OBJECTIVE: To explore the prevalence of synchronous and metachronous tonsillar cancer in patients with base of tongue cancer, as well as identifying potential risk factors linked to these secondary malignancies. We aim to answer the following question: Should bilateral tonsillectomy be recommended to patients diagnosed with base of tongue cancer?
METHODS: A case-series study was conducted at Aarhus University Hospital, including all patients with histologically confirmed base of tongue squamous cell carcinoma treated between January 2012 and December 2021. Data from electronic patient records, including diagnosis of prior, synchronous or metachronous tonsillar cancer, demographics, and clinical features were analysed. Fisher\'s exact test was performed to assess factors associated with synchronous and metachronous tonsillar cancer.
RESULTS: Among 198 patients with base of tongue cancer, 5.6% had a history of tonsillar cancer, either prior to (4.5%), synchronous (0.5%), or metachronous (0.5%) to the base of tongue diagnosis. The prevalence of synchronous or metachronous tonsillar cancer among patients without previous bilateral tonsillectomy was 1.2%. Patients with tonsillar cancer were older, had heavier smoking histories, and exhibited less frequent P16-overexpression.
CONCLUSIONS: Our findings deepen understanding of tonsillar cancer in patients with base of tongue cancer. The prevalence of synchronous or metachronous tonsillar cancer was found to be relatively low, suggesting that routine tonsillectomy for all base of tongue cancer patients is not warranted.

Hodgkin lymphoma survivors who received mantle radiation are at risk of developing secondary malignant neoplasms. There is no established recommended screening guideline for this population. We discuss the case of a patient with a history of Hodgkin lymphoma status post-mantle field radiation, thyroid cancer status post-thyroidectomy, and now breast cancer following mantle radiation. The risk of adverse effects from mantle field radiation is well documented and includes secondary cancers of the thyroid, breast, lung, and cardiovascular disease. Advances in technology have led to an international paradigm shift in the management of Hodgkin lymphoma to reduce the diameter and dose of radiation based on the patient\'s anatomy. However, there is no consensus regarding the optimal frequency or modality of breast cancer screening in patients with Hodgkin lymphoma status post-mantle radiation who are now in remission. We discuss screening methods for this population, which has a high risk of developing breast cancer, and emphasize the need for personalized medicine.

UNASSIGNED: High-grade gliomas are central nervous system tumors conventionally treated with surgery followed by adjuvant chemoradiotherapy. Secondary cancer due to radiation therapy is a rare yet established phenomenon that typically occurs years after radiation therapy.
UNASSIGNED: In this case, we discuss an early presentation of a second cancer adjacent to the radiation field. This case report is of a 52-year-old male who developed a new scalp sarcoma at the site of primary surgery 8 months after radiation therapy. Genetic testing revealed a heterozygous missense variant in the NF1 gene, a variant of uncertain significance. The report highlights that this case does not conform to the expected criteria for postradiation sarcoma in terms of timing.
UNASSIGNED: Secondary cancers may arise earlier than expected, even in phenotypically normal patients, as they may have unmanifested variants of relevant mutations. The question of pre-radiotherapy screening for radiosensitivity syndromes and diseases requires further study, as current data are limited and do not provide enough insight into the significance of different genetic variants.

BACKGROUND: Hodgkin lymphoma (HL) survivors who received chest radiotherapy are at risk for breast cancer and cardiovascular disease, but screening adherence is low. We assessed the acceptability/feasibility of a web-based educational intervention and its impact on knowledge of health risks and screening.
METHODS: HL survivors were randomized to either an interactive online educational intervention or handouts only. Surveys were completed at baseline and 3 months post-intervention. We described the acceptability/feasibility of the intervention and compared knowledge between groups.
RESULTS: Fifty-two HL survivors participated; 27 in the intervention group and 25 in the control group. Eighteen (66%) intervention participants completed the intervention and reported high acceptability (89-100%). At baseline, adherence to breast cancer screening was low across all participants. Post-intervention, those in the intervention group more often than controls correctly identified breast cancer and echocardiogram screening guidelines (35% vs. 28%, P = 0.02 and 82% vs. 52%, P = 0.04) and reported knowing how to address potential complications from cancer treatments (87% vs. 64%, P = 0.03). We detected no increase in screening behavior post-intervention.
CONCLUSIONS: Online education modules for high-risk HL survivors are an acceptable method to improve knowledge of health risks and screening guidelines. Future interventions should focus on improving screening uptake in this population.
CONCLUSIONS: Web-based learning can be useful in increasing cancer survivor knowledge of their unique risks and screening recommendations but does not necessarily change patient behavior. Involvement in a cancer survivorship program can help assess individual barriers and monitor uptake of screening.

