OBJECTIVE: Uveal melanoma is the most prevalent intraocular malignancy in adults, derived from uveal tract melanocytes. This study focuses on the frequency and risk of second primary malignancies in UM patients.
METHODS: A PubMed search (1980-2023) identified studies on SPM incidence in UM patients. From 191 references, 14 studies were chosen, focusing on UM, SPMs, and analysing data on demographics and types of neoplasms.
RESULTS: Among 31,235 UM patients in 14 studies, 4695 had 4730 SPMs (15.03% prevalence). Prostate (15%), breast (12%), and colorectal (9%) cancers were most common. Digestive system malignancies were highest (19%), with colorectal cancer leading (51%). Breast and prostate cancers were prevalent in respective systems. Lung, bladder, and non-Hodgkin\'s lymphoma were also notable. The study observed an increasing trend in the frequency of SPMs over time, reflecting broader trends in cancer survivorship and the growing prevalence of multiple malignancies.
CONCLUSIONS: The study highlights a significant presence of SPMs in UM patients, with an increasing trend in frequency over time, emphasizing prostate and breast cancers. This underscores the need for focused surveillance and tailored follow-up for UM survivors, considering their higher risk of additional malignancies. Future research should further investigate SPM aetiology in UM patients.

BACKGROUND: Studies on the risk of new primary cancer in patients with posterior uveal melanoma (UM) have produced conflicting results, and the role of socioeconomic status (SES) is unknown. The purpose of this population-based matched cohort study was to determine the risk of new primary cancer following the diagnosis of posterior UM.
METHODS: 2179 patients with posterior UM 1968-2016 and 22,717 matched controls without cancer were included. Incidence and time-dependent hazard ratio (HR) of new primary cancer were described, and the effect of SES was emphasized in a sub-cohort.
RESULTS: The incidence of new primary cancer was increased in patients with posterior UM, rate ratio (RR) 1.21 (95% CI: 1.08; 1.35), but the specific cancer types did not differ compared to the controls. The rate of new primary cancer following the diagnosis of posterior UM was significantly increased 2-5 years (HR 1.49 (95% CI: 1.23; 1.80)) and 11-15 years (HR: 1.49 (95% CI: 1.12; 1.99)), and adjusting for SES did not change the rate (HR 1.35 (95% CI:1.20; 1.55)).
CONCLUSIONS: Patients with posterior UM have an increased risk of new primary cancer independent of SES. No difference in incidence of specific cancer type was observed compared to the control group.

Supernumerary breast components occur predominantly between the breast and umbilicus. Carcinoma of this ectopic, or accessory breast tissue (ABT), is exceedingly rare, accounting for <1% of breast cancer cases. Historically, ectopic breast carcinoma was considered aggressive with poor outcome. In 1995, Evans et al reported 90 cases spanning from 1929 to 1993 with a 9.4% survival beyond 4 years. More contemporary studies reveal improvement in both treatment and survival. There is currently no consensus on whether prophylactic excision of an ipsilateral supernumerary nipple at the time of initial breast cancer diagnosis is necessary. The following describes a patient with an ipsilateral tumor uniquely located within her supernumerary nipple 5 years after mastectomy.

OBJECTIVE: We describe several methodological issues that were addressed in conducting a Danish population-based matched cohort study comparing rates of new primary cancers (NPCs) in men with and without prostate cancer (PC).
METHODS: We matched 30,220 men with PC to 151,100 men without PC (comparators) on age (±2 years) and PC diagnosis/index date. We focused on several methodological issues: 1) to address survival differences between the cohorts we compared rates with and without censoring comparators on the date their matched PC patient died or was censored; 2) to address diagnostic bias, we excluded men with a history of cancer from the comparator cohort; 3) to address prostate cancer immunity, we graphed the hazard of NPC in both cohorts, with and without prostate cancer as an outcome; 4) we used empirical Bayes methods to explore the effect of adjusting for multiple comparisons.
RESULTS: After 18 months of follow-up, cumulative person-time was lower in the PC than comparator cohort due to higher mortality among PC patients. Terminating person-time in comparators at the matched PC patient\'s death or loss to follow-up resulted in comparable person-time up to 30 months of follow-up and lower person-time among comparators thereafter. The hazard of NPC was lower among men with PC than comparators throughout follow-up. There was little difference in rates beyond the first four years of follow-up after removing PC as an outcome. Empirical Bayes adjustment for multiple comparisons had little effect on the estimates.
CONCLUSIONS: Addressing the issues of competing risks, treatment interference or diagnostic bias, prostate cancer immunity due to radical prostatectomy, and multiple comparisons lowered the deficit rate of NPCs among men with a history of PC compared with those without PC. However, the differing rates of NPCs may also be due to risk factor differences between the cohorts.

BACKGROUND: Prostate cancer (PC) survivors may have an increased risk of new primary cancers (NPCs) due to shared risk factors or PC-directed treatments.
METHODS: Using Danish registries, we conducted a cohort study of men with (n=30,220) and without PC (n=151,100) (comparators), matched 1:5 on age and PC diagnosis/index date. We computed incidence rates of NPCs per 10,000 person years (PY) and associated 95% confidence intervals (CI), and used Cox proportional hazards regression to compute hazard ratios (HRs) and 95%CI, adjusting for comorbidities. In order to obviate any impact of shorter survival among prostate cancer patients, we censored comparator patients when the matched prostate cancer patient died or was censored.
RESULTS: Follow-up spanned 113,487PY and 462,982PY in the PC and comparison cohorts, respectively. 65% of the cohorts were aged >70 years at diagnosis. Among PC patients, 51% had distant/unspecified stage, and 63% had surgery as primary treatment. The PC cohort had lower incidence of NPCs than their comparators. The adjusted HR of NPC among men with PC versus the comparators was 0.84 (95%CI=0.80, 0.88). Lowest HRs were among older men, those with distant stage, and were particularly evident for cancers of the brain, liver, pancreas, respiratory, upper gastrointestinal, and urinary systems.
CONCLUSIONS: We find no evidence of an increased risk of NPCs among men with PC. The deficit of NPCs among men with PC may be a true effect but is more likely due to lower levels of risk factors (e.g., smoking) in PC patients versus comparators, clinical consideration of cancers at new organs as metastases rather than new primaries, or under-recording/under-reporting of NPCs among PC patients.