Volume 13, Issue 10, Pages 1121-1134 (October 2007)

5 of 21

ABSTRACT

FULL TEXT

FULL-TEXT PDF (184 KB)

Second Malignancies after Allogeneic Hematopoietic Cell Transplantation

Received 28 February 2007; accepted 6 July 2007.

Abstract

Allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplantation (allo-HCT) may prolong life and cure patients suffering from otherwise fatal diseases. However, the growing population of long-term survivors has led to the realization of multiple long-term complications, including the risk of second malignancies. Compared to the autologous setting, allo-HCT carries a much higher risk of posttransplant lymphoproliferative disorder (PTLD), which usually occurs within the first year after allo-HCT and is strongly associated with the Epstein-Barr virus (EBV). Treatment-related myelodysplastic syndromes (tMDS) and second leukemias are extremely rare. Both autologous and allo-HCT carry increased risks for second solid malignancies (SSM). The cumulative incidence of SSM continues to increase in each of the largest studies with as much as 20 years of follow-up, likely related to the long latency of radiation-related SSM. Systematic, prospective monitoring, vigilant screening processes, and well-maintained survivorship clinics and databases are absolute necessities, and should be included in the infrastructure of individual transplant centers and networks, with mandatory periodic reporting of second malignancy incidences. Primary care and transplant physicians alike must be aware of the risk of second malignancies after allo-HCT. Most importantly, guidelines should be developed in regard to screening and prevention of second malignancies, so that physicians can provide state-of-the-art counsel and care for the benefit of our patients.

Key Words: Allogeneic, Transplant, Second malignancy, PTLD

Article Outline

• Abstract

• Introduction

• Posttransplant Lymphoproliferative Disorders

• Classification

• Epidemiology

• Etiology

• Risk Factors

• Prevention

• Treatment

• Second Solid Malignancies

• Epidemiology

• Risk factors

• Radiation

• Age

• GVHD/Immunosupressants

• Viruses

• Nonmelanoma skin cancer

• Conclusions

• References

• Copyright

Introduction

There are almost 10 million cancer survivors in the United States, representing 3.5% of the population. This number has tripled since 1971, and is growing at approximately 2% per year [1, 2]. For many hematologic diseases the treatment with greatest potential for cure includes an allogeneic (matched sibling or unrelated donor-derived) hematopoietic cell transplant (allo-HCT). The National Marrow Donor Program (NMDP) has facilitated unrelated HCT in 25,000 patients since 1987, and currently averages more than 220 per month [3]. The improvement in cancer survival comes with the realization of many potential long-term effects and complications of treatment. One of the most devastating long-term complications is the development of a second malignancy. Second or higher order cancers accounted for 16% of cancer diagnoses in 2003, an incidence that has doubled over the last 20 years [4, 5]. Second malignancies are well described after treatment and exposure to radiation [6, 7, 8, 9], certain chemotherapy agents [10, 11, 12], and in a variety of disease settings including treatment for Hodgkin disease [13, 14]. Children particularly may be at increased risk secondary to their long life expectancy and potentially increased sensitivity of proliferating tissue to carcinogens [13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21]. With the growing number of patients treated for hematologic diseases surviving long term and possibly being cured, the risk of developing second malignancies after allo-HCT has been increasingly recognized over the past 2 decades [22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40, 41, 42, 43, 44]. The largest studies of second malignancies after allo-HCT are listed in Table 1. There are multiple factors possibly involved in second malignancy in the allo-HCT setting, including cytotoxic chemotherapy, radiation, immunosuppressive therapy, immune stimulation, immune suppression from graft-versus-host disease (GVHD), antigenic stimulation, oncogenic virus activity, and genetic predisposition [30]. We will describe these second malignancies after allo-HCT by dividing them into posttransplant lymphoproliferative disorders (PTLD), hematologic malignancies, and second solid malignancies (SSM).

Table 1.

Large Studies of Second Malignancy after Allogeneic HCT


Study	Setting	No. pts	Median Time to Malig (Years)	Median Age (Years) at Trans	Median f/u (Years)	Relative Risk	Cumulative Incidence of New Second Malignancy
Gallagher, 2007 (multi-institution, British Columbia)	Second solid malignancies after allogeneic transplant 1985-2003	926	6.8	39	1.8	1.85⁎	2.3% at 10 years⁎
Baker, 2003 (single institution, U Minnesota)	Second malignancies after autologous and allogeneic transplant 1974-2001	3372(2179allo)	NR	24	5	8.1⁎ (auto and allo)	6.9% at 20 years⁎ (auto and allo)
Bhatia 2001 (single institution, City of Hope)	Second solid malignancies after autologous and allogeneic transplant 1976-1998	2129(1370allo)	NR	33.9	3.3 (3.6 > 1 year survival)	2.1⁎ (auto and allo)	6.4% at 10 years for allogeneic subset
Socie, 2000 (multi-institution, international bone marrow transplant registry/U Wash)	Second malignancies after allogeneic transplant for childhood acute leukemia (<age 17) 1964-1992	3,182	6	8.2	0.9 (3.6 > 1 year survival)	45.1⁎	11% at 15 years (solid tumors) 1% at 5 years (PTLD)
Kolb, 1999 (multi-institution, Late Effects Working Party-Europe)	Second malignancies in long-term survivors (>5 years) after allogeneic and autologous transplant before 1986	1036(982evaluable)(903allo)	NR	21	10.7years	3.8	12.8% at 15 years
Curtis, 1999 (multi-institution, international bone marrow transplant registry/U Wash)	PTLD after allogeneic bone marrow transplantation 1964-1992	18,014	NR	25	NR	51.5	1% at 10 years
Curtis, 1997 (multi-institution, international bone marrow transplant registry/U Wash)	Second solid malignancies after allogeneic and syngeneic transplant 1964-1992	19,229(18,696allo)	NR	25.5	3.5years	2.7⁎ 8.3 for >10 year survivors	6.7% at 15 years⁎
Witherspoon, 1989 (single institution, U Wash)	Second malignancies after allogeneic and autologous transplant for leukemia or aplastic anemia 1970-1987	2246(1993allo)	1.0	NR	NR	6.69⁎ (auto and allo)	1.6% at 18 years⁎

ALLO indicates allogeneic; AUTO, autologous; PTLD, posttransplant lymphoproliferative disorder.

⁎

Excluding nonmelanoma skin cancer as not recorded in SEER database.

Posttransplant Lymphoproliferative Disorders

Posttransplant lymphoid neoplasms were first recognized in 1969 in the setting of solid organ transplantation [45, 46]. PTLD is relatively common in organ transplantation with an incidence of 1%-20%, depending on the type of allograft [47]. Initially it was felt that PTLD was universally malignant, but it is now recognized that PTLD is a diverse group of disorders ranging from benign self-limited polyclonal hyperplasias to clonal malignancies [48, 49, 50, 51, 52]. Historically, PTLD has been attributed to uncontrolled proliferation of the Epstein-Barr virus (EBV) transformed B-lymphocytes; however, EBV negative PTLD has also been recognized [53]. PTLD also occurs after hematopoietic cell transplantation (HCT), although the entity is observed almost entirely following allo-HCT [25, 27, 29, 42]. PTLD has been reported after umbilical cord [54, 55, 56] and nonmyeloablative allo-HCT [56, 57].

Classification

Before PTLD was defined, posttransplant lymphoid neoplasms were classified as immunoblastic sarcomas. Frizzera et al. [58] in 1987 appreciated certain polymorphic morphologic changes in renal transplant patients and introduced a classification distinguishing nonspecific hyperplasia, polymorphic hyperplasia, and polymorphic lymphoma from immunoblastic sarcoma. In 1988, Nalesnik et al. [59] combined the previous descriptions under the heading of polymorphic PTLD [59]. Monomorphic PTLD was also introduced, and was felt to be indistinguishable from non-Hodgkin lymphomas (NHL). However, morphology alone does not provide reliable prognostic information. Knowles et al. [60] used morphology in combination with molecular genetic analysis in order to evaluate clonality. PTLD was then reclassified into polyclonal plasmacytic hyperplasia, monoclonal polymorphic B-cell hyperplasia or lymphoma, and monoclonal pleomorphic immunoblastic lymphoma or multiple myeloma.

In 1995, the City of Hope National Medical Center in Duarte, CA, hosted the Society for Hematopathology workshop on immunodeficiency-related lymphoproliferative disorders. Eighty-two cases from different settings; including posttransplant immunosuppression, other iatrogenic immunosuppression, congenital immunodeficiencies, and the acquired immune deficiency syndrome, were reviewed. This led to discussions that culminated in the 1997 Society for Hematopathology classification including (1) early lesions, (2) polymorphic PTLD, (3) PTLD-monomorphic, (4) plasmacytoma-like lesions, and (5) T cell-rich large B cell lymphoma/Hodgkin disease like lesions [61]. This was the first classification system that appreciated the clinical differences between early and late PTLD.

