Distinctive pattern of cancer development in kidney transplant recipients: a nationwide cohort study in South Korea

Article information

Korean J Nephrol. 2026;.j.krcp.25.217
Publication date (electronic) : 2026 June 8
doi : https://doi.org/10.23876/j.krcp.25.217
1Division of Nephrology, Department of Medicine, Samsung Medical Center, Sungkyunkwan University School of Medicine, Seoul, Republic of Korea
2Department of Internal Medicine, Korea University Guro Hospital, Seoul, Republic of Korea
3Department of Family Medicine, Samsung Medical Center, Sungkyunkwan University School of Medicine, Seoul, Republic of Korea
4Department of Statistics and Actuarial Science, Soongsil University, Seoul, Republic of Korea
Correspondence: Hye Ryoun Jang Division of Nephrology, Department of Medicine, Samsung Medical Center, Sungkyunkwan University School of Medicine, 81 Irwon-ro, Gangnam-gu, Seoul 06531, Republic of Korea. E-mail: shinehr@skku.edu
Kyungdo Han Department of Statistics and Actuarial Science, Soongsil University, 369 Sangdo-ro, Dongjak-gu, Seoul 06978, Republic of Korea. E-mail: hkd@ssu.ac.kr
*Hojin Jeon and Seung Min Song contributed equally to this study as co-first authors.†Kyungdo Han and Hye Ryoun Jang contributed equally to this study as co-corresponding authors.
Received 2025 July 6; Revised 2026 January 5; Accepted 2026 February 20.

Abstract

Background

Kidney transplant recipients (KTRs) are at increased risk for various cancers due to long-term immunosuppression. However, recent epidemiologic patterns in Asian populations remain understudied. This study aimed to evaluate the incidence and relative risk of cancer in Korean KTRs compared with the general population.

Methods

We conducted a