4.7 Article

Increased Risk of Cancer Other Than Melanoma in CDKN2A Founder Mutation (p16-Leiden)-Positive Melanoma Families

期刊

CLINICAL CANCER RESEARCH
卷 14, 期 21, 页码 7151-7157

出版社

AMER ASSOC CANCER RESEARCH
DOI: 10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-08-0403

关键词

-

类别

资金

  1. Dutch Cancer Society
  2. The Netherlands Organization for Scientific Research
  3. Aspasia Fellowship of the Netherlands Organization for Scientific Research
  4. Cancer Research UK Programme Award [C588/A4994]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Purpose: We report the largest study to date analyzing the risk of cancers other than melanoma in melanoma families positive for the same CDKN2A mutation. Experimental Design: We studied family members of 22 families positive for the p16-Leiden founder mutation who had attended a surveillance clinic or were their close relatives. Within this cohort, observed and expected rates of cancer were computed by mutation status consisting of 221 (proven plus obligate) carriers, 639 (proven plus obligate) noncarriers, and 668 first-degree relatives whose carrier risk was estimated from the relationship to known carriers and the age and melanoma status of that person and their relatives. Results: Our analysis shows a relative risk (RR) of cancer other than melanoma and non-melanoma skin cancer of 4.4 [95% confidence interval (95% CI), 3.3-5.6], predominantly attributable to the increased risk for pancreatic cancer (RR, 46.6; 95% Cl, 24.7-76.4), but also for other cancers. We provide substantial proof for pancreatic cancer being a key component of the p16-Leiden phenotype. Inclusion of this cancer in a penetrance analysis leads to an estimated RR of pancreatic cancer for mutation carriers of 47.8 (95% Cl, 28.4-74.7). Conclusions: This study shows clear evidence of increased risk of cancers other than melanoma in CDKN2A families carrying the p16-Leiden mutation. Further research is necessary to determine if similar risks apply to families with CDKN2A mutations other than p16-Leiden.

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

4.7
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