In 2001, the World Health Organization (WHO) published a revised PTLD classification, which is most commonly used today. This includes (1) early lesions such as reactive lymphoplasmacytic hyperplasia and infectious mononucleosis like lesions, (2) polymorphic PTLD, (3) monomorphic PTLD, and (4) Hodgkin lymphoma (HL) and Hodgkin lymphoma-like PTLD (Table 2) [62].

Table 2.

World Health Organization Classification of PTLD


Type	Clonality	Characteristics
Early lesions	Polyclonal	Usually regress spontaneously or after reduction of immunosuppression
a) Reactive lymphoplasmacytic hyperplasia
b) Infectious mono-like lesions
Polymorphic PTLD	MostlyPolyclonal	Variable response to reduction of immunosuppression
Monomorphic PTLD	Monoclonal	Should be classified according to WHO classification of non-Hodgkin lymphoma
Hodgkin Lymphoma and Hodgkin lymphoma like PTLD	Monoclonal	Similar to Hodgkin lymphoma though controversy remains regarding the latter

PTLD indicates posttransplant lymphoproliferative disorder.

Epidemiology

The incidence of PTLD in allogeneic bone marrow transplantation has been reported as between 0.5% and 1.8%, with the majority occurring within the first year after transplantation [25, 27, 29, 32, 42, 63]. PTLD may be asymptomatic, and diagnosed only at autopsy [25]. EBV is more prevalent in early PTLD, and is found in >90% of B cell PTLD within the first year after transplantation. The proportion of EBV negative disease increases in late (>1 year) PTLD and encompasses 21% to 32% of cases overall [64].

The largest retrospective review to date of PTLD after allo-HCT included 18,014 patients from 234 centers reporting to the International Bone Marrow Transplant Registry (IBMTR) and the Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center between 1964 and 1992 [29]. The cumulative incidence of PTLD was 1% at 10 years. Fifty-eight percent of PTLD occurred within 1-5 months, and 82% occurred before 1 year.

Etiology

Primary EBV infection after transplantation is the greatest risk factor in solid-organ PTLD, with a 10- to 76-fold increased risk of PTLD [47, 64, 65, 66, 67]. EBV, the etiologic agent of infectious mononucleosis, is a member of the human herpes virus family [64, 68]. In immunocompetent hosts it is transmitted via body fluids such as saliva. More than 90% of the population has immunity to EBV by the age of 40, and it usually establishes life-long viral latency after primary infection. The immunocompetent host has several mechanisms to control EBV proliferation after primary infection including cytotoxic T cell response, and to a lesser extent humoral immune response, natural killer activity, and cytokine regulation [63, 69, 70, 71, 72, 73]. The transmission of EBV in the transplant population occurs mainly from blood products, but the transmission rate is unknown. Although the pathophysiology is still unclear, B cell PTLD is thought to be related to factors that stimulate B cell proliferation and depress EBV-specific control mechanisms [74].

Risk Factors

In addition to EBV infection, a number of other risk factors have been identified (Table 3) [25, 27, 29, 32, 42]. Common risk factors include HLA disparity (relative risk [RR] 3.8-9.0), T cell depletion of the graft (RR 4.0-12.7), use of antithymocyte globulin (ATG) in the preparative regimen or GVHD prophylaxis (RR 3.1-6.4), and GVHD (RR 1.9-6.5). Use of anti-CD3 monoclonal antibody (mAb) was associated significantly with PTDL in 2 studies [29, 42]. In regard to T cell depletion of the graft, Curtis et al. [29] found that the methods applied for T cell depletion were relevant: specifically, sheep red blood cell E-rosetting techniques (RR 15.6) and mAb-based depletion of T cells (RR 12.3) were associated with an increased risk of early onset PTLD. As for development of late onset PTLD (>1 year), Curtis et al. [29] only identified chronic GVHD (cGVHD) as a significant risk factor.

Table 3.

Studies of PTLD after Allogeneic HCT


Study	Setting	Number of Patients	Median Time to PTLD (Years)	Cumulative Incidence of New PTLD	Relative Risk	Significant Risk Factors (Excluding Primary Immunodeficiency)
Baker, 2003 (single institution, U Minnesota)	Second malignancies after autologous and allogeneic transplant 1974-2001	3372 (2179 allo)	0.3 (auto and allo)	1.4% at 20 years (71% of pts <1 year) All but 1 in allo BMT	54.3	-Mismatched related donor (RR 9.0) -T cell depletion (RR 4.0) -Use of ATG for aGVHD (RR 3.7) -Grade 3-4 aGVHD (RR 2.4)
Socie, 2000 (multi-institution, international bone marrow transplant registry/U Wash)	Second malignancies after allogeneic transplant for childhood acute leukemia (<age 17) 1964-1992	3182 allo	Unknown (1.5 years in text; however, 75% of pts <1 year in table)	0.6% at 15 years (75% of pts <1 year)	182	-Unrelated or mismatched related donor (RR 7.5) -Mod-severe GVHD (RR 6.5) -T cell depletion of graft (RR 4.8) -Use of ATG for aGVHD (RR 3.1)
Curtis, 1999 (multi-institution, international bone marrow transplant registry/U Wash)	PTLD after allogeneic bone marrow transplantation 1964-1992	18,014 allo	0.2-0.3	1% at 10 years (82% of pts <1 year)	51.5	Early Onset PTLD (<1 year) -Use of anti-CD3 mAb for aGVHD (RR 43.2) -T cell depletion of graft (RR 12.7) -Use of ATG for aGVHD (RR 6.4) -Unrelated or mismatched related donor (RR 4.1) -aGVHD grades II-IV (RR 1.9) -Late-onset PTLD (>1 year) -Extensive cGVHD (RR 4.0)
Witherspoon, 1989 (single institution, U Wash)	Second malignancies after allogeneic and autologous transplant for leukemia or aplastic anemia 1970-1987	2246 (1993 allo)	0.2	0.7% at 18 years (auto and allo) (75% of pts <1 year)	355	-Use of anti-CD3 mAb for aGVHD (RR 15.6) -T cell depletion of graft (RR 12.4) -Use of ATG for aGVHD (RR 4.9) -Mismatch donor (RR 3.8)

mAb, indicates monoclonal antibody; ALLO, allogeneic; ATG, antithymocyte globulin; AUTO, autologous; GVHD, graft-versus-host disease; aGVHD, acute graft-versus-host disease; cGVHD, chronic graft-versus-host disease; HCT, hematopoietic cell transplantation; PTLD, posttransplant lymphoproliferative disorder; TBI, total-body irradiation; RR, relative risk; pts, patients.

Prevention

Perhaps the best management of PTLD is prevention by addressing the known risk factors. Although GVHD may be better controlled with T cell depletion of donor grafts, ATG, and the use of anti-CD-3 antibodies, the increased risk of PTLD must also be recognized. The risk factor for PTLD well-described in the solid transplant literature is development of new EBV infection in seronegative patients, and is largely from blood transfusions [64, 65, 66, 67]. Hence, testing for EBV immunity status should be considered in allo-HCT candidates. In one study, leukoreduction of packed red blood cells rendered 13 of 14 EBV-positive units negative by PCR [75]. There are no studies to date on whether this type of intervention translates to clinical benefit. CMV immunity is routinely tested as part of standard practice before allo-HCT, and CMV infection has also been implicated as a cofactor in solid organ PTLD.

Rituximab appears to be active in treatment of EBV reactivation after allo-HCT, and therefore, in the prevention of PTLD. A prospective study from The Netherlands in 2002 monitored 49 matched sibling or matched unrelated donor T cell-depleted allo-HCT patients [76]. EBV quantitative real-time PCR was measured weekly. Preemptive therapy with a single dose of rituximab was given in patients with more than 1000 copies/mL. Median time to preemptive therapy in 15 patients was 113 days (range: 41-202 days) after allo-HCT. Fourteen patients had a complete response by quantitative EBV PCR. One patient progressed to PTLD but obtained a complete response with 2 doses of therapeutic rituximab and donor lymphocyte infusion. Notably, Weinstock et al. [77] published a comprehensive review of the preemptive diagnosis and treatment of EBV-associated PTLD in 2006.

