Chemotherapy and Risk of Subsequent Malignant Neoplasms in the Childhood Cancer Survivor Study Cohort
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: Therapeutic radiation in childhood cancer has decreased over time with a concomitant increase in chemotherapy. Limited data exist on chemotherapy-associated subsequent malignant neoplasm (SMN) risk. PATIENTS AND METHODS: SMNs occurring > 5 years from diagnosis, excluding nonmelanoma skin cancers, were evaluated in survivors diagnosed when they were < 21 years old, from 1970 to 1999 in the Childhood Cancer Survivor Study (median age at diagnosis, 7.0 years; median age at last follow-up, 31.8 years). Thirty-year SMN cumulative incidence and standardized incidence ratios (SIRs) were estimated by treatment: chemotherapy-only (n = 7,448), chemotherapy plus radiation (n = 10,485), radiation only (n = 2,063), or neither (n = 2,158). Multivariable models were used to assess chemotherapy-associated SMN risk, including dose-response relationships. RESULTS: ; 95% CI, 1.2 to 1.6). CONCLUSION: Childhood cancer survivors treated with chemotherapy only, particularly higher cumulative doses of platinum and alkylating agents, face increased SMN risk. Linear dose responses were seen between alkylating agents and SMN rates and between anthracyclines and breast cancer rates. Limiting cumulative doses and consideration of alternate chemotherapies may reduce SMN risk.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".