Skip to main content
NIHPA Author Manuscripts logoLink to NIHPA Author Manuscripts
. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2023 Nov 17.
Published in final edited form as: Int J Cancer. 2018 Oct 3;143(11):2741–2748. doi: 10.1002/ijc.31735

Risk of Kaposi sarcoma after solid organ transplantation in the United States

Elizabeth K Cahoon 1, Martha S Linet 1, Christina A Clarke 2, Karen S Pawlish 3, Eric A Engels 1, Ruth M Pfeiffer 1
PMCID: PMC10655926  NIHMSID: NIHMS1941383  PMID: 29987894

Abstract

Due to treatment with immunosuppressive medications, solid organ transplant recipients have elevated risk for Kaposi sarcoma (KS), which is caused by human herpesvirus 8 (HHV8). Other risk factors for KS are poorly understood. We linked the United States solid organ transplant registry with 17 population-based cancer registries to ascertain KS incidence among 244,964 transplant recipients from 1987–2014. To compare incidence rates of KS according to patient and transplant characteristics, we calculated incidence rate ratios (IRRs) using Poisson regression. To compare associations of KS with other skin cancers occurring before or within 12 months of KS diagnosis, we computed odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) using conditional logistic regression. All statistical tests were two-sided. We identified 163 KS cases during follow-up. Among transplant recipients, we found significantly increased risk of KS associated with male sex (IRR = 1.87; 95%CI:1.32,2.71), nonwhite race (IRR = 2.67; 95%CI:1.92,3.72), non-US citizenship (IRR = 2.10; 95%CI:1.19,3.47), lung transplant (IRR = 2.22; 95%CI:1.03,4.24, vs. kidney), and older age at transplant. KS risk decreased significantly with time since transplant and recent calendar year, however, no specific induction or maintenance medication was associated with KS. KS incidence was not significantly associated with ambient ultraviolet radiation (IRR = 1.32 95%CI:0.87,2.02, tertile 3 vs. 1). KS incidence has decreased in recent calendar years. In a cross-sectional sample, we found cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma was associated with KS (OR = 4.83; 95%CI:1.30,14.69). KS risk factors included those potentially associated with HHV8 infection and increased immunosuppression. Our findings suggest that transplant recipients with a non-KS skin cancer may also be at high KS risk.

Keywords: Kaposi sarcoma, human herpesvirus 8, HHV8, solid organ transplant, ultraviolet radiation, basal cell carcinoma, squamous cell carcinoma, melanoma, mTOR inhibitor, corticosteroid

Introduction

Kaposi sarcoma (KS) is a cutaneous malignancy of blood or lymphatic endothelial origin, caused by human herpesvirus 8 (HHV8, also known as KS-associated herpesvirus). Due to treatment with immunosuppressive medications, solid organ transplant recipients are at especially elevated risk for cancers caused by oncogenic viruses,13 and KS incidence among solid organ transplant recipients is about 60 times higher than in the general population.1 While infection with HHV8 usually predates the transplant, HHV8 can also be transmitted through the donor organ.4

Apart from severe immunosuppression associated with organ transplantation or human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) infection,3,5 few risk factors have been firmly established for KS. Internationally, KS incidence varies notably due to large differences in the prevalence of HHV8 infection. Recently, increased risk of KS has been associated with higher ambient ultraviolet radiation (UVR) and history of cutaneous basal or squamous cell carcinoma (referred to collectively as “keratinocyte carcinomas”) among HIV-infected men.6 Transplant recipients have a very high risk of keratinocyte carcinoma,79 but the association of ambient UVR or non-KS skin cancers with KS risk has not been assessed among transplant recipients. While use of immunosuppressive medications is associated with increased risk of KS, to our knowledge, prospective data on specific immunosuppressive medications and trends in KS risk are limited. Incidence of KS in the United States (US) transplant population has been most recently examined using follow-up of patients from transplant registries between 1993 and 2003 with the outcome of KS being ascertained through reports from transplant centers.10 That study found KS risk was increased for males, older age at transplant, HLA-B mismatch, nonwhite race, and non-US citizenship. However, transplant center reports of cancer diagnoses are likely incomplete,11 and recent trends of KS in the US transplant population are not known.

Here we evaluate the association between demographic, environmental and treatment-related factors and risk of KS among solid organ transplant recipients in the US. We use the transplant cancer match (TCM) study which is a large population-based linkage of the US transplant registry with 17 state or regional cancer registries between 1987 and 2014. Analyses in the current study make use of 17 additional years of follow-up beyond what was previously evaluated (including data from 1987 to 1992 and 2004 to 2014), ascertain KS cases using cancer registry information, which has been demonstrated to have more complete cancer ascertainment,11 and include linkage of residential locations to ambient UVR satellite-based data.