At the City of Hope, we monitor for EBV reactivation in “high risk” patients such as those treated with thymoglobulin. EBV quantitative PCR is evaluated weekly starting at 21 days after allo-HCT. A single dose of rituximab is given for EBV levels >1000 copies/mL. Response is measured by quantitative PCR for at least 6 weeks after the infusion. If the level remains >1000 copies/mL thereafter, 3 additional doses of rituximab are given for a total course of 4 doses. EBV titers >1000 copies/mL at 6 weeks are monitored weekly until the titer returns to baseline. T cell-depleted and mismatched donor grafts are not commonly used, but both have been identified as also high-risk factors for PTLD after allo-HCT (Table 3).

The use of anti-EBV agents, such as acyclovir or ganciclovir, is also of interest. Ganciclovir has the greatest activity against EBV in vitro, but increased myelosuppression may be of concern [78]. Several single institutional reports suggest some efficacy in prevention of PTLD [79, 80, 81]; however, contradictory reports exist [82, 83]. A recent multicenter case-control study of ganciclovir or acyclovir in renal transplant patients demonstrated an 83% reduction in the risk of PTLD with the former showing better efficacy [84]. Finally, early studies of infusion of EBV-cytotoxic T cells have also shown efficacy in decreasing viral loads, and may turn out to be useful in preventing and ameliorating EBV-related PTLD [85, 86, 87].

Treatment

There have been no randomized trials of treatment of PTLD. However, some recommendations may be made based on the WHO classification [62]. The clinical utility of the WHO classification system has been verified by at least 1 study [88]. Type I or early polyclonal lesions, which include reactive lymphoplasmacytic hyperplasia and infectious mononucleosis-like lesions, usually require no intervention and are self-limited, although reduction of immunosuppression may be considered. Type II polyclonal PTLD usually requires reduction of immunosuppression but has variable response. Type III monomorphic PTLD should be classified according to the WHO classification of lymphoma, and treatment includes reduction of immunosuppression and usually requires chemotherapy. Type IV HL and HL-like PTLD likewise require aggressive management, although there is some controversy in regard to classification of the latter. A recent retrospective report from Loma Linda University analyzed 5 cases of HL-like PTLD with respect to immunophenotype, EBV status, clonality, and clinical outcome [89]. Although HL-like PTLD was similar morphologically to classic HL PTLD, the immunophenotype, molecular genetics, and clinical course were more consistent with a monomorphic B-cell PTLD.

The anti-CD20 antibody rituximab has been shown to be effective in PTLD [90, 91, 92, 93, 94, 95]. A multicenter phase II German study of 17 patients with solid-organ PTLD showed a 53% complete response rate using single agent rituximab with a mean duration of 17.8 months [93]. A retrospective study of solid-organ PTLD from the University of Pennsylvania found a 68% response rate in 22 patients treated with rituximab with a median duration not reached at 19 months [95]. In univariate analysis, EBV positivity predicted response. The authors concluded that PTLD patients requiring therapy beyond reduction of immunosuppression should be considered for rituximab, especially with EBV-positive disease, and chemotherapy should be reserved for those who fail rituximab, have EBV-negative tumors, or need a rapid response.

Infusion of EBV-cytotoxic T cells has also been studied in the treatment of PTLD [85, 96, 97]. In 1 study of patients with progressive PTLD unresponsive to conventional treatment, HLA-matched cytotoxic T cells were infused with a complete response in 3 of 8 patients, although responses were mainly in those with early, localized, and polyclonal disease [97]. Cytokine therapy has also been studied with a multicenter phase I-II trial of an anti-interleukin 6 monoclonal antibody showing a 41% response rate in early PTLD [98, 99].

Treatment-Related Myelodysplastic Syndrome and Second Leukemia

There is significant controversy regarding risk factors for development of treatment-related myelodysplastic syndrome (tMDS) and second leukemias. tMDS and second leukemias in HCT occur almost entirely in the autologous setting where exposure to certain chemotherapeutics (alkylating agents, topoisomerase II inhibitors, and possibly anthracyclines) and total-body irradiation (TBI) appear to be the greatest risk factors [30, 100, 101, 102, 103, 104, 105, 106].

tMDS and second leukemia are extremely rare after allo-HCT (Table 4) [25, 27, 28, 42]. The low incidence supports the hypothesis that tMDS and second leukemia may be primarily related to pretransplant factors and not to HCT itself. The graft-versus-marrow effect of allo-HCT likely decreases the risk of recipient derived MDS/secondary leukemia [30]. Baker et al. [25] reported 4 cases of MDS/AML of 2179 allo-HCT patients during the period 1974 to 2001. The leukemic clones all originated in host cells but were morphologically and cytogenetically different from the initial malignancy. A large study from the Late Effects Working Party of Europe evaluating second malignancies in 903 allo-HCT patients observed more than 5 years from transplantation reported no incidence of second leukemia [28]. However, there was mention of 1 patient in the database who developed second leukemia before 5 years of follow-up, but details on cell origin were not provided. Witherspoon et al. [42], from the Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, reported 6 second leukemias of 1993 allo-HCT for leukemia or aplastic anemia from 1970-1987, with 4 being of donor cell origin.

Table 4.

Studies of Second MDS/Leukemia after Allogeneic HCT


Study	Setting	Number of Patients	Incidence in Allogeneic HCT	Median Time to MDS/Leukemia (Years)
Baker, 2003 (single institution, U Minnesota)	Second malignancies after autologous and allogeneic transplant 1974-2001	3372(2179allo)	4 patients MDS/AML (all host)	2.1 (auto and allo)
Socie, 2000 (multi-institution, international bone marrow transplant registry/U Wash)	Second malignancies after allogeneic transplant for childhood acute leukemia (<age 17) 1964-1992	3182allo	0	NA
Kolb, 1999 (multi-institution, Late Effects Working Party-Europe)	Second malignancies in long-term survivors (>5 years) after allogeneic and autologous transplant before 1986	982evaluable(903allo)	0 (1 in database prior to 5-year follow-up but cell origin unknown)	NA
Witherspoon, 1989 (single institution, U Wash)	Second malignancies after allogeneic and autologous transplant for leukemia or aplastic anemia 1970-1987	2246(1993allo)	6 leukemias (4 ALL, 1 ANLL, 1 granulocytic sarcoma; 4 donor/2 host)	0.6

ALLO indicates allogeneic; ALL, acute lymphocytic leukemia; AML, acute myelogenous leukemia; ANLL, acute nonlymphocytic leukemia; AUTO, autologous; HCT, hematopoietic cell transplantation; MDS, myelodysplastic syndrome.

Given the rarity of second leukemia after allo-HCT, risk factors are likely to remain elusive. The reasons for developing leukemia from host derived cells may be similar to risk factors identified in autologous HCT where exposure to prior therapy may lead to chromosomal damage in progenitor cells that survive after transplantation. Many mechanisms have been proposed as possible causes of second leukemia in donor cells after allo-HCT. Antigenic stimulation through host tissue has shown to be able to transform donor cells in vivo [107, 108, 109, 110]. An unknown factor in the marrow environment may lead to leukemic transformation (ie, an oncogenic virus) [107, 108, 109, 110, 111, 112]. Preexisting genetic factors may certainly be important in related donor allo-HCT [113, 114]. There is 1 case in the literature of allo-HCT donor-derived inadvertent transplantation of preexisting leukemia [115], and another case of liver transplant donor-derived acute promyelocytic leukemia presumably from stem cells in the transplanted organ [116].

Second Solid Malignancies

Epidemiology

Unlike the short latency of PTLD, SSM have a long latency period of multiple years following allo-HCT. The largest studies report a 1.85- to 34-fold increased risk of SSM compared to the normal population with a median time from allo-HCT to diagnosis of 3.3 to 6.8 years (Table 5) [22, 25, 26, 27, 28, 31, 42]. Most of these studies exclude squamous and basal cell skin carcinomas, as they are not recorded in the SEER database. It is important to note that a plateau has not been reached in long-term follow-up, and the cumulative incidence continues to increase.

Table 5.