UNASSIGNED: Aplastic anemia (AA), characterized by hematopoietic stem cell deficiency, can evolve into different hematologic malignancies. Our understanding of the genetic basis and mechanisms of this progression remains limited.
UNASSIGNED: We retrospectively studied 9 acquired AA patients who later developed hematologic malignancies. Data encompassed clinical, laboratory, karyotype, and next-generation sequencing (NGS) information. We explored chromosomal alterations and mutation profiles to uncover genetic changes underlying the transition.
UNASSIGNED: Nine AA patients developed myelodysplastic syndrome (seven patients), acute myeloid leukemia (one patient), or chronic myelomonocytic leukemia (one patient). Among eight patients with karyotype results at secondary malignancy diagnosis, monosomy 7 was detected in three. Trisomy 1, der(1;7), del(6q), trisomy 8, and del(12p) were detected in one patient each. Among three patients with NGS results at secondary malignancy diagnosis, KMT2C mutation was detected in two patients. Acquisition of a PTPN11 mutation was observed in one patient who underwent follow-up NGS testing during progression from chronic myelomonocytic leukemia to acute myeloid leukemia.
UNASSIGNED: This study highlights the genetic dynamics in the progression from AA to hematologic malignancy. Monosomy 7\'s prevalence and the occurrence of PTPN11 mutations suggest predictive and prognostic significance. Clonal evolution underscores the complexity of disease progression.

BACKGROUND: Whether neoadjuvant chemoradiation for locally advanced rectal cancer (LARC) induces secondary cancers is controversial. This retrospective cohort study describes the incidence of secondary cancers in LARC patients.
METHODS: We compared 364 LARC patients who received conventional (50.4 Gy) or short course neoadjuvant radiation (25 Gy x 5 fractions) followed by resection to 142 patients with surgically resected rectal cancer who did not receive radiation at a single institution from 2004 to 2018. Secondary cancer was defined as any nonmetastatic noncolorectal malignancy diagnosed via biopsy or definitive imaging criteria at least 6 mo after completion of neoadjuvant therapy or after resection in the comparison group.
RESULTS: Among the neoadjuvant radiation group (364 patients, 40% female, age 61 ± 13 y), 32 patients developed 34 (9.3%) secondary cancers. Three cases involved a pelvic organ. Among the comparison group (142 patients, 39% female, age 64 ± 15 y), 15 patients (10.6%) developed a secondary cancer. Five cases involved pelvic organs. Secondary cancer incidence did not differ between groups. Latency period to secondary cancer diagnosis was 6.7 ± 4.3 y. Patients who received radiation underwent longer median follow-up (6.8 versus 4.5 y, P < 0.01) and were significantly less likely to develop a pelvic organ cancer (odds ratio 0.18; 95% confidence interval, 0.04-0.83; P = 0.02). No genetic mutations or cancer syndromes were identified among patients with secondary cancers.
CONCLUSIONS: Neoadjuvant chemoradiation is not associated with increased secondary cancer risk in LARC patients and may have a local protective effect on pelvic organs, especially prostate. Ongoing follow-up is critical to continue risk assessment.

UNASSIGNED: Patients with stage II seminoma have traditionally been treated with photons to the retroperitoneal and iliac space, which leads to a substantial dose bath to abdominal and pelvic organs at risk (OAR). As these patients are young and with excellent prognosis, reducing dose to OAR and thereby the risk of secondary cancer is of utmost importance. We compared IMPT to opposing IMRT fields and VMAT, assessing dose to OAR and both overall and organ-specific secondary cancer risk.
UNASSIGNED: A comparative treatment planning study was conducted on planning CT-scans from ten patients with stage II seminoma, treated with photons to a \'dog-leg\' field with doses ranging from 20 to 25 Gy and a 10 Gy sequential boost to the metastatic lymph node(s). Photon plans were either 3-4 field IMRT (Eclipse) or 1-2 arc VMAT (Pinnacle). Proton plans used robust (5 mm; 3.5%) IMPT (Eclipse), multi field optimization with 3 posterior fields supplemented by 2 anterior fields at the level of the iliac vessels. Thirty plans were generated. Mean doses to OARs were compared for IMRT vs IMPT and VMAT vs IMPT. The risk of secondary cancer was calculated according to the model described by Schneider, using excess absolute risk (EAR, per 10,000 persons per year) for body outline, stomach, duodenum, pancreas, bowel, bladder and spinal cord.
UNASSIGNED: Mean doses to all OARs were significantly lower with IMPT except similar kidney (IMRT) and spinal cord (VMAT) doses. The relative EAR for body outline was 0.59 for IMPT/IMRT (p < .05) and 0.33 for IMPT/VMAT (p < .05). Organ specific secondary cancer risk was also lower for IMPT except for pancreas and duodenum.
UNASSIGNED: Proton therapy reduced radiation dose to OAR compared to both IMRT and VMAT plans, and potentially reduce the risk of secondary cancer both overall and for most OAR.