Materials and Methods

Overview

The TCM study (http://transplantmatch.cancer.gov) has been previously described in detail.1 Briefly, computer-based linkages were performed between the Scientific registry of transplant recipients (SRTR) and 17 US central cancer registries (see Table 1 footnote). The SRTR includes structured data regarding all US solid organ transplants since 1987. KS cases were identified from linked cancer registry data (International Classification of Diseases for Oncology, third edition [ICD-O-3] morphology code 9140). The TCM Study was approved by human subjects’ research review committees at the National Cancer Institute and (as required) participating cancer registries.

Table 1.

Characteristics of solid organ transplants in the United States evaluated for risk of Kaposi sarcoma

Characteristic No. of transplants Percent
Total 264,624 100.0
Sex
Female 101,066 38.2
Male 163,558 61.8
Age at transplant, years
15 to 34 46,773 17.7
35 to 49 83,467 31.5
50 to 64 106,345 40.2
65+ 28,039 10.6
Race/ethnicity
Non-Hispanic white 164,598 62.2
Non-Hispanic black 45,826 17.3
Hispanic 37,994 14.4
Asian/Pacific Islander 14,568 5.5
Other/Unknown 1,638 0.6
Citizenship
United States citizen 252,911 95.6
Non-United States citizen 11,713 4.4
Transplanted organ
Kidney 157,105 59.4
Liver 55,502 21.0
Heart 23,158 8.8
Lung 12,501 4.7
Other or multiple 16,358 6.2
Calendar year of transplantation
1987 to 1996 53,817 20.3
1997 to 2003 74,885 28.3
2004 to 2014 135,922 51.4

Data derived from the United States Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients and 17 United States cancer registries include California (years of cancer registration 1988–2012), Colorado (1988–2009), Connecticut (1973–2009), Florida (1981–2009), Georgia (1995–2010), Hawaii (1973–2007), Illinois (1986–2013), Iowa (1973–2009), Kentucky (1995–2011), Michigan (1985–2009), New Jersey (1979–2010), New York (1976–2010), North Carolina (1990–2010), Pennsylvania (1987–2013), Seattle, Washington (1974–2014), Texas (1995–2010), and Utah (1973–2008).

Study population

The underlying cohort included 291,373 solid organ transplants performed from 1987 to 2014 with residential location of transplant recipients known to be within the regions covered by 17 US central cancer registries. We successively excluded transplants with cancer registry coverage initiating after transplant (n = 6,155), a history of KS prior to transplant (n = 26), persons with known HIV infection at time of transplant (n = 526), transplants in persons aged <15 years at transplant (n = 16,146, among whom there were zero KS cases), and persons with poorly specified residential location (n = 3,896, with 2 KS cases). The main study sample included 264,624 transplants (244,964 unique individuals). Follow-up began at time of transplant and ended at the earliest of KS diagnosis, death, failure of a transplanted organ, subsequent transplant, first loss to follow-up by the SRTR or end of cancer registry coverage. Most factors were examined in relation to incidence of KS using this cohort.

Many KS cases were diagnosed soon after transplantation, allowing for little prospective follow-up time to ascertain non-KS skin cancers (e.g., basal cell carcinoma, cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma, and melanoma). We therefore examined the cross-sectional relationship of non-KS skin cancers and KS by creating a case–control sample nested within this primary study population. Controls must have been alive and free of KS at the follow-up time (representing time since transplant) of diagnosis of the index case. We matched each KS case (n = 163) with 20 control transplant recipients on sex, transplanted organ, age at transplant (±2 years), and calendar year of transplant (±2 years).12 We restricted this analysis to non-Hispanic whites because non-KS skin cancers are rare among nonwhites and none occurred among non-white KS cases. Non-KS skin cancers were included if they occurred before or within 12 months after KS diagnosis for the case and the equivalent follow-up time for the controls in that set.

Exposure assessment

Baseline information on recipient demographic characteristics and immunosuppressive medications prescribed at the time of transplant was obtained from the SRTR. The SRTR also provided information on diagnoses of basal or squamous cell carcinoma during posttransplant follow-up, because these malignancies are not ascertained by cancer registries. Diagnoses of melanoma prior to transplant as well as during posttransplant follow-up were obtained using the linked cancer registry data.

Average annual ambient UVR exposure for transplant recipients was derived by linking their zip code of residence at the time of transplantation or listing, to the Total Ozone Mapping Spectrometer database maintained by the National Aeronautics and Space Administration.13 Cloud-adjusted daily ambient ultraviolet irradiance at 305 nm, which is part of the UVB spectrum, is provided on a 1 latitude by 1 longitude grid corresponding to approximately 111 by 85 km, respectively. Daily noontime satellite-based estimates were averaged over years 1982–1992 to account for any annual fluctuations due to the 11-year solar cycle.14 Tertile cutoffs for ambient UVR (6.0–26.4, 26.5–43.1, 43.2–84.0 mW/m2) were based on the UVR distribution among eligible subjects.

