Tools

Export citation

Search in Google Scholar

No Increased Risk of Second Cancer After Radiotherapy in Patients Treated for Rectal or Endometrial Cancer in the Randomized TME, PORTEC-1, and PORTEC-2 Trials

This paper was not found in any repository, but could be made available legally by the author.
This paper was not found in any repository, but could be made available legally by the author.

Full text: Unavailable

Red circle
Preprint: archiving forbidden
Orange circle
Postprint: archiving restricted
Red circle
Published version: archiving forbidden
Data provided by SHERPA/RoMEO

Abstract

Purpose This study investigated the long-term probability of developing a second cancer in a large pooled cohort of patients treated with surgery with or without radiotherapy (RT). Patients and Methods All second cancers diagnosed in patients included in the TME, PORTEC-1, and PORTEC-2 trials were analyzed. In the TME trial, patients with rectal cancer (n = 1,530) were randomly allocated to preoperative external-beam RT (EBRT; 25 Gy in five fractions) or no RT. In the PORTEC trials, patients with endometrial cancer were randomly assigned to postoperative EBRT (46 Gy in 2-Gy fractions) versus no RT (PORTEC-1; n = 714) or EBRT versus vaginal brachytherapy (VBT; PORTEC-2; n = 427). Results A total of 2,554 patients were analyzed (median follow-up, 13.0 years; range 1.8 to 21.2 years). No differences were found in second cancer probability between patients who were treated without RT (10- and 15-year rates, 15.8% and 26.5%, respectively) and those treated with EBRT (10- and 15-year rates, 15.4% and 25.6%, respectively) or VBT (10-year rate, 14.9%). In the individual trials, no significant differences were found between treatment arms. All cancer survivors had a higher risk of developing a second cancer compared with an age- and sex-matched general population. The standardized incidence ratio for any second cancer was 2.98 (95% CI, 2.82 to 3.14). Conclusion In this pooled trial cohort of > 2,500 patients with pelvic cancers, those who underwent EBRT or VBT had no higher probability of developing a second cancer than patients who were treated with surgery alone. However, patients with rectal or endometrial cancer had an increased probability of developing a second cancer compared with the general population.