Cohort studyindependent cross-checkabstract checked★ key study I-CHM-110 standard review

Leukaemia-type cancers after breast cancer treatment

Risk of marrow neoplasms after adjuvant breast cancer therapy: the national comprehensive cancer network experience.

Overview

Wolff AC et al.. J Clin Oncol 2015 · PMID 25534386 · DOI 10.1200/JCO.2013.54.6119

About 5 in 1000 treated women developed a marrow cancer within 10 years.

Does the study support the specific claim? Yes · Methodological quality: moderate

Original publication

Plain-language summary

Study explained simply
What did the researchers want to find out?

Measure risk of marrow cancers after treatment

How was the study done?

Cohort of 20,063 patients

How many people, animals or samples were studied?

US academic centres

What was actually found?

Low but real risk that keeps rising after 5 years

How large was the observed effect?

0.24% at 5 y, 0.48% at 10 y

What do the results mean in everyday life?

Rare, but a reason for follow-up

What are the study's limitations?

Few events

What does it say about Elawady's specific claim?

Supports existence of second cancers; shows they are rare

Do the results apply to Germany and Europe?

High

What can explicitly not be concluded from this study?

Cannot show harm outweighs benefit

Scientific in-depth review

1. Full reference

Authors
Wolff AC et al.
Journal
J Clin Oncol
Year
2015
Identifier
PMID 25534386 DOI 10.1200/JCO.2013.54.6119
Verification
verified – PubMed efetch 2026-10-26 (PublicationType and CommentsCorrections checked); Crossref 2026-10-26
Retracted
no
Corrections

ErratumIn J Clin Oncol 2015;33(10):1227 (PubMed); Crossref correction 10.1200/jco.2015.61.6656; no retraction

Extent checked
abstract only
Conflicts of interest and funding

NCI grants; COI not stated in abstract.

2. Research question

What is the risk of marrow neoplasms (MDS/AML and others) after adjuvant breast cancer therapy?

3. Study design and population

Study design
Cohort study – Retrospective multicentre cohort (NCCN database)
Population

Patients with stage I-III breast cancer at US academic centres

Country

USA

Period

Treated 1998-2007; median follow-up 5.1 years

Sample size

20,063

Inclusion and exclusion criteria

Stage I-III breast cancer

4. Methods and endpoints

Exposure / intervention

Adjuvant chemotherapy and/or radiotherapy

Comparator

Surgery only

Endpoints

Marrow neoplasms (myeloid and lymphoid)

Statistical methods

Cumulative incidence with competing risks; HRs; comparison with SEER

5. Actual results

Results

50 patients developed marrow neoplasm (42 myeloid, 8 lymphoid). HR 6.8 (1.3-36.1) after surgery plus chemotherapy and 7.6 (1.6-35.8) after all modalities vs no chemotherapy. Rates per 1000 person-years: 0.16 (surgery), 0.43 (plus radiation), 0.46 (plus chemotherapy), 0.54 (all three). Cumulative incidence 0.24% at 5 years and 0.48% at 10 years.

Absolute risks

Cumulative incidence 0.48% at 10 years

Authors' conclusion

Marrow-neoplasm risk after radiation and/or adjuvant chemotherapy was low but higher than previously described and continued beyond 5 years; individual risk must be balanced against the absolute survival benefit of chemotherapy.

6. Strengths

  • Large cohort, competing-risk methods
  • Absolute rates reported

7. Weaknesses

  • Observational; few events (wide CIs)
  • Academic centres only

8. Risk of bias

Orienting tool
ROBINS-E
Type of assessment
simplified assessment (abstract only)
Full formal assessment
no
Overall risk of bias
some concerns
Rationale

Observational cohort; confounding by indication possible but direction of harm consistent with biology.

9. Assessment of the statistical interpretation

HRs have very wide CIs (few events in surgery-only group); absolute rates are the informative measure (stats/C-CHM-03.py).

10. Relevance to the specific claim

Confirms therapy-related marrow cancers and quantifies them as rare (about 0.5% at 10 years).

11. Independent contrary findings

EBCTCG 2023 (I-CHM-101) gives a similar order of magnitude (AML about 1 per 700).

12. Transferability to Germany and Europe

Applicable to European adjuvant practice.

13. Overall methodological judgement

Real but rare harm, quantified.

Multidimensional assessment
Multidimensional assessment
Authenticity of the sourceverified
Methodological qualitymoderate
Risk of biassome concerns
Precision of resultslow
Directnessdirect
Reproducibilityreplicated
Consistency with the overall evidenceconsistent
Regional transferabilityhigh
Adequacy of the interpretation (by the archive)not applicable

14. Open questions

Risk beyond 10 years.

15. Linked fact checks