Statistical analysis

To evaluate the relationship of baseline recipient risk factors with KS incidence, we used Poisson regression to calculate incidence rate ratios (IRRs). Demographics and characteristics of the transplanted organs were assessed in a multivariable model that included sex, age at transplant, race (white, nonwhite), US citizenship, transplanted organ (kidney, liver, heart, lung, other/multiple), calendar year of transplant and a time-dependent variable for time since transplant. Poisson regression was also used to examine the associations between incident KS and ambient UVR and induction and maintenance medications after adjusting for sex, age at transplant, race, US citizenship, calendar year of transplant and time since transplant. Induction and maintenance medications were tested as potential effect modifiers of the ambient UVR dose–response. p-values for trend, heterogeneity and interaction were based on likelihood ratio tests. Poisson regression analyses were conducted using the AMFIT module of Epicure (RSI, Ottowa, Canada).15 To examine the association between non-KS skin cancers with KS risk using nested case–control data, we conducted conditional logistic regression to calculate matched odds ratios (ORs) and due to small numbers, provided exact p-values and confidence intervals (CIs) using SAS software (version 9.3, SAS Institute, Cary, NC). All statistical tests were two-sided and p values less than 0.05 were considered significant.

Results

The study population included 264,624 transplants (Table 1) with 1,310,880 person-years of follow-up. Sixty-two percent of transplant recipients were male, and the median age at transplant was 50 years. Non-Hispanic whites represented 62% of transplants and US citizens represented 96% of transplants. Most transplants were kidney (59%), followed by transplants of the liver, heart and lung.

KS incidence was 87% higher in men than women, over twofold greater in nonwhites than whites and twofold higher in non-US citizens than US citizens. There were 163 KS cases identified during follow-up (Table 2). KS incidence increased with age at transplant and decreased sharply with time since transplant, so that the highest incidence occurred within 1 year of transplant. Lung recipients had the highest incidence of KS when compared to kidney transplants, although there was no overall heterogeneity in KS risk across organ types (p = 0.23). KS incidence decreased significantly with increasing calendar year of transplant surgery.

Table 2.

Risk of Kaposi sarcoma in relation to demographic characteristics, transplanted organ, and time since transplant

Characteristic KS patients Incidence rate, per 100,000 person-years IRR (95% CI)1 p-value1
Total 163 12.4
Sex
Female 41 8.0 Ref.
Male 122 15.3 1.87 (1.32, 2.71) < 0.001
Race
White 73 8.6 Ref.
Non-white 90 19.7 2.67 (1.92, 3.72) < 0.001
Citizenship
United States citizen 147 11.7 Ref.
Non-United States citizen 16 30.1 2.10 (1.19, 3.47) 0.01
Age at transplant, years
15–34 14 5.7 Ref.
35–49 35 7.7 1.47 (0.80, 2.82)
50–64 83 16.4 3.26 (1.89, 6.04)
65+ 31 28.6 6.24 (3.34, 12.25) Ptrend < 0.001
Time since transplant, years
<1 81 35.1 Ref.
1 to <3 57 15.6 0.44 (0.31, 0.61)
3 to <5 13 5.0 0.13 (0.07, 0.23)
≥5 12 2.6 0.06 (0.03, 0.11) Ptrend < 0.001
Transplanted organ
Kidney 91 11.7 Ref.
Liver 35 12.7 1.25 (0.83, 1.84)
Heart 22 16.2 1.40 (0.85, 2.23)
Lung 9 19.6 2.22 (1.03, 4.24)
Other or multiple 6 8.1 1.26 (0.49, 2.67) 0.23
Calendar year of transplant
1987–1996 54 14.2 Ref.
1997–2003 66 13.8 0.73 (0.51, 1.06)
2004–2014 43 9.6 0.26 (0.17, 0.39) ptrend < 0.001

Abbreviations: KS, Kaposi sarcoma; IRR, incidence rate ratio; CI, confidence interval.

1

Adjusted for all factors (as categorized) in the table. P-trend based likelihood ratio tests treating ordinal categories as numeric in Poisson regression.

We examined risk of KS in relation to ambient UVR and non-KS skin cancers (Table 3). Compared with the lowest ambient UVR tertile, KS incidence was not significantly elevated in the highest tertile, either in the total population (IRR = 1.32; 95% CI: 0.87, 2.02) or among non-Hispanic whites (IRR = 1.18; 95% CI: 0.64, 2.20). In contrast, among non-Hispanic whites, KS was significantly associated with diagnosis of cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma (odds ratio [OR] = 4.83; 95% CI: 1.30, 14.7), but not significantly elevated with basal cell carcinoma (OR = 2.95; 95% CI: 0.55, 10.3) or melanoma (OR = 10.00; 95% CI: 0.17, 192.1).

