Transplant recipients have elevated cancer risk, but it is unknown if cancer risk differs across race and ethnicity as in the general population. U.S. kidney recipients (N=87,895) in the Transplant Cancer Match Study between 1992 and 2008 were evaluated for racial/ethnic differences in risk for six common cancers after transplantation. Compared to white recipients, black recipients had lower incidence of non-Hodgkin lymphoma (NHL) (adjusted incidence rate ratio [aIRR] 0.60, p<0.001) and higher incidence of kidney (aIRR 2.09, p<0.001) and prostate cancer (aIRR 2.14, p<0.001); Hispanic recipients had lower incidence of NHL (aIRR 0.64, p=0.001), and lung (aIRR 0.41, p<0.001), breast (aIRR 0.53, p=0.003) and prostate cancer (aIRR 0.72, p=0.05). Colorectal cancer incidence was similar across groups. Standardized incidence ratios (SIRs) measured the effect of transplantation on cancer risk and were similar for most cancers (p≥0.1). However, black and Hispanic recipients had larger increases in kidney cancer risk with transplantation (SIRs: 8.96 in blacks, 5.95 in Hispanics vs. 4.44 in whites), and only blacks had elevated prostate cancer risk following transplantation (SIR: 1.21). Racial/ethnic differences in cancer risk after transplantation mirror general population patterns, except for kidney and prostate cancers where differences reflect the effects of end-stage renal disease or transplantation.
Kidney transplantation offers improved survival and quality of life compared to other treatments for end-stage renal disease (ESRD) [
In the U.S. general population, cancer risk varies substantially across different races and in people of Hispanic ethnicity compared with non-Hispanics. Compared to whites, blacks have increased risk for cancers of the lung (among men), kidney, colorectum, prostate, pancreas, liver, and esophagus, as well as for multiple myeloma [
We are unaware of any previous research into racial/ethnic differences in cancer risk after transplantation. In the present study, we used several approaches to understand if different racial/ethnic groups face different risks for cancer after transplantation. First, we compared the incidence of common cancers among kidney recipients according to race/ethnicity. Since baseline (general population) cancer risks vary by race/ethnicity, we also explored whether the risk attributable to the transplant differed across groups. Finally, since risk of one of the cancers of interest (namely, kidney cancer) is elevated among people with ESRD [
The Transplant Cancer Match Study links data from the Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients (SRTR, 1987-2008) with 14 population-based U.S. cancer registries (
In the present study, we included kidney-only recipients classified by the SRTR as white, black/African American, or Hispanic/Latino. The SRTR race/ethnicity variable is derived from kidney transplant candidate registry forms completed by transplant centers as required by participation in the U.S. transplant network. Multiple races/ethnicities may be marked for a given individual, although in practice more than 99% of candidates have a single race/ethnicity entered. In our analysis, any recipient with the category Hispanic/Latino indicated was included in our Hispanic category. This approach assumes that remaining recipients categorized as white are non-Hispanic whites, and those categorized as black are non-Hispanic black, although it is likely that the white and black categories include some Hispanics.
For kidney recipients, follow-up started at transplantation and ended at death, graft failure, retransplantation, loss of follow-up by the transplant registry, or end of cancer registry coverage. Recipients were further restricted to those who received their transplant during years of cancer registry coverage between 1992 and 2008. We used the linked cancer registry data to identify incident cancers following transplantation. We focused on the six most common cancers after kidney transplantation: NHL, and cancers of the lung, kidney, colorectum, prostate, and breast. Breast cancer analyses were limited to female recipients; prostate cancer analyses were limited to male recipients.
Because kidney cancer incidence is markedly elevated in ESRD patients [
For kidney recipients, we used Poisson regression to quantify racial/ethnic differences in cancer incidence (the number of cases observed per unit person-time at risk) after transplantation. Incidence rate ratios (IRRs) comparing recipients were adjusted for age at transplant (0-35, 36-50, 51-60, >60), gender, calendar year of transplant (1987-1996, 1997-2003, 2004-2008), retransplantation (i.e., whether this was a first kidney vs. subsequent kidney transplant), and HLA mismatch (1-6 vs. 0).
