skip to main content

Radiation-induced Second Cancer — SCE Medical Oncology MCQ

Instant feedback + full explanation. One question, done properly.

HardGynaecological CancersRadiation-induced Second CancerSCE Medical Oncology

Twelve years after pelvic radiotherapy, a woman develops a histologically distinct sarcoma centred within the previous high-dose field. There was no lesion there before radiotherapy. Which interpretation and planning step is most defensible?

Educational content. Not a substitute for clinical judgement or local policy.

Reveal the answer and explanation

Correct answer: BThe combined features support a radiation-associated second primary; retrieve the old plan before specialist treatment planning

Explanation lettering: B = shown as A · D = shown as B · E = shown as C · C = shown as D · A = shown as E

D is correct. A radiation-associated solid tumour is a clinicopathological attribution supported by occurrence within a previously irradiated field after an appropriate latency and histological distinction from the original cancer. No single feature proves causation. Prior plans and dose-volume data matter because tissue tolerance, fibrosis, wound healing and any re-irradiation strategy affect feasibility. A wrongly treats a distinct sarcoma as recurrence. B skips pathological confirmation and overstates field location. C discards clinically important previous exposure. E again treats one criterion as proof and ignores the planning consequences of irradiated tissue.

Reference: Radiation-induced secondary malignancies review: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/29983028/