Table 3.

Risk of Kaposi sarcoma in relation to ambient ultraviolet radiation and diagnosis of skin cancer among solid organ transplant recipients

Factor KS patients Incidence rate, per 100,000 person-years IRR (95% CI)1 p-trend1
Total population
 Ambient UVR tertiles
  T1 (6.0–26.4 mW/m2) 36 8.9 Ref.
  T2 (26.5–43.1 mW/m2) 63 12.5 1.26 (0.84, 1.92)
  T3 (43.2–84 mW/m2) 64 16.0 1.32 (0.87, 2.02) 0.22
Non-Hispanic white transplant recipients
 Ambient UVR tertiles
  T1 (6.0–26.4 mW/m2) 21 6.6 Ref.
  T2 (26.5–43.1 mW/m2) 32 10.0 1.53 (0.89, 2.69)
  T3 (43.2–84 mW/m2) 20 9.3 1.18 (0.64, 2.20) > 0.50

Skin cancer 2 KS cases Controls OR (95% CI) 3 p-value 3

 Squamous cell carcinoma
  No 68 1,435 Ref.
  Yes 5 25 4.83 (1.30, 14.69) 0.02
 Basal cell carcinoma
  No 70 1,439 Ref.
  Yes 3 21 2.95 (0.55, 10.32) 0.20
 Melanoma
  No 72 1,458 Ref.
  Yes 1 2 10.00 (0.17, 192.09) 0.27

Abbreviations: KS, Kaposi sarcoma; IRR, incidence rate ratio; CI, confidence interval; UVR, ultraviolet radiation; T, tertile; OR, odds ratio.

1

Incidence rate ratios based on Poisson regression after adjustment on sex, race, US citizenship, age at transplant (years), calendar year of transplant, and time since transplant (years). p-trend based likelihood ratio tests treating ordinal UVR categories (1–3) as numeric in regression.

2

Diagnoses of squamous and basal cell carcinoma were ascertained by the Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients, while ascertainment of melanoma was based on cancer registry linkages.

3

Odds ratios based on conditional logistic regression with 20 controls matched to each Kaposi sarcoma case on sex, transplanted organ, age at transplant (±2 years), and calendar year of transplant (±2 years). Restricted to non-Hispanic white transplant recipients. Confidence intervals and p-values based on exact methods.

We did not find any induction or maintenance medication to be significantly associated with KS risk (Table 4). However, KS incidence was marginally increased in association with corticosteroid use (IRR = 1.59; 95% CI: 0.93, 2.79). Medication use did not significantly modify the relationship between ambient UVR and KS (data not shown).

Table 4.

Risk of Kaposi sarcoma in relation to induction and maintenance medications prescribed at time of organ transplant

Medication KS patients Incidence rate, per 100,000 person-years IRR (95% CI)1 p-value1
Induction medications
Monoclonal antibodies
 No 154 12.5 Ref.
 Yes 9 11.7 0.87 (0.41, 1.62) > 0.50
Polyclonal antibody
 No 138 12.9 Ref.
 Yes 25 10.4 0.82 (0.52, 1.25) 0.37
IL2 receptor antagonist
 No 132 12.0 Ref.
 Yes 31 14.4 1.41 (0.91, 2.12) 0.12
Baseline maintenance medications
Cyclosporine
 No 89 11.9 Ref.
 Yes 74 13.2 0.81 (0.55, 1.19) 0.28
Tacrolimus
 No 95 14.0 Ref.
 Yes 68 10.6 0.95 (0.65, 1.40) > 0.50
Azathioprine
 No 121 12.0 Ref.
 Yes 42 13.8 0.86 (0.55, 1.31) 0.48
MMF
 No 85 14.1 Ref.
 Yes 78 11.0 0.90 (0.61, 1.34) > 0.50
mTOR inhibitors
 No 156 12.6 Ref.
 Yes 7 10.3 0.90 (0.38, 1.80) > 0.50
Corticosteroids
 No 13 7.8 Ref.
 Yes 150 13.1 1.59 (0.93, 2.79) 0.09
Maintenance medication regimen
Tacrolimus and MMF 41 9.1 Ref.
Cyclosporine and azathioprine 34 12.9 1.01 (0.55, 1.87)
Other 88 14.7 1.42 (0.94, 2.19) 0.08

Abbreviations: IRR, incidence rate ratio; CI, confidence interval; IL2, interleukin 2; MMF, mycophenolate mofetil; mTOR, mammalian target of rapamycin.