As noted above, racial/ethnic differences in cancer incidence after transplantation could be caused by different baseline cancer incidence in the general population, different risks attributable to transplantation, or both. To test for differences in the effect of transplantation, we calculated the standardized incidence ratio (SIR) of each cancer of interest separately for each racial/ethnic group. The SIR compares cancer risk in kidney transplant recipients to people in the general population who are demographically similar, including in terms of race/ethnicity. The SIR is the observed count of cancers divided by the expected count, which is calculated by applying general population rates to person-time in the transplant cohort stratified by gender, age, race/ethnicity, and calendar year. For whites and blacks, the general population rates were derived from data from all participating cancer registries. For Hispanics, general population rates were from NCI's Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results program (SEER,
Since kidney cancer is associated with ESRD, we did an additional set of analyses to clarify the relationship between race/ethnicity, ESRD, and kidney cancer risk. First, we calculated SIRs for kidney candidates vs. the general population, similar to the approach for recipients stratified by race/ethnicity. Second, we compared kidney cancer incidence in kidney recipients and candidates separately for each race/ethnic group, adjusting for attained age (0-14, 15-29, 30-44, 45-59, >59), gender, and attained calendar year (1992-1996, 1997-2003, 2004-2008) using Poisson regression. We then assessed whether these IRRs differed across the race/ethnicity groups by testing for an interaction between candidate/recipient status and race/ethnicity.
All p-values were two-sided and a p-value of 0.05 was considered significant. Analyses were performed using Stata 12.0/MP for Linux (StataCorp,
There were 87,895 patients in the Transplant Cancer Match Study who underwent kidney transplantation between 1992 and 2008, of whom 56.7% were white, 23.5% black, and 19.8% Hispanic. Demographic characteristics differed slightly among the racial/ethnic groups (
As shown in
Compared to the same racial/ethnic group in the general population, kidney recipients in all racial/ethnic groups had higher risk of NHL and kidney cancer (
As shown in
Among kidney recipients, risk for several common cancers differs by race/ethnicity. Black kidney recipients have a higher risk for kidney cancer and prostate cancer, and lower risk for NHL and breast cancer than white kidney recipients. Hispanic kidney recipients have a lower risk for NHL, lung cancer, prostate cancer, and breast cancer compared to white kidney recipients. We found that most of these racial/ethnic differences after transplantation were attributable to baseline differences in risks of cancer, since the cancer risk attributable to transplantation (as assessed by the SIR) was similar between races/ethnicities. We discuss below two exceptions to this pattern—kidney and prostate cancers—for which varying SIRs suggest different effects of transplantation and ESRD on risk across racial/ethnic groups.
First, though, we highlight that in the U.S. general population, racial/ethnic groups have different risks for each of the cancers that we studied. Compared to whites, blacks have increased risk for lung, kidney, colorectal, and prostate cancers while Hispanics have decreased risk for lung, kidney, and colorectal cancers [
Transplantation has a variable effect on risk for specific cancers [
SIRs were similar across races/ethnicities with the exception of kidney cancer and prostate cancer. This finding suggests that for many cancer outcomes, the cancer risk attributable to transplantation is similar across racial/ethnic groups. That is, the biological effects of transplantation add to other risk factors to promote the development of cancer similarly across racial/ethnic groups, and transplantation preserves the relative ranking in cancer risk among groups. For example, in lung cancer, the prevalence of smoking or its effects may differ by race/ethnicity, but immunosuppression or other transplant-related factors amplify the risk associated with smoking with the same intensity across racial/ethnic categories. Among female recipients, the deficit of breast cancer appeared to be stronger in blacks than whites (
In contrast, kidney cancer risk was elevated for all kidney recipients compared to the general population, but it increased more for black kidney recipients than for white or Hispanic recipients. However, when compared to kidney candidates, we observed that recipients actually had less risk. Thus, the increased risk for kidney cancer among black kidney recipients does not appear to be attributable to transplantation: instead there are strong racial/ethnic differences in risk among kidney candidates. Given the association of kidney cancer with acquired polycystic kidney disease (APKD) and the increased prevalence of APKD with time on dialysis [
For prostate cancer, the risk was lower in white and Hispanic kidney recipients than in the general population, while for black men the risk was actually increased after transplantation. Because a large fraction of prostate cancers are detected in asymptomatic men due to screening [
Strengths of our study include use of a large, nationally representative cohort of ethnically diverse kidney recipients. Cancer ascertainment was based on cancer registry data with mandatory reporting, and was reliable and uniform across racial/ethnic groups. Nonetheless, any study that examines differences in racial/ethnic groups must acknowledge the imperfect nature of these classifications. We relied on transplant centers’ classification of recipients at the time of initial evaluation for transplantation, and the white and black categories likely included an unknown proportion of Hispanics. Furthermore, our Hispanic category represents a heterogeneous population in terms of genetic background, culture, and duration of U.S. residence. In general, race/ethnicity serves as a marker for other genetic, exposure, and lifestyle factors [
To conclude, we found that cancer risk varies by race/ethnicity in kidney recipients. For the most part, these differences parallel the patterns seen in the general population, suggesting that transplantation has a consistent effect across groups on underlying biological processes and preserves the underlying racial/ethnic differences in cancer risk. Nonetheless, the risk attributable to transplantation or ESRD for kidney and prostate cancer was increased in blacks compared to whites or Hispanics. Further research should aim to elucidate the mechanisms that underlie racial/ethnic differences in cancer risk among transplant recipients and candidates and to determine optimal cancer screening and prevention measures.