We investigated the risk of secondary cancers in rectum and bladder for prostate cancer radiotherapy using a feasibility assessment tool. We calculated the risk of secondary cancer by generating a dose-volume histogram based on an ideal dose falloff function (f-value). This study found a smaller f-value was associated with a lower secondary cancer risk in the rectum but a higher risk in the bladder. The study suggests setting the f-value at 0-0.1 as the optimization goal for the rectum and 0.4 for the bladder is reasonable and feasible for reducing the risk of secondary cancer and other adverse events.

UNASSIGNED: The purpose of this study was to evaluate three techniques of irradiation of left-sided breast cancer patients, three-dimensional conformal radiotherapy (3D-CRT), hybrid Intensity-Modulated Radiotherapy (h-IMRT), and hybrid Volumetric-Modulated Arc Therapy (h-VMAT, h-ARC), in terms of dose distribution in the planning target volume (PTV) and organs at risk (OARs). The second aim was to estimate the projected relative risk of radiation-induced secondary cancers for hybrid techniques.
UNASSIGNED: Three treatment plans were prepared in 3D-CRT, h-IMRT, and h-VMAT techniques for each of the 40 patients, who underwent CT simulation in deep inspiration breath-hold (DIBH). For hybrid techniques, plans were created by combining 3D-CRT and dynamic fields with an 80%/20% dose ratio for 3D-CRT and IMRT or VMAT. Cumulative dose-volume histograms were used to compare dose distributions within the PTV and OARs (heart, left anterior descending coronary artery [LAD], left and right lung [LL, RL], right breast [RB]). Projected risk ratios for secondary cancers were estimated relative to 3D-CRT using the organ equivalent dose (OED) concept for the Schneider\'s linear exponential, plateau, and full mechanistic dose-response model.
UNASSIGNED: All plans fulfilled the PTV criterium: V95%≥95%. Compared to 3D-CRT, both hybrid techniques showed significantly better target coverage (PTV: V95%>98%, p < 0.001), and the best conformality was achieved by h-ARC plans (CI: 1.18 ± 0.09, p < 0.001). Compared to 3D-CRT and h-ARC, h-IMRT increased the average sum of monitor units (MU) over 129.9% (p < 0.001). H-ARC increased the mean dose of contralateral organs and the LL V5Gy parameter (p < 0.001). Both hybrid techniques significantly reduced the Dmax of the heart by 5 Gy. Compared to h-IMRT, h-ARC increased secondary cancer projected relative risk ratios for LL, RL, and RB by 18, 152, and 81%, respectively.
UNASSIGNED: The results confirmed that both hybrid techniques provide better target quality and OARs sparing than 3D-CRT. Hybrid VMAT delivers less MU compared to hybrid IMRT but may increase the risk of radiation-induced secondary malignancies.

The six-year ECHELON-1 update showed a survival advantage for frontline (1 L) A + AVD (brentuximab vedotin, doxorubicin, vinblastine, dacarbazine) vs ABVD (doxorubicin, bleomycin, vinblastine, dacarbazine) for stage III/IV classic Hodgkin lymphoma (cHL). As clinical trials have limited ability to track patients for extended periods, we developed an oncology simulation model using ECHELON-1 data to estimate population-based cHL outcomes in the US over 10 years (through 2031). The model included a scenario without (64.5% ABVD, 35.5% PET-adapted ABVD utilization) and scenarios with 1 L A + AVD (27%-80%k utilization). At 27%-80% A + AVD utilization, the model estimated 13.6%-31.7% fewer deaths, 2.4%-6.3% more patients ≥5 years progression free, 9.4%-24.4% fewer stem cell transplants (SCTs), and 7.8%-22.5% fewer second cancers over 10 years. These results suggest that the improved outcomes observed in the ECHELON-1 update with A + AVD vs ABVD may translate to more patients alive and fewer with primary relapsed/refractory cHL, SCTs, and second cancers.