1

Adjusted for sex, race, US citizenship, age at transplant (years), calendar year of transplant, and time since transplant (years).

Discussion

In this large, population-based cohort study of solid organ transplant recipients with information on demographic and transplant characteristics, medication use and diagnosed medical conditions, spanning 27 calendar years, KS risk was significantly higher for factors potentially associated with HHV8 infection and greater immunosuppression. This is the first study to examine the associations of ambient UVR and skin cancers with KS risk in the transplant population, and we observed a significant association with squamous cell carcinoma of the skin. Our study is also the first to report a decrease in KS incidence for more recent solid organ transplant recipients.

Some factors associated with increased KS risk in our study likely reflect differences in HHV8 prevalence. Prevalence of HHV8 is low (<2%) in the general US population,16,17 however several factors are related to higher prevalence of HHV8 among adults, including older age and, among men, coinfection with other viruses (hepatitis B and herpes simplex virus) and engaging in sexual activity with other men.16 Consistent with our finding of an elevated incidence of KS among transplant recipients of non-US citizenship, the prevalence of HHV8 is especially high in some other countries, including in sub-Saharan Africa and countries along the Mediterranean.17

KS risk was not related to ambient UVR in this transplant population. In contrast, we recently found a significantly increased risk of KS with high ambient UVR in a population of HIV-infected men.6 Since all subjects had HIV in that study, and because HIV and HHV8 infection often co-occur in the same groups (e.g., men who have sex with men [MSM]), the associations with ambient UVR were somewhat protected from confounding by geographic differences in HHV8 prevalence. In contrast, in this transplant population, KS cases tended to occur in urban areas (data not shown) with potentially higher rates of HIV and large populations of MSM. Although transplant recipients diagnosed with HIV were excluded, we did not have information on MSM status.

We considered the co-occurrence of other UVR-related skin cancers as possible surrogates of individual sun exposure and sensitivity because common skin cancers have well-established relationships with history of personal UVR exposure.1821 Although based on small numbers, we found that KS risk was significantly higher in transplant recipients with diagnosis of squamous cell carcinoma. Notably, this finding supports our previous finding of increased KS risk in HIV-infected men with non-KS skin cancers6 and several case studies reported in the literature.2225 Rather than being explained by UVR, our findings may instead be explained by drug-induced immunosuppression causing both KS and non-KS skin cancers in the same people. However, these associations were seen despite adjustment through matching on factors related to immunosuppression (age at transplant, calendar year of transplant, and time since transplant). Another explanation is that patients diagnosed with either KS or a non-KS skin cancer may have increased medical surveillance for skin cancers. A limitation to this analysis is that basal and squamous cell carcinomas were ascertained through the SRTR, rather than the cancer registries. Diagnoses of these skin cancers in the SRTR have low sensitivity, but high positive predictive value.26 Under-ascertainment of BCC and SCCs may bias effect estimates towards the null.

In this transplant population, as in others,10,27 KS incidence peaked within 1 year of transplant, likely reflecting the effect of intensive immunosuppression prescribed in the first months after transplant. In addition, the association of KS with lung transplant may be due to particularly strong immunosuppression in this group.28 Consistent with an earlier study in this population,10 no specific induction or maintenance medications were significantly associated with KS risk. However, incidence of KS tended to be higher among people prescribed corticosteroids, a finding that has been observed in both epidemiological studies29,30 and clinical settings outside of transplantation.3134 KS risk was not significantly decreased with prescription of mammalian target of rapamycin (mTOR) inhibitors. Some clinical studies have shown promising effects for treatment of KS using mTOR inhibitors,35,36 possibly through a reduction in the secretion of vascular endothelial growth factor and inhibition of angiogenesis.37 However, there are few epidemiological data on mTOR use in relation to incidence of KS.38,39 While our findings do not support a protective role for mTOR inhibitors, they are based on small numbers and we lacked information on dose or duration. In addition, medication use was assessed only at baseline, and not updated during follow-up. If medications were commonly switched, lack of updated data may bias the associations between medication use and KS toward the null. However, this may have less impact on incidence of KS than other post-transplant malignancies, because KS usually occurred within 36 months of transplant.

In this analysis of KS among US transplant recipients, which included follow-up over 27 calendar years, we found a significant decline in KS incidence over time. Two recent nationwide population-based studies based in northern Europe have had too few cases to examine longitudinal trends of KS in the transplant population.40,41 The decrease in KS risk over calendar time we observed may reflect improvements in management of patients such as optimized dosing of immunosuppressing medications.