Studies of Second Solid Malignancy after Allogeneic HCT


Study	Setting	Number of Patients	Median Time to Solid Malignancy (Years)	Cumulative Incidence of New Second Solid Malignancy	Relative Risk	Significant Risk Factors
Gallagher, 2007 (multi-institution, British Columbia)	Second solid malignancies after allogeneic transplant 1985-2003	926	6.8	2.3% at 10 years⁎	1.85⁎ Not given for individual cancer types	-Recipient age at BMT >40 (P = .005) -Woman donor (P = .0008)
Baker, 2003 (single institution, U Minnesota)	Second malignancies after autologous and allogeneic transplant 1974-2001	3372 (2179 allo)	4.2 (auto and allo)	0.4% at 1 year⁎ 1.2 at 5 years⁎ 2.2 at 10 years⁎ 3.8% 20 years⁎ (auto and allo)	8.1⁎ (auto and allo) Oral 10.2 Brain 9.5 Melanoma 8.3 Lung 2.1 Breast 1.5 Colon 1.8	-age >20 years at time of BMT (RR 2.0); however, age <10 RR 33.3
Bhatia, 2001 (single institution, City of Hope)	Second solid malignancies after autologous and allogeneic transplant 1976-1998	2129 (1370 allo)	3.3 Cervical 7.6 Oral 10.8 Liver (auto and allo)	1.6% at 5 years⁎ 6.1% at 10 years⁎ 6.4% allo, 1.6% auto) 14.9% at 15 years⁎ (auto and allo)	2.1⁎ (auto and allo) Liver 27.7 Oral cavity 17.4 Cervical 13.3	-Age < 34 years at time of BMT (RR 5.3)
Socie, 2000 (multi-institution, international bone marrow transplant registry/U Wash)	Second malignancies after allogeneic transplant for childhood acute leukemia (<age 17) 1964-1992	3182	6	0.9% at 5 years⁎ 4.3% at 10 years⁎ 11% at 15 years⁎	34⁎ Tongue 2765 Sal. gland 519 Thyroid 125 Melanoma 65 Brain/CNS 46 Bone and Connective tissue 20	-Recipient age <10 years at transplantation (RR 3.7) -High-dose TBI (RR 3.1) -(Chronic mod-severe GVHD lower risk RR 0.2)
Kolb, 1999 (multi-institution, Late Effects Working Party-Europe)	Second malignancies in long-term survivors (>5 years) after autologous and allogeneic transplant before 1986	982 evaluable (903 allo)	NR	3.5% at 10 years 11.5% at 15 years (auto and allo)	3.8 (auto and allo) >10-fold for oral, esophagus, thyroid. skin ca(basal/sq cell), >5-fold for Hodgkin glioblastoma, uterus/cervix	-Older recipient age (RR 1.4) -Immunosuppressive therapy -Cyclosporine (RR 1.4) -Thalidomide (RR 3.4)
Curtis, 1997 (multi-institution, international bone marrow transplant registry/U Wash)	Second solid malignancies after allogeneic and syngeneic transplant 1964-1992	19,229 (18,696 allo)	NR	2.2% at 10 years⁎ 6.7% at 15 years⁎	2.7⁎ (8.3 for survivors > 10 years) Bone 13.4 Oral 11.1 CNS 7.6 Liver 7.5 Thyroid 6.6 Melanoma 5.0 Connective tissue 8.0	-High-dose TBI (RR 2.7-4.4) -Chronic GVHD (cGVHD) with oral and skin SCC (RR 6.0, 22.6) -Younger recipient age (age <10, RR 36.6)
Witherspoon, 1989 (single institution, U Wash)	Second malignancies after autologous and allogeneic transplant for leukemia or aplastic anemia 1970-1987	2246 (1993 allo)	4.7 (auto and allo)	NR	6.69⁎ (auto and allo) GBM 100 Liver 125 Melanoma 10.7	Use of ATG for acute GVHD (aGVHD) (RR 4.3)

ALLO indicates allogeneic; ATG, antithymocyte globulin; AUTO, autologous; GBM, glioblastoma multiforme; GVHD, graft-versus- host disease; HCT, hematopoietic cell transplantation; SCC, squamous cell carcinoma; TBI, total-body irradiation; RR, relative risk.

⁎

Excluding nonmelanoma skin cancer as not recorded in SEER database.

Curtis et al. [31] reported the largest study to date of SSM in 1997. A total of 19,229 patients underwent allogeneic (97.2%) and syngeneic (2.8%) HCT from 235 medical centers (IBMRT and Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center) between 1964 and 1992. The relative risk of SSM was 2.7, and increased to 8.3 for those who survived >10 years. The cumulative incidence of new solid malignancies also increased from 2.2% at 10 years to 6.7% at 15 years of follow-up. Significantly increased risks by tumor type were seen in bone (RR 13.4), oral cavity (RR 11.1), brain and central nervous system (RR 7.6), hepatocellular (RR 7.5), thyroid (RR 6.6), melanoma (RR 5.0), and connective tissue (RR 8.0) malignancies.

Risk factors

Several risk factors have been identified that may contribute to the development of SSM after allo-HCT. These include radiation and chemotherapy used in primary treatment and conditioning for allo-HCT, immunodeficiency from incomplete recovery after allo-HCT, and immune stimulation and suppression from GVHD [30]. Specific risk factors identified from the largest studies of second malignancies after allo-HCT are discussed later.

Radiation

Radiation may account for some if not most of the long latency seen in SSM after allo-HCT. The 13th report from the Life Span Study cohort of survivors of the atomic bomb in Hiroshima and Nagasaki provides more than 5 decades of follow-up [6]. The relationship between radiation dose and excess solid cancer risk appears to be linear. Approximately 5% of solid cancer deaths to date have been attributed to radiation, and it is estimated that 60%-70% of radiogenic cancer-related deaths have yet to occur. The number of cancer-related deaths continues to increase in both adults and children, but the risk is higher in the latter.

The risk of radiation-induced SSM after cancer treatment is perhaps best described in the pediatric Hodgkin disease (HD) literature [13, 18, 19, 20, 21]. Bhatia et al. [13] reported long-term follow-up from the Late Effects Study Group of 1380 children treated for HD. The cumulative incidence for second solid malignancy was 7.3% at 20 years, increasing to 23.5% at 30 years. Breast cancer was the most common solid malignancy (RR 56.7), followed by thyroid, bone, colorectal, and gastric cancers. Risk factors included younger age at treatment and radiation based therapy.

Despite the well-described relationship between radiation and SSM, only 2 of the largest studies of SSM after allo-HCT, both from the IBMRT and Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, describe a significant association [27, 31]. Curtis et al. [31] found a highly significant dose related 2.7- to 4.4-fold higher risk with high-dose TBI. Socie et al. [27] reported a 3.1-fold risk with high-dose TBI. Notably, 6 of the 9 patients with second brain cancers and 3 of the 5 thyroid cancer patients had received cranial radiation for treatment or prophylaxis of acute leukemia before allo-HCT. Other studies of SSM have failed to show a significant association. Witherspoon et al. [42] reported a 3.9-fold increased risk of all second malignancies after TBI but this was not significant when assessing solid malignancies alone. A study from the University of Minnesota by Bhatia et al. [32] showed a 6-fold increased risk in patients treated with TBI which approached statistical significance (P = .08); however, a more recent report with 6 more years of follow-up gave less conclusive results (RR 1.5, P = .27) [25]. There are multiple possible explanations for the negative findings. The large studies did report significantly increased risks of tumors previously attributed to radiation exposure such as head and neck, bone, brain, and thyroid cancers [22, 25, 26, 28, 32, 42]. None of the studies quantify the amount of pretransplant exposure to radiation. Also, follow-up is still relatively short for most of these studies. Data from the atomic bomb survivor cohort and children treated for HD suggest that risk of second solid malignancy after radiation exposure remains elevated for multiple decades, and therefore many more radiogenic malignancies may emerge with longer follow-up [6, 13, 18, 19, 20, 21].

Age

There is conflicting data regarding the relationship between age of the recipient at the time of allo-HCT and the risk of SSM. Some studies support that risk is increased in younger recipients [26, 27, 31]. The analysis from the City of Hope found a 5.3-fold increased risk in recipients less than age 34 at the time of allo-HCT [26]. Another analysis by Socie et al. [27] was limited only to children less than age 17, but reported the highest overall RR of SSM (RR 34). This included 3 tongue and 2 salivary gland cancers, which are extremely rare in children. Children ages 0-9 showed a 3.7-fold greater risk than those between the ages of 10 and 16. Curtis et al. [31] reported an RR of 36.6 for recipients less than age 10 at the time of allo-HCT.

The explanation for a possibly increased risk in young children, especially less than age 10, may be multifactorial. As discussed above, radiogenic tumors have a long latency, and therefore children may experience increased incidence of SSM simply because of longer life expectancy and follow-up. The literature on second breast malignancy after treatment for childhood HD also suggests that radiation may have increased carcinogenic potential on proliferating tissue in young patients [13, 18, 19, 20, 21].

Conversely, other studies suggest that older age at allo-HCT increases the risk of SSM [22, 25, 28]. Gallagher reported that age >40 was a significant risk factor; however, only 2% of the patients in the study cohort were <18 years old [22]. Baker et al. [25] found an increased risk in those more than age 20 years (RR 2.0), although subgroup analysis suggested the highest risk was actually among recipients <10 years old (RR 33). The second malignancies included rare pediatric tumors such as melanoma, renal cell, breast, and parotid cancer. Kolb et al. [28] observed a slightly increased risk with older age on a continuum at allo-HCT transplant (RR 1.4). The authors concluded that the risk for GVHD increased with age, and may increase second tumor risk.