The authors gratefully acknowledge the support and assistance provided by individuals at the Health Resources and Services Administration (including Monica Lin), the SRTR (Ajay Israni, Bertram Kasiske, Paul Newkirk, Jon Snyder), and the following cancer registries: the states of California (Christina Clarke), Colorado (Jack Finch), Connecticut (Lou Gonsalves), Georgia (Rana Bayakly), Hawaii (Marc Goodman), Iowa (Charles Lynch), Illinois (Lori Koch), Michigan (Glenn Copeland), New Jersey (Karen Pawlish, Xiaoling Niu), New York (Amy Kahn), North Carolina (Chandrika Rao), Texas (Melanie Williams), and Utah (Janna Harrell), and the Seattle-Puget Sound area of Washington (Margaret Madeleine). We also thank analysts at Information Management Services for programming support (David Castenson, Ruth Parsons).
The views expressed in this paper are those of the authors and should not be interpreted to reflect the views or policies of the National Cancer Institute, Health Resources and Services Administration, SRTR, cancer registries, or their contractors. This research was supported in part by the Intramural Research Program of the National Cancer Institute and by training grant number T32CA126607, Clinical and Laboratory Research Training for Surgical Oncologists.
During the initial period when registry linkages were performed, the SRTR was managed by Arbor Research Collaborative for Health in Ann Arbor, MI (contract HHSH234200537009C); beginning in September 2010, the SRTR was managed by Minneapolis Medical Research Foundation in Minneapolis, MN (HHSH250201000018C). The following cancer registries were supported by the National Program of Cancer Registries of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention: California (agreement 1U58 DP000807-01), Colorado (U58 DP000848-04), Georgia (5U58DP000817-05), Illinois (5658DP000805-04), Michigan (5U58DP000812-03), New Jersey (5U58/DP000808-05), New York (15-0351), North Carolina (U58DP000832), and Texas (5U58DP000824-04). The following cancer registries were supported by the SEER Program of the National Cancer Institute: California (contracts HHSN261201000036C, HHSN261201000035C, and HHSN261201000034C), Connecticut (HHSN261201000024C), Hawaii (HHSN261201000037C, N01-PC-35137, and N01-PC-35139), Iowa (N01-PC-35143), New Jersey (HHSN261201000027C N01-PC-54405), Seattle-Puget Sound (N01-PC-35142), and Utah (HHSN261201000026C). Additional support was provided by the states of California, Colorado, Connecticut, Illinois, Iowa, New Jersey, New York (Cancer Surveillance Improvement Initiative 14-2491), Texas, and Washington, as well as the Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center in Seattle, WA.
Disclosures
The authors of this manuscript have no conflicts of interest to disclose as described by the
non-Hodgkin lymphoma
adjusted incidence rate ratio
standardized incidence ratio
end-stage renal disease
United States
Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients
Surveillance Epidemiology and End Results
acquired polycystic kidney disease
Demographic characteristics of U.S. kidney recipients in the Transplant Cancer Match Study by race/ethnicity
| White N (%) 49,827 (100) | Black N (%) 20,678 (100) | Hispanic N (%) 17,390 (100) | |
|---|---|---|---|
|
| |||
| 0-35 | 12,709 (25.5) | 5,635 (27.3) | 6,176 (35.5) |
| 36-50 | 16,415 (32.9) | 7,420 (35.9) | 5,428 (31.2) |
| 51-60 | 11,863 (23.8) | 4,951 (23.9) | 3,543 (20.4) |
| >60 | 8,840 (17.7) | 2,672 (12.9) | 2,243 (12.9) |
|
| |||
| Male | 30,139 (60.5) | 12,094 (58.5) | 10,363 (59.6) |
| Female | 19,688 (39.5) | 8,584 (41.5) | 7,027 (40.4) |
|
| |||
| 1992-1996 | 12,176 (24.4) | 4,190 (20.3) | 3,215 (18.5) |
| 1997-2003 | 23,056 (46.3) | 9,545 (46.1) | 7,772 (44.7) |
| 2004-2008 | 14,595 (29.3) | 6,943 (33.6) | 6,403 (36.8) |
|
| |||
| No | 44,052 (88.4) | 19,051 (92.1) | 15,992 (92.0) |
| Yes | 5,775 (11.6) | 1,627 (7.9) | 1,398 (8.0) |
|
| |||
| 0 | 8,406 (16.9) | 1,409 (6.8) | 2,539 (14.6) |
| 1-6 | 40,935 (82.2) | 19,129 (92.5) | 14,670 (84.4) |
| Missing | 486 (1.0) | 140 (0.7) | 181 (1.0) |
Incidence of cancer among kidney recipients according to race/ethnicity.