Our study has several limitations beyond those mentioned above. Because we did not have data on HHV8 prevalence, the population at risk of KS is overestimated and our ability to differentiate a risk factor for HHV8 versus the development of KS in a person with HHV8 infection is hampered. Another limitation is lack of information on personal sun exposure behaviors (e.g., time spent outdoors and number of episodes of sunburn). Our ambient UVR measure is based only on residence at time of transplant and may also be subject to potential confounding by factors that vary geographically such as HHV8 prevalence, which may depend on sexual and drug using behaviors and socioeconomic status. Strengths include US transplant population representativeness, follow-up over a period of 27 years, and outcome ascertainment through cancer registry linkage. Although cancer registries have been shown to be more complete than the SRTR in ascertaining cancer cases,11 they may still miss a proportion of KS cases, resulting in effect estimates possibly biased toward the null.

In this large population-based United States study of solid organ transplant recipients, factors potentially associated with HHV8 infection or greater immunosuppression were associated with increased risk of KS. While no specific medications, including mTOR inhibitors, were significantly associated with subsequent risk of KS, recent transplant recipients had reduced KS risk suggesting possible improvements in drug prescribing patterns. Our findings also suggest that transplant recipients with non-KS skin cancers may constitute an additional high-risk group for KS and underscore the need for skin cancer screening in this population.

What’s new?

Due to treatment with immunosuppressive medications, solid organ transplant recipients are at elevated risk for cancers caused by oncogenic viruses, such as Kaposi sarcoma (KS). In this large population-based study of transplant recipients, factors potentially linked to HHV8 infection or greater immunosuppression were associated with increased KS risk. While no specific medications were significantly associated with KS risk, recent transplant recipients had reduced KS risk, suggesting possible improvements in drug-prescribing patterns. The findings also suggest that transplant recipients with non-KS skin cancers may constitute an additional high-risk group for KS, underscoring the need for skin cancer screening in this population.

Acknowledgements

The authors gratefully acknowledge the support and assistance provided by individuals at the Health Resources and Services Administration (Monica Lin), the SRTR (Ajay Israni, Bertram Kasiske, Paul Newkirk, Jon Snyder), and the following cancer registries: the states of California (Tina Clarke), Colorado (Jack Finch), Connecticut (Lou Gonsalves), Florida (Brad Wohler), Georgia (Rana Bayakly), Hawaii (Brenda Hernandez), Iowa (Charles Lynch), Illinois (Lori Koch), Kentucky (Jaclyn Nee), Michigan (Glenn Copeland), New Jersey (Xiaoling Niu), New York (Amy Kahn), North Carolina (Chandrika Rao), Texas (Leticia Nogueria), and Utah (Janna Harrell), and the Seattle-Puget Sound area of Washington (Margaret Madeleine). We also thank Kelly Yu at the National Cancer Institute for study management, and analysts at Information Management Services for programming support (David Castenson, Matthew Chaloux, Michael Curry, Ruth Parsons).

The SRTR is currently operated under contract number HHSH250201500009C (Health Resources and Services Administration) by the Minneapolis Medical Research Foundation, Minneapolis, MN. Previously the SRTR was managed under contracts HHSH250201000018C and HHSH234200537009C. The following cancer registries were supported by the SEER Program of the National Cancer Institute: California (contracts HHSN261201000036C, HHSN26120 1000035C, and HHSN261201000034C), Connecticut (HHSN261201300019I), Hawaii (HHSN261201000037C, N01-PC-35137, and N01-PC-35139), Iowa (HSN261201000032C and N01-PC-35143), New Jersey (HHSN261201300021I, NU58DP003931-05-00), Seattle-Puget Sound (N01-PC-35142), and Utah (HHSN2612013000171). The following cancer registries were supported by the National Program of Cancer Registries of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention: California (agreement 1 U58DP000807-01 ), Colorado (U58 DP000848-04), Georgia (5U58 DP003875-01), Illinois (5U58DP003883-03), Maryland (U58DP12-12053919-03), Michigan (5U58DP003921-03), New Jersey (NU58DP003931-05-00), New York (U58DP003879), North Carolina (U58DP000832) and Texas (5U58DP000824-04). Additional support was provided by the states of California, Colorado, Connecticut, Illinois, Iowa, Massachusetts (Massachusetts Cancer Prevention and Control Cooperative Agreement 5458DP003920), New Jersey, New York (including the Cancer Surveillance Improvement Initiative), Texas, Utah, and Washington, as well as the University of Utah and Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center in Seattle, WA.

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 by the Intramural Research Program, Division of Cancer Epidemiology and Genetics, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services.

