ArticleCancer medicine2024
Late subsequent leukemia after childhood cancer: A report from the Childhood Cancer Survivor Study (CCSS).
Article in Cancer medicine, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Repair of DNA double-strand breaks after low radiation doses in childhood cancer survivors and matched cancer-free individuals.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2026Article
- Changes in Medicaid Enrollment Among Adult Survivors of Childhood Cancer After Medicaid Expansion: A Report From the Childhood Cancer Survivor Study.JCO oncology practice · 2026Article
- Multiple Basal Cell Carcinomas in a Long-Term Survivor of Childhood ALL and HSCT-A Call for Dermatologic Vigilance.Life (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
- Late subsequent leukemia after childhood cancer: A report from the Childhood Cancer Survivor Study (CCSS).Cancer medicine · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
14 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundSubsequent short-latency leukemias are well-described among survivors of childhood cancer. However, late (5-14.9 years from diagnosis, LL) and very late (≥15 years from diagnosis, VLL) subsequent leukemias have not been well studied. We assessed risk factors, prevalence, and outcomes for LL and VLL in the Childhood Cancer Survivor Study cohort.
methodsSubsequent leukemias, among 25,656 five-year survivors, were self-reported and confirmed by pathology review. Standardized incidence ratios (SIR) and cumulative incidences were calculated, and relative risks (RR) were estimated using Cox regression for exposures.
resultsSeventy-seven survivors developed subsequent leukemia, 49 survivors with LL (median time from diagnosis 7.8 years, range 5.0-14.5 years) and 28 with VLL (median time from diagnosis 25.4 years, range 15.9-42.8 years), with a cumulative incidence of 0.23% (95% CI 0.18%-0.30%) 20 years from diagnosis for all subsequent leukemias. The most common leukemia subtypes were acute myeloid leukemia, myelodysplastic syndrome, and chronic myeloid leukemia. Compared to the general population, survivors were at increased risk, for developing LL (SIR 9.3, 95% CI 7.0-12.1) and VLL (SIR 5.9, 95% CI 3.9-8.4). In multivariable relative risk analyses, cumulative epipodophyllotoxin dose >4000 mg/m
conclusionsIn this large series of late subsequent leukemias, survivors of childhood cancer are at increased risk, with no evidence of plateau over time. We observed most risk among survivors who received high cumulative doses of epipodophyllotoxins. Ongoing consideration for this late effect should continue beyond 10 years.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.