GVHD/Immunosupressants

None of the large studies of SSM after allo-HCT report an overall association with GVHD. In fact, Socie et al. [27], in 2000, observed an unexpected decrease in risk with GVHD. Notably, most of these studies excluded nonmelanoma skin cancer in the multivariate analysis as these are not reported in the SEER database. The IBMRT and investigators from the Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center did find a 6-fold higher risk when evaluating separately for onset of oral and skin SCC [31]. The report by Bhatia et al. [26] from our institution found that all 6 patients with nonmelanoma skin cancer had developed GVHD. Many of the studies also found an association between use of immunosupressants for GVHD and risk of second solid tumors. Witherspoon et al. [42] observed a 4.3-fold risk with the use of ATG in acute GVHD (aGVHD). The report from the Late Effects Working Party of Europe showed a 1.4-fold risk for cyclosporine [28]. Overall, it appears that immunosuppression rather than GVHD directly, except in nonmelanoma skin cancers as discussed below, increase the risk of SSM after allo-HCT.

Viruses

Viruses may play a small role in some SSM. Three of the large studies found a 7.5- to 125-fold increased risk of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) after allo-HCT, although this translates to only 6 patients of more than 22,000 allo-HCT recipients [26, 31, 42]. Both patients from our institution had a history of chronic hepatitis C, but viral status was not reported in the other studies. EBV has been implicated in a case report of an early second gastric carcinoma [117]. Human papillomavirus (HPV) may also play a role in SCC of the skin and mucous membranes [118]. Four patients in the cohort from City of Hope had cervical cancer attributed to HPV infection (RR 13.3) [26].

Nonmelanoma skin cancer

Many of the studies of second malignancies after allo-HCT exclude risk analysis for nonmelanoma SCC and basal cell carcinoma (BCC) skin cancer, as they are not reported in the SEER database. A recent report on second SCC and BCC of the skin and mucous membranes from the Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center and affiliates contained follow-up on 4810 patients who underwent allo-HCT between 1969 and 2003 and survived at least 100 days [23]. Two hundred thirty-seven patients developed at least 1 cancer (158 BCC, median 7.9 years from allo-HCT; 95 SCC, median 6.3 years from allo-HCT). Twenty-year cumulative incidence was 6.5% for BSC for and 3.4% for SCC. The risk for BCC was significantly increased with TBI (P = .003), and was strongest for recipients <18 years old at allo-HCT (P = .02). The risk of SCC was significantly increased with aGVHD grades II-IV (P = .02) and cGVHD (P < .001), whereas the risk of BCC was increased with cGVHD (no mention of grade, P = .01).

Conclusions

HCT may prolong life and cure many patients suffering from otherwise fatal diseases. Most of the transplant literature concentrates on reporting short-term complications such as infection and GVHD. However, the growing population of long-term survivors has led to our realization of multiple long-term complications including the risk of second malignancies. There are multiple factors that may be involved in the development of second malignancies including cytotoxic chemotherapy, radiation, immunosuppressive therapy, immune stimulation and immune suppression from GVHD, antigenic stimulation, oncogenic virus activity, and genetic predisposition [30]. Compared to the autologous setting, allo-HCT carries a much higher risk of PTLD, but tMDS and second leukemias are extremely rare. Both autologous and allo-HCT carry increased risks for SSM.

PTLD after allo-HCT usually has a short latency period, with the majority of cases occurring within the first year, although EBV negative PTLD may increase in late-onset PTLD. PTLD encompasses a range of benign polyclonal hyperplasias to malignant monoclonal lymphomas, and standard treatment options include reduction of immunosuppression, cytotoxic chemotherapy, and use of rituximab. High-risk patients, such as those given thymoglobulin, should be monitored for EBV reactivation with EBV quantitative PCR. Rituximab appears to have efficacy in treating EBV reactivation and thereby preventing EBV-associated PTLD.

The latency period for solid malignancies is relatively long, usually being multiple years. Most notably, a plateau has not been reached in any of the largest long-term studies. Data from the cohort of atomic bomb survivors suggests that such risk continues to be elevated >50 years from exposure [6]. As we obtain further follow-up, more solid tumors are likely to emerge. Hence, systematic, prospective follow-up, vigilant screening processes, and well-maintained survivorship clinics and databases are absolute necessities. Such entities should be included in the infrastructure of individual transplant centers and networks, with mandatory periodic reporting of second malignancy incidences. Primary care physicians may often have the most continuity years from allo-HCT, and must be aware of the continued risk of second malignancy. The highest risk cancers identified across the largest studies include cancers of the skin, oral cavity, thyroid, brain, and central nervous system, connective tissue, and bone. Hepatitis C patients and women affected with cervical HPV appear to be at particular risk for are hepatocellular carcinoma and cervical carcinoma, respectively.

There are long-term follow-up guidelines for survivors of childhood, adolescent, and young adult cancers based on type of cancers and exposures published by the Children’s Oncology Group [119]. The minimum follow-up guidelines for all allo-HCT recipients should include yearly history and comprehensive physicals. Special attention should be made to the organ systems at highest risk for second malignancy including the skin and oral cavity, thyroid, lymphatic, neurologic, musculoskeletal, and gynecologic. Breast and colon cancer risk may also be slightly increased and therefore current screening guidelines for the general population should be strictly followed. Further research is necessary to evaluate whether the screening age guidelines for colonoscopy and mammography after allo-HCT should be lowered.

Continued research is required to attempt to quantify risk based not only on transplant factors but pretransplant exposures as well. Primary care and transplant physicians alike must be aware of the risk of second malignancies after HCT. Guidelines for all HCT recipients in regard to screening and prevention of second malignancies based on available evidence and expert opinion should be developed, so physicians can provide state of the art counsel and care for the benefit of our patients.

References

1. 1Cancer survivors: living longer, and now, better. [editorial] Lancet. 2004;364:2153–2154. Full Text | Full-Text PDF (108 KB) | CrossRef

2. 2Rowland J, Mariotto A, Aziz N, Tesauro G, Feuer EJ. Cancer survivorship—United States, 1971-2001. MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep. 2004;53:526–529.

3. 3Atlas LD. The National Marrow Donor Program in 2006: constants and challenges. Transfusion. 2006;46:1080–1084. MEDLINE | CrossRef

4. 4Ries LAG, Harkins D, Krapcho M, et al., eds. SEER Cancer Statistics Review, 1975-2003. Bethesda, MD: National Cancer Institute (http://seer.cancer.gov/csr/1975_2003/), based on November 2005 SEER data submission, posted to the SEER Web site, 2006.

5. 5Neugut AI, Meadows AT, Robinson E. Introduction. In: Neugut AI, Meadows AT, Robinson E editor. Multiple Primary Cancers. Philadelphia, PA: Lippincott Williams and Wilkins; 1999;p. 1–12.

6. 6Preston DL, Shimizu Y, Pierce DA, Suyama A, Mabuchi K. Studies of mortality of atomic bomb survivors (Report 13: solid cancer and noncancer disease mortality: 1950-1997). Radiat Res. 2003;160:381–407. MEDLINE | CrossRef

7. 7Inskip PD. Second cancers following radiotherapy. In: Neugut AI, Meadows AT, Robinson E editor. Multiple Primary Cancers. Philadelphia, PA: Lippincott Williams and Wilkins; 1999;p. 91–135.

8. 8Tucker MA, D’Angio GJ, Boice JD, et al. Bone sarcomas linked to radiotherapy and chemotherapy in children. N Engl J Med. 1987;317:588–593. MEDLINE | CrossRef

9. 9UNSCEAR. Sources and Effects of Ionizing Radiation: United Nations Scientific Committee on the Effects of Atomic Radiation 2000 Report to the General Assembly, with Scientific Annexes, Vol II: Effects. New York: United Nations; 2000;.

