ArticleNPJ precision oncology2026
Risk assessment of secondary primary malignancies: results from two large prospective European cohorts.
Article in NPJ precision oncology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Secondary primary malignancies (SPMs), new histologically distinct cancers that develop in patients with a history of primary tumors, represent a critical long-term adverse event in cancer survivorship. Although epidemiological studies have suggested associations between certain primary tumors and SPMs, systematic validation of their causal relationships is lacking. A Mendelian randomization analysis was employed to investigate the causal links between primary tumors and SPMs. This study systematically examined cancers spanning eight major human organ systems using data from two large European prospective cohorts: UK Biobank (31 cancer types) and FinnGen (28 cancer types). A meta-analysis of the two cohorts revealed that gastric cancer (GC) had a significant causal relationship with an increased risk of secondary esophageal cancer (odds ratio [OR] = 1.29, 95% confidence interval [95% CI]: 1.13-1.46, P < 0.001) and rectal cancer (OR = 1.13, 95% CI: 1.07-1.21, P < 0.001). Further, a single-cell sequencing analysis identified PLK1
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.