4.6 Article

Age of first cancer diagnosis and survival in Bloom syndrome

期刊

GENETICS IN MEDICINE
卷 24, 期 7, 页码 1476-1484

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1016/j.gim.2022.03.008

关键词

Bloom syndrome; Cancer; Diagnosis; Survival

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This study describes the spectrum of cancers observed in Bloom syndrome, as well as the survival and age of first cancer diagnosis. The findings highlight significant differences in survival and age of diagnosis among different tumor types and genotypes.
Purpose: This study aimed to describe the spectrum of cancers observed in Bloom Syndrome and the observed survival and age of first cancer diagnosis in Bloom syndrome as these are not well-defined. Methods: Data from the Bloom Syndrome Registry (BSR) was used for this study. Cancer history, ages of first cancer diagnosis, and ages of death were compiled from the BSR and analyzed. Results: Among the 290 individuals in the BSR, 155 (53%) participants developed 251 malignant neoplasms; 100 (65%) were diagnosed with 1 malignancy, whereas the remaining 55 (35%) developed multiple malignancies. Of the 251 neoplasms, 83 (33%) were hematologic and 168 (67%) were solid tumors. Hematologic malignancies (leukemia and lymphoma) were more common than any of the solid tumors. The most commonly observed solid tumors were colorectal, breast, and oropharyngeal. The cumulative incidence of any malignancy by age 40 was 83%. The median survival for all participants in the BSR was 36.2 years. There were no significant differences in time to first cancer diagnosis or survival by genotype among the study participants. Conclusion: We describe the spectrum of cancers observed in Bloom syndrome and the observed survival and age of first cancer diagnosis in Bloom syndrome. We also highlight the significant differences in survival and age of diagnosis seen among different tumor types and genotypes. (C) 2022 American College of Medical Genetics and Genomics. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据