10. 10Vega-Stromberg T. Chemotherapy-induced secondary malignancies. J Infus Nurs. 2003;26:353–361. MEDLINE | CrossRef

11. 11Travis LB, Curtis RE, Glimelius B, et al. Bladder and kidney cancer following cyclophosphamide therapy for non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma. J Natl Cancer Inst. 1995;87:524–530. MEDLINE | CrossRef

12. 12Pedersen-Bjergaard J, Ersboll J, Hansen VL, et al. Carcinoma of the urinary bladder after treatment with cyclophosphamide or non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma. N Engl J Med. 1988;318:1028–1032. MEDLINE | CrossRef

13. 13Bhatia S, Robison LL, Oberlin O, et al. Breast cancer and other second neoplasms after childhood Hodgkin’s disease. N Engl J Med. 1996;334:745–751. MEDLINE | CrossRef

14. 14Boivin JF, Hutchison GB, Zauber AG. Incidence of second cancers in patients treated for Hodgkin’s disease. J Natl Cancer Inst. 1995;87:732–741. MEDLINE | CrossRef

15. 15Garwicz S, Anderson H, Olsen JH, et al. Second malignant neoplasms after cancer in childhood and adolescence: a population-based case-control study in the 5 Nordic countries (The Nordic Society for Pediatric Hematology and Oncology. The Association of the Nordic Cancer Registries). Int J Cancer. 2000;88:672–678. MEDLINE | CrossRef

16. 16Hawkins MM, Draper GJ, Kingston JE. Incidence of second primary tumours among childhood cancer survivors. Br J Cancer. 1987;56:339–347. MEDLINE

17. 17Neglia JP, Friedman DL, Yasui Y, et al. Second malignant neoplasms in five-year survivors of childhood cancer: childhood cancer survivor study. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2001;93:618–629. MEDLINE | CrossRef

18. 18Van Leeuwen FE, Klokman WJ, Stovall M, et al. The role of radiation dose, chemotherapy, treatment-related ovarian ablation, and other risk factors in breast cancer following Hodgkin’s disease. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2003;95:971–980. CrossRef

19. 19Van Leeuwen FE, Klokman WJ, Veer MB, et al. Long-term risk of second malignancy in survivors of Hodgkin’s disease treated during adolescence or young adulthood. J Clin Oncol. 2000;18:487–497.

20. 20Aisenberg AC, Finkestein DM, Doppke KP, Koerner FC, Boivin F, Willett CG. High risk of breast cancer after irradiation of young women with Hodgkin’s disease. Cancer. 1997;79:1203–1210.

21. 21Hancock SL, Tucker MA, Hoppe RT. Breast cancer after treatment of Hodgkin’s disease. J Natl Cancer. 1993;85:25–31.

22. 22Gallagher G, Forrest DL. Second solid cancers after allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation. Cancer. 2007;109:84–92.

23. 23Leisenring W, Friedman DL, Flowers ME, Schwartz JL, Deeg HJ. Nonmelanoma skin and mucosal cancers after hematopoietic cell transplantation. J Clin Oncol. 2006;24:1119–1126. CrossRef

24. 24Hasegawa W, Pond GR, Rifkind JT, et al. Long-term follow-up of secondary malignancies in adults after allogeneic bone marrow transplantation. Bone Marrow Transplant. 2005;35:51–55. MEDLINE | CrossRef

25. 25Baker KS, DeFor TE, Burns LJ, Ramsay NK, Neglia JP, Robison LL. New malignancies after blood or marrow stem-cell transplantation in children and adults: incidence and risk factors. J Clin Oncol. 2003;21:1352–1358. CrossRef

26. 26Bhatia S, Louie AD, Bhatia R, et al. Solid cancers after bone marrow transplantation. J Clin Oncol. 2001;19:464–471.

27. 27Socie G, Curtis RE, Deeg HJ. New malignant diseases after allogeneic marrow transplantation for childhood acute leukemia. J Clin Oncol. 2000;18:348–357.

28. 28Kolb HJ, Socie G, Duell T, et al. Malignant neoplasms in long-term survivors of bone marrow transplantation (Late Effects Working Party of the European Cooperative Group for Blood and Marrow Transplantation and the European Late Effect Project Group). Ann Intern Med. 1999;131:738–744. MEDLINE

29. 29Curtis RE, Travis LB, Rowlings PA, et al. Risk of lymphoproliferative disorders after bone marrow transplantation: a multi-institutional study. Blood. 1999;94:2208–2216. MEDLINE

30. 30Deeg HJ, Socie G. Malignancies after hematopoietic stem cell transplantation: many questions, some answers. Blood. 1998;91:1833–1844. MEDLINE

31. 31Curtis RE, Rowlings PA, Deeg HJ, et al. Solid cancers after bone marrow transplantation. N Engl J Med. 1997;336:897–904. MEDLINE | CrossRef

32. 32Bhatia S, Ramsay LL, Steinbuch M, et al. Malignant neoplasms, following bone marrow transplantation. Blood. 1996;87:3633–3639. MEDLINE

33. 33Deeg HJ, Socie G, Schoch G, et al. Malignancies after marrow transplantation for aplastic anemia and fanconi anemia: a joint Seattle and Paris analysis of results in 700 patients. Blood. 1996;87:386–392. MEDLINE

34. 34Witherspoon RP, Deeg HJ, Storb R. Secondary malignancies after marrow transplantation for leukemia or aplastic anemia. Transplantation. 1994;57:1413–1418. MEDLINE | CrossRef

35. 35Pierga JY, Socie G, Gluckman E, et al. Secondary solid malignant tumors occurring after bone marrow transplantation for severe aplastic anemia given thoraco-abdominal irradiation. Radiother Oncol. 1994;30:55–58. MEDLINE | CrossRef

36. 36Lowsky R, Lipton J, Fyles G, et al. Secondary malignancies after bone marrow transplantation in adults. J Clin Oncol. 1994;12:2187–2192.

37. 37Deeg HJ, Witherspoon RP. Risk factors for the development of secondary malignancies after marrow transplantation. Hematol Oncol Clin North Am. 1993;7:417–429. MEDLINE

38. 38Witherspoon RP, Storb R, Pepe M, et al. Cumulative incidence of second malignant tumors in aplastic anemia patients given marrow grafts after conditioning with chemotherapy alone. Blood. 1992;79:289–290. MEDLINE

39. 39Kolb HJ, Guenther W, Duell T, et al. Cancer after bone marrow transplantation. Bone Marrow Transplant. 1992;10:135–138. MEDLINE

40. 40Socie G, Henry-Amar M, Cosset JM, Devergie A, Girinsky T, Gluckman E. Increased incidence of solid malignant tumors after bone marrow transplantation for severe aplastic anemia. Blood. 1991;78:277–279. MEDLINE

41. 41Lishner M, Patterson B, Kandel R, et al. Cutaneous and mucosal neoplasms in bone marrow transplant recipients. Cancer. 1990;65:473–476.

42. 42Witherspoon RP, Fisher LD, Schoch G, et al. Secondary cancers after bone marrow transplantation for leukemia or aplastic anemia. N Engl J Med. 1989;321:784–789. MEDLINE | CrossRef

43. 43Shapiro RS, McClain K, Frizzera G, et al. Ebstein-Barr virus associated B cell lymphoproliferative disorders following bone marrow transplantation. Blood. 1988;71:1234–1243. MEDLINE

44. 44Deeg HJ, Sanders J, Martin P, et al. Secondary malignancies after marrow transplantation. Exp Hematol. 1984;12:660–666.

45. 45Penn I, Hammon W, Brettschneider L, Starzl TE. Malignant lymphomas in transplantation patients. Transplant Proc. 1969;1:106–112. MEDLINE

46. 46McKhann CF. Primary malignancy in patients undergoing immunosuppression for renal transplantation. Transplantation. 1969;8:209–212. MEDLINE | CrossRef

47. 47Cockfield SM. Identifying the patient at risk for post-transplant lymphoproliferative disorder. Transpl Infect Dis. 2001;3:70–78. MEDLINE | CrossRef

48. 48Orazi A, Hromas RA, Neiman RS, et al. Posttransplantation lymphoproliferative disorders in bone marrow transplant recipients are aggressive diseases with a high incidence of adverse histologic and immunobiologic features. Am J Clin Pathol. 1997;107:419–429. MEDLINE

49. 49Hoover RN. Lymphoma risks in populations with altered immunity—a search for mechanism. Cancer Res. 1992;52:5477s. MEDLINE

50. 50Cohen JI. Epstein-Barr virus lymphoproliferative disease associated with acquired immunodeficiency. Medicine (Baltimore). 1991;70:137–160. MEDLINE | CrossRef

51. 51Liebowitz D. Epstein-Barr virus and a cellular signaling pathway in lymphomas from immunosuppressed patients. N Engl J Med. 1998;338:1413–1421. MEDLINE | CrossRef

52. 52Nalesnik MA, Makowka L, Starzl TE. The diagnosis and treatment of posttransplant lymphoproliferative disorders. Curr Probl Surg. 1988;25:367–472. Full-Text PDF (59 KB) | CrossRef

53. 53Lebland V, Davi F, Charlotte F, et al. Posttransplant lymphoproliferative disorders not associated with Epstein-Barr virus: a distinct entity?. J Clin Oncol. 1998;16:2052–2059.