Grant sponsor: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services; Grant sponsor: National Institutes of Health; Grant sponsor: Division of Cancer Epidemiology and Genetics, National Cancer Institute; Grant sponsor: Health Resources and Services Administration; Grant numbers: HHSN261201300021I, NU58DP003931-05-00; Grant sponsor: Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center; Grant sponsor: University of Utah; Grant sponsor: Centers for Disease Control and Prevention; Grant numbers: 5U58DP000824-04, U58DP000832, U58DP003879, NU58DP003931-05-00, 5U58DP003921-03, U58DP12-12053919-03, 5U58DP003883-03, 5U58DP003875-01, DP000848-04, U58DP000807-01; Grant sponsor: Minneapolis Medical Research Foundation; Grant sponsor: National Cancer Institute; Grant sponsor: National Cancer Institute; Grant numbers: N01-PC-35143, HSN261201000032C, N01-PC-35139, N01-PC-35137, HHSN261201000037C, HHSN261201300019I, HHSN261201000034C, HHSN261201000035C, HHSN261201000036C, HHSN2612013000171

Footnotes

Conflict of interest: Christina Clarke currently works at GRAIL, Inc.; but this work was completed at prior position in Cancer Prevention Institute of California. The remaining authors have no conflicts of interest to disclose.

References

  • 1.Engels EA, Pfeiffer RM, Fraumeni JF Jr, et al. Spectrum of cancer risk among US solid organ transplant recipients. JAMA 2011;306: 1891–901. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 2.Collett D, Mumford L, Banner NR, et al. Comparison of the incidence of malignancy in recipients of different types of organ: a UK registry audit. Am J Transplant 2010;10:1889–96. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 3.Grulich AE, van Leeuwen MT, Falster MO, et al. Incidence of cancers in people with HIV/- AIDS compared with immunosuppressed transplant recipients: a meta-analysis. Lancet 2007;370: 59–67. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 4.Chiereghin A, Barozzi P, Petrisli E, et al. Multicenter prospective study for laboratory diagnosis of HHV8 infection in solid organ donors and transplant recipients and evaluation of the clinical impact after transplantation. Transplantation 2017;101:1935–44. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 5.Engels EA, Biggar RJ, Hall HI, et al. Cancer risk in people infected with human immunodeficiency virus in the United States. Int J Cancer 2008;123: 187–94. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 6.Cahoon EK, Engels EA, Freedman DM, et al. Ultraviolet radiation and Kaposi sarcoma incidence in a Nationwide US cohort of HIV-infected men. J Natl Cancer Inst 2017;109:djw267. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 7.Berg D, Otley CC. Skin cancer in organ transplant recipients: epidemiology, pathogenesis, and management. J Am Acad Dermatol 2002;47:17; quiz 8–20. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 8.Jensen P, Hansen S, Moller B, et al. Skin cancer in kidney and heart transplant recipients and different long-term immunosuppressive therapy regimens. J Am Acad Dermatol 1999;40:177–86. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 9.Yanik EL, Pfeiffer RM, Freedman DM, et al. Spectrum of immune-related conditions associated with risk of keratinocyte cancers among elderly adults in the United States. Cancer Epidemiol Biomark Prev 2017;26:998–1007. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 10.Mbulaiteye SM, Engels EA. Kaposi’s sarcoma risk among transplant recipients in the United States (1993–2003). Int J Cancer 2006;119:2685–91. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 11.Yanik EL, Nogueira LM, Koch L, et al. Comparison of cancer diagnoses between the US solid organ transplant registry and linked central cancer registries. Am J Transplant 2016;16: 2986–93. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 12.Grandits G, Neuhaus J. Using SAS® to perform individual matching in design of case-control studies 061–2010. In: SAS, editor.2010. [Google Scholar]
  • 13.National Aeronautics and Space Administration. Total ozone mapping spectrometer data product: erythemal UV exposure, Goddard Space Flight Center: Greenbelt, MD, 2004. [Google Scholar]
  • 14.Lean JL, Rottman GJ, Kyle HL, et al. Detection and parameterization of variations in solar mid- and near-ultraviolet radiation (200–400 nm). J Geophys Res Atmos 1997;102:29939–56. [Google Scholar]
  • 15.Preston DL, Lubin JH, Pierce DA, et al. N.S S. Epicure risk regression and person-year computation software: command summary and user guide Ottowa, Canada: Risk Sciences International, 2015. [Google Scholar]