| Cancer Outcome | Incidence per 100,000 person years (n) | Adjusted incidence rate ratio (95% CI), p-value | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| White | Black | Hispanic | Black vs. white | Hispanic vs. white | |
|
| 167.3 (360) | 95.7 (71) | 105.6 (74) | 0.60 (0.46-0.77) | 0.64 (0.49-0.82) |
|
| 126.0 (271) | 129.4 (96) | 41.4 (29) | 1.17 (0.93-1.49) | 0.41 (0.28-0.60) |
|
| 93.4 (201) | 190.0 (141) | 98.5 (69) | 2.09 (1.68-2.60) | 1.16 (0.88-1.53) |
|
| 60.0 (129) | 64.7 (48) | 31.4 (22) | 1.21 (0.87-1.69) | 0.65 (0.41-1.02) |
|
| 171.5 (221) | 373.5 (157) | 108.4 (45) | 2.14 (1.75-2.63) | 0.72 (0.52-0.99) |
|
| 184.3 (164) | 105.7 (34) | 91.1 (26) | 0.62 (0.43-0.91) | 0.53 (0.35-0.80) |
Poisson models are adjusted for age at transplant, gender, calendar year of transplant, retransplantation and zero mismatch.
Comparison of cancer risk in kidney recipients with risk in the general population, according to race/ethnicity
| Cancer Outcome | Standardized incidence ratio (95% CI) | P-value for difference in SIRs | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| White | Black | Hispanic | Black vs. white | Hispanic vs. white | |
|
| 6.02 (5.43-6.68) | 4.87 (3.80-6.14) | 5.57 (4.37-6.99) | 0.1 | 0.5 |
|
| 1.39 (1.23-1.57) | 1.34 (1.08-1.63) | 1.33 (0.89-1.91) | 0.7 | 0.8 |
|
| 4.44 (3.84-5.09) | 8.96 (7.54-10.57) | 5.95 (4.63-7.53) | <0.001 | 0.02 |
|
| 0.94 (0.78-1.12) | 0.93 (0.68-1.23) | 0.75 (0.47-1.13) | 0.9 | 0.3 |
|
| 0.75 (0.65-0.85) | 1.21 (1.03-1.42) | 0.70 (0.51-0.94) | <0.001 | 0.7 |
|
| 0.91 (0.77-1.06) | 0.61 (0.43-0.86) | 0.77 (0.50-1.12) | 0.04 | 0.4 |
Standardized incidence ratios (SIR) are the observed count of each cancer divided by the expected count calculated by applying general population rates to person-time in the transplant cohort stratified by gender, age at transplant, race/ethnicity, and calendar year of transplant. General population rates were derived from all participating cancer registries (whites and blacks) and SEER registries (Hispanics). Poisson regression was used to compare SIRs between racial/ethnic groups.
Comparison of kidney cancer risk in candidates for kidney transplantation, kidney recipients, and the general population, according to race/ethnicity.
| White | Black | Hispanic | |
|---|---|---|---|
|
| 5.87 (5.15-6.65) | 14.20 (12.85-15.64) | 6.99 (5.77-8.40) |
|
| 4.44 (3.84-5.09) | 8.96 (7.54-10.57) | 5.95 (4.63-7.53) |
|
| 0.80 (0.65-0.97) | 0.68 (0.57-0.81) | 0.86 (0.66-1.13) |
Standardized incidence ratios (SIR) are the observed count of each cancer divided by the expected count calculated by applying general population rates to person-time in the cohort stratified by those variables available for both recipients and candidates, namely: gender, attained age, race/ethnicity, and attained year. General population rates were derived from all participating cancer registries (whites and blacks) and SEER registries (Hispanics). Poisson regression was used to compare adjusted incidence rates (aIRR) between recipients and candidates and to test for interaction by racial/ethnic group.