54. 54Barker JN, Martin PL, Coad JE, et al. Low incidence of Epstein-Barr virus-associated posttransplantation lymphoproliferative disorders in 272 unrelated-donor umbilical cord blood transplant recipients. Biol Blood Marrow Transplant. 2001;7:395–399. Abstract | Full-Text PDF (84 KB) | CrossRef

55. 55Gong JZ, Bayerl MG, Sandhaus LM, et al. Posttransplant lymphoproliferative disorder after umbilical cord blood transplantation in children. Am J Surg Pathol. 2006;30:328–336. MEDLINE

56. 56Brunstein CG, Weisdorf DJ, DeFor T, et al. Marked increased risk of Epstein-Barr virus-related complications with the addition of antithymocyte globulin to a nonmyeloablative conditioning prior to unrelated umbilical cord blood transplantation. Blood. 2006;108:2874–2880. MEDLINE | CrossRef

57. 57Snyder MJ, Stenzel TT, Buckley PJ, et al. Posttransplant lymphoproliferative disorder following nonmyeloablative allogeneic stem cell transplantation. Am J Surg Pathol. 2004;28:794–800. MEDLINE | CrossRef

58. 58Frizzera G, Hanto DW, Gajl-Peczalska KJ, et al. Polymorphic diffuse B-cell hyperplasias and lymphomas in renal transplant recipients. Cancer Res. 1987;41:4262–4279. MEDLINE

59. 59Nalesnik MA, Jaffe R, Starzl TE, et al. The pathology of posttransplant lymphoproliferative disroders occurring in the setting of cyclosporine A-prednisone immunosuppression. Am J Pathol. 1988;133:173–192. MEDLINE

60. 60Knowles DM, Cesarman E, Chadburn A, et al. Correlative morphologic and molecular genetic analysis demonstrates three distinct categories of posttransplant lymphoproliferative disorders. Blood. 1995;85:552–565. MEDLINE

61. 61Harris NL, Ferry JA, Swerdlow SH. Posttransplant lymphoproliferative disorders: summary of Society for Hematopathology Workshop. Semin Diagn Pathol. 1997;14:8–14. MEDLINE

62. 62Pathology and genetics of tumours of the haematopoietic and lymphoid tissues. In: Jaffe ES, Harris NL, Stein H, Vardiman JW editor. World Health Organization Classification of Tumours. vol. 3:Lyon, France: IARC Press; 2001;p. 264–269.

63. 63Gross T, Steinbuch M, DeFor T, et al. B cell lymphoproliferative disorders following hematopoietic stem cell transplantation: risk factors, treatment and outcome. Bone Marrow Transplant. 1999;23:251–258. MEDLINE

64. 64Epstein-Barr virus and lymphoproliferative disorders after transplantation. Am J Transplant. 2004;10:59–65. CrossRef

65. 65Preiksaitis JK. New developments in the diagnosis and management of posttransplantation lymphoproliferative disorders in solid organ transplant recipients. Clin Infect Dis. 2004;39:1016–1023. CrossRef

66. 66Hanto DW, Frizzera G, Gajl-Peczalska KJ, Simmons RL. Epstein-Barr virus, immunodeficiency, and B cell lymphoproliferation. Transplantation. 1985;39:461–472. MEDLINE | CrossRef

67. 67Cohen JI. Epstein-Barr virus lymphoproliferative disease associated with acquired immune deficiency. Medicine. 1991;70:137–160.

68. 68Henle G, Henle W. The virus as the etiologic agent of infectious mononucleosis. In: Epstein MA, Achong BG editor. The Epstein-Barr Virus. New York: Springer-Verlag; 1979;p. 297–320.

69. 69Wallace LE, Rickinson AB, Rowe M, Epstein MA. Epstein-Barr virus-specific cytotoxic T-cell clones restricted through a single HLA antigen. Nature. 1982;297:413–415. MEDLINE | CrossRef

70. 70Pearson GR, Orr TW. Antibody-dependent lymphocyte cytotoxicity against cells experiencing Epstein-Barr virus antigens. J Natl Cancer Inst. 1986;56:485–488. MEDLINE

71. 71Blazar BA, Patarroyo M, Klein E, Klein G. Increased sensitivity of human lymphoid lines to natural killer cells after induction of the Epstein-Barr viral cycle by superinfection or sodium butyrate. J Exp Med. 1980;151:614–627. MEDLINE | CrossRef

72. 72Mathur A, Kamat DM, Filipovich AH, et al. Immunoregulatory abnormalities in patients with Epstein-Barr virus-associated B cell lymphoproliferative disorders. Transplantation. 1994;57:1042–1045. MEDLINE | CrossRef

73. 73Shapiro RS, McClain K, Frizzera G, et al. Epstein-Barr virus associated B cell lymphoproliferative disorders following bone marrow transplantation. Blood. 1988;71:1234–1243. MEDLINE

74. 74Andreone P, Gramenzi A, Lorenzini S, et al. Posttransplantation lymphoproliferative disorders. Arch Intern Med. 2003;163:1997–2004. MEDLINE | CrossRef

75. 75Qu L, Xu S, Rowe D, Triulzi D. Efficacy of Epstein-Barr virus removal by leukoreduction of red blood cells. Transfusion. 2005;45:591–595. MEDLINE | CrossRef

76. 76van Esser JW, Niesters HG, van der Holt B, et al. Prevention of Epstein-Barr virus-lymphoproliferative disease by molecular monitoring and preemptive rituximab in high-risk patients after allogeneic stem cell transplantation. Blood. 2002;99:4364–4369. MEDLINE | CrossRef

77. 77Weinstock DM, Ambrossi GG, Brennan C, Kiehn TE, Jakubowski A. Preemptive diagnosis and treatment of Epstein-Barr virus-associated post transplant lymphoproliferative disorder after hematopoietic stem cell transplant: an approach in development. Bone Marrow Transplant. 2006;37:539–546. MEDLINE | CrossRef

78. 78Lin JC, Smith MC, Pagano JS. Prolonged inhibitory effect of 9-(1,3-dihydroxy-2-propoxymethyl) guanine against replication of Epstein-Barr virus. J Virol. 1984;50:50–55.

79. 79Keay S, Oldach D, Wiland A, et al. Post-transplantation lymphoproliferative disorder associated with OKT3 and decreased antiviral prophylaxis in pancreas transplant recipients. Clin Infect Dis. 1998;26:596–600. MEDLINE | CrossRef

80. 80Davis CL, Harrison KL, McVicar JP, Forg PJ, Bronner MP, Marsh CL. Antiviral prophylaxis and the Epstein-Barr virus-related post-transplant lymphoproliferative disorders. Clin Transplant. 1995;9:53–59. MEDLINE

81. 81Darenkov IA, Macarelli MA, Basadonna GP, et al. Reduced incidence of Epstein-Barr virus-associated posttransplant lymphoproliferative disorder using preemptive antiviral therapy. Transplantation. 1997;64:848–852. MEDLINE | CrossRef

82. 82Aris RM, Maia DM, Neuringer IP, et al. Post-transplantation lymphoproliferative disorder in the Epstein-Barr virus-naïve lung transplant recipient. Am J Respir Crit Care Med. 1996;154:1712–1717.

83. 83Kuo PC, Dafoe DC, Alfrey EJ, Sibley RK, Scandling JD. Posttransplant lymphoproliferative disorders and Epstein-Barr virus prophylaxis. Transplantation. 1995;59:135–138. MEDLINE | CrossRef

84. 84Funch DP, Walker AM, Schneider G, Ziyadeh NJ, Pescovitz MD. Ganciclovir and acyclovir reduce the risk of post-transplant lymphoproliferative disorder in renal transplant recipients. Am J Transplant. 2005;5:2894–2900. MEDLINE | CrossRef

85. 85Rooney CM, Smith CA, Ng CY, et al. Infusion of cytotoxic T cells for the prevention and treatment of Epstein-Barr virus-induced lymphoma in allogeneic transplant recipients. Blood. 1998;92:1549–1555. MEDLINE

86. 86Comoli P, Labirio M, Basso S, et al. Infusion of autologous Epstein-Barr virus (EBV)-specific cytotoxic T cells for prevention of EBV-related lymphoproliferative disorder in solid organ transplant recipients with evidence of active virus replication. Blood. 2002;99:2592–2598. MEDLINE | CrossRef

87. 87Gustafsson A, Levitsky V, Zou JZ, et al. Epstein-Barr virus (EBV) load in bone marrow transplant recipients at risk to develop posttransplant lymphoproliferative disease: prophylactic infusion of EBV-specific cytotoxic T cells. Blood. 2000;95:807–814. MEDLINE

88. 88Mourad WA, Tulabah A, Al Sayed A, et al. The impact of the World Health Organization classification and clonality assessment of posttransplant lymphoproliferative disorders on disease management. Arch Pathol Lab Med. 2006;130:1649–1653.