  • 16.Engels EA, Atkinson JO, Graubard BI, et al. Risk factors for human herpesvirus 8 infection among adults in the United States and evidence for sexual transmission. J Infect Dis 2007;196:199–207. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 17.Mesri EA, Cesarman E, Boshoff C. Kaposi’s sarcoma and its associated herpesvirus. Nat Rev Cancer 2010;10:707–19. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 18.Pleasance ED, Cheetham RK, Stephens PJ, et al. A comprehensive catalogue of somatic mutations from a human cancer genome. Nature 2010;463: 191–6. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 19.Wu S, Han J, Laden F, et al. Long-term ultraviolet flux, other potential risk factors, and skin cancer risk: a cohort study. Cancer Epidemiol Biomark Prev 2014;23:1080–9. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 20.Lin SW, Wheeler DC, Park Y, et al. Prospective study of ultraviolet radiation exposure and risk of cancer in the United States. Int J Cancer 2012;131: E1015–23. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 21.Richards TB, Johnson CJ, Tatalovich Z, et al. Association between cutaneous melanoma incidence rates among white US residents and county-level estimates of solar ultraviolet exposure. J Am Acad Dermatol 2011;65:S50–7. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 22.Cottoni F, Montesu MA, Lissia A, et al. Merkel cell carcinoma, Kaposi’s sarcoma, basal cell carcinoma and keratoacanthoma: multiple association in a patient with chronic lymphatic leukaemia. Br J Dermatol 2002;147:1029–31. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 23.Lanternier F, Lebbe C, Schartz N, et al. Kaposi’s sarcoma in HIV-negative men having sex with men. AIDS 2008;22:1163–8. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 24.Parakh S, Goh M, Andrews MC. Non-HIV-associated Kaposi sarcoma in an immunosuppressed melanoma patient treated with dabrafenib. J Clin Pharm Ther 2016;41:354–6. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 25.Hiatt KM, Nelson AM, Lichy JH, et al. Classic Kaposi sarcoma in the United States over the last two decades: a clinicopathologic and molecular study of 438 non-HIV-related Kaposi sarcoma patients with comparison to HIV-related Kaposi sarcoma. Mod Pathol 2008;21:572–82. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 26.Zamoiski RD, Yanik E, Gibson TM, et al. Risk of second malignancies in solid organ transplant recipients who develop keratinocyte cancers. Cancer Res 2017;77:4196–203. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 27.Raeisi D, Payandeh M, Madani SH, et al. Kaposi’s sarcoma after kidney transplantation: a 21-years experience. Int J Hematol Oncol Stem Cell Res 2013;7:29–33. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 28.Scheffert JL, Raza K. Immunosuppression in lung transplantation. J Thorac Dis 2014;6: 1039–53. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 29.Goedert JJ, Vitale F, Lauria C, et al. Risk factors for classical Kaposi’s sarcoma. J Natl Cancer Inst 2002;94:1712–8. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 30.Anderson LA, Lauria C, Romano N, et al. Risk factors for classical Kaposi sarcoma in a population-based case-control study in Sicily. Cancer Epidemiol Biomark Prev 2008;17:3435–43. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 31.Yoo S, Moon S, Chin SO, et al. A case of exogenous corticosteroid-induced Kaposi’s sarcoma that developed after a cure of endogenous hypercortisolism. Int J Clin Pharm 2015;37:988–1. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 32.Tyros G, Potouridou I, Tsaraklis A, et al. A generalized Kaposi’s sarcoma after chronic and extensive topical corticosteroid use. Eur J Dermatol 2014;24:111–2. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 33.Vincent T, Moss K, Colaco B, et al. Kaposi’s sarcoma in two patients following low-dose corticosteroid treatment for rheumatological disease. Rheumatology (Oxford) 2000;39:1294–6. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 34.Kilincalp S, Akinci H, Hamamci M, et al. Kaposi’s sarcoma developing in a HIV-negative Crohn’s disease patient shortly after azathioprine and corticosteroid treatment. J Crohns Colitis 2014;8: 558–9. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 35.Stallone G, Schena A, Infante B, et al. Sirolimus for Kaposi’s sarcoma in renal-transplant recipients. N Engl J Med 2005;352:1317–23. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 36.Detroyer D, Deraedt K, Schoffski P, et al. Resolution of diffuse skin and systemic Kaposi’s sarcoma in a renal transplant recipient after introduction of everolimus: a case report. Transpl Infect Dis 2015;17:303–7. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 37.Roy D, Sin SH, Lucas A, et al. mTOR inhibitors block Kaposi sarcoma growth by inhibiting essential autocrine growth factors and tumor angiogenesis. Cancer Res 2013;73:2235–46. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 38.De Fijter JW. Cancer and mTOR inhibitors in transplant recipients. Transplantation 2017;101: 45–55. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 39.Kauffman HM, Cherikh WS, Cheng Y, et al. Maintenance immunosuppression with target-of-rapamycin inhibitors is associated with a reduced incidence of de novo malignancies. Transplantation 2005;80:883–9. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 40.Krynitz B, Edgren G, Lindelof B, et al. Risk of skin cancer and other malignancies in kidney, liver, heart and lung transplant recipients 1970 to 2008–a Swedish population-based study. Int J Cancer 2013;132:1429–38. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 41.Rizvi SMH, Aagnes B, Holdaas H, et al. Long-term change in the risk of skin cancer after organ transplantation: a population-based Nationwide cohort study. JAMA Dermatol 2017; 153:1270–7. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

RESOURCES