89. 89Pitman SD, Huang Q, Zuppan CW, et al. Hodgkin lymphoma-like posttransplant lymphoproliferative disorder (HL-like PTLD) simulates monomorphic B-cell PTLD both clinically and pathologically. Am J Surg Pathol. 2006;30:470–476. MEDLINE | CrossRef

90. 90Blaes AH, Peterson BA, Bartlett N, Dunn DL, Morrison VA. Rituximab therapy is effective for posttransplant lymphoproliferative disorders after solid organ transplantation: results of a phase II trial. Cancer. 2005;104:1661–1667.

91. 91Codeluppi M, Cocchi S, Guaraldi G, et al. Rituximab as treatment of posttransplant lymphoproliferative disorder in patients who underwent small bowel/multivisceral transplantation: report of three cases. Transplant Proc. 2005;37:2634–2635. Abstract | Full Text | Full-Text PDF (49 KB) | CrossRef

92. 92Zhu K, Chen J, Chen S. Treatment of Epstein-Barr virus-associated lymphoproliferative disorder (EBV-PTLD) and pure red cell aplasia (PRCA) with Rituximab following unrelated cord blood transplantation: a case report and literature review. Hematology. 2005;10:365–370.

93. 93Oertel SH, Verschuuren E, Reinke P, et al. Effect of anti-CD 20 antibody rituximab in patients with post-transplant lymphoproliferative disorder (PTLD). Am J Transplant. 2005;5:2901–2906. MEDLINE | CrossRef

94. 94Jain AB, Marcos A, Pokharna R, et al. Rituximab (chimeric anti-CD20 antibody) for posttransplant lymphoproliferative disorder after solid organ transplantation in adults: long-term experience from a single center. Transplantation. 2005;80:1692–1698. MEDLINE | CrossRef

95. 95Elstrom RL, Andreadis C, Aqui NA, et al. Treatment of PTLD with rituximab or chemotherapy. Am J Transplant. 2006;6:569–576. MEDLINE | CrossRef

96. 96Pakakasama S, Eames GM, Morriss MC, et al. Treatment of Epstein-Barr virus lymphoproliferative disease after hematopoietic stem-cell transplantation with hydroxyurea and cytotoxic T-cell lymphocytes. Transplantation. 2004;78:755–757. MEDLINE | CrossRef

97. 97Haque T, Wilkie GM, Taylor C, et al. Treatment of Epstein-Barr-virus-positive post-transplantation lymphoproliferative disease with partly HLA-matched allogeneic cytotoxic T cells. Lancet. 2002;360:436–442. Abstract | Full Text | Full-Text PDF (366 KB) | CrossRef

98. 98Durandy A. Anti-B and anticytokine therapy for the treatment of posttransplant lymphoproliferative disorder: past, present, and future. Transpl Infect Dis. 2001;3:104–107. MEDLINE | CrossRef

99. 99Haddad E, Paczesny S, Leblond V, et al. Treatment of B-lymphoproliferative disorder with a monoclonal anti-interleukin-6 antibody in 12 patients: a multicenter phase 1-2 clinical trial. Blood. 2001;97:1590–1597. MEDLINE | CrossRef

100. 100Armitage JO, Carbone PP, Connors JM, Levine A, Bennett JM, Kroll S. Treatment-related myelodysplasia and acute leukemia in non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma patients. J Clin Oncol. 2003;21:897–906. CrossRef

101. 101Darrington DL, Vose JM, Anderson JR, et al. Incidence and characterization of secondary myelodysplastic syndrome and acute myelogenous leukemia following high-dose chemoradiotherapy and autologous stem-cell transplantation for lymphoid malignancies. J Clin Oncol. 1994;12:2527–2534.

102. 102Stone RM, Neuberg D, Soiffer R, et al. Myelodysplastic syndrome as a late complication following autologous bone marrow transplantation for non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma. J Clin Oncol. 1994;12:2535–2542.

103. 103Krishnan A, Bhatia S, Slovak ML, et al. Predictors of therapy-related leukemia and myelodysplasia following autologous transplantation for lymphoma: an assessment of risk factors. Blood. 2000;95:1588–1593. MEDLINE

104. 104Micallef INM, Lillington DM, Apostolidis J, et al. Therapy-related myelodysplasia and secondary acute myelogenous leukemia after high-dose therapy with autologous hematopoietic progenitor-cell support for lymphoid malignancies. J Clin Oncol. 2000;18:947–955.

105. 105Milligan DW, Ruiz de Elvira MC, Kolb H-J, et al. Secondary leukaemia and myelodysplasia after autografting for lymphoma: results from the EBMT-EBMT Lymphoma and Late Effects Working Parties. Br J Haematol. 1999;106:1020–1026. MEDLINE | CrossRef

106. 106Tam CS, Seymour JF, Prince HM, et al. Treatment-related myelodysplasia following fludarabine combination chemotherapy. Haematologica. 2006;91:1546–1550.

107. 107Fialkow PJ, Thomas ED, Bryant JI, Neiman PE. Leukaemic transformation of engrafted human marrow cells in vivo. Lancet. 1971;1:251–255. MEDLINE

108. 108Cornelius EA. Rapid viral induction of murine lymphomas in the graft-versus-host reaction. J Exp Med. 1972;136:1533–1544. MEDLINE | CrossRef

109. 109Schwartz RS. Immunoregulation, oncogenic viruses, and malignant lymphomas. Lancet. 1972;1:1266–1269. MEDLINE

110. 110Gleichmann E, Melief CJ, Gleichmann H. Lymphomagenesis and autoimmunization caused by reactions of T-lymphocytes to incompatible structures of the major histocompatibility complex: a concept of pathogenesis. (review) Rec Results Cancer Res. 1978;64:292–315.

111. 111Thomas ED, Bryant JI, Buckner CD, et al. Leukaemic transformation of engrafted human marrow cells in vivo. Lancet. 1972;1:1310–1313. MEDLINE

112. 112Cornelius EA. Rapid immunological induction of murine lymphomas: evidence for a viral etiology. Science. 1972;177:524–525. MEDLINE

113. 113Katz F, Reeves BR, Alexander S, Kearney L, Chessells J. Leukaemia arising in donor cells following allogeneic bone marrow transplantation for beta thalassaemia demonstrated by immunological, DNA and molecular cytogenetic analysis. Br J Haematol. 1993;85:326–331. MEDLINE | CrossRef

114. 114Brown SA, Bashey A, Schey SA. Donor cell leukaemia—an unresolved problem. Eur J Haematol. 1995;54:198–199. MEDLINE | CrossRef

115. 115Niederwieser DW, Appelbaum FR, Gastl G, et al. Inadvertent transmission of a donor’s acute myeloid leukemia in bone marrow transplantation for chronic myelocytic leukemia. N Engl J Med. 1990;322:1794–1796. MEDLINE | CrossRef

116. 116Bodo I, Peters M, Radich JP, et al. Donor-derived acute promyelocytic leukemia in a liver-transplant recipient. N Engl J Med. 1999;341:807–813. MEDLINE | CrossRef

117. 117Au WY, Pang A, Chan EC, Chu KM, Shek TW, Kwong YL. Epstein-barr virus-related gastric adenocarcinoma: an early secondary cancer post hemopoietic stem cell transplantation. Gastroenterology. 2005;129:2058–2063. Abstract | Full Text | Full-Text PDF (348 KB) | CrossRef

118. 118Hebner CM, Laimins LA. Human papillomaviruses: basic mechanisms of pathogenesis and oncogenicity. Rev Med Virol. 2006;16:83–97. MEDLINE | CrossRef

119. 119Children’s Oncology Group. Long-Term Follow-Up Guidelines for Survivors of Childhood, Adolescent, and Young Adult Cancers. Version 2.0, March 2006. (www.survivorshipguidelines.org) [accessed May 19, 2007].

City of Hope Comprehensive Cancer Center, Duarte, California

Correspondence and reprint requests: Thomas Lowe, MD, City of Hope Comprehensive Cancer Center, Division of Medical Oncology and Therapeutics Reasearch, 1500 East Duarte Road, Duarte, CA 91010.

PII: S1083-8791(07)00349-7

doi:10.1016/j.bbmt.2007.07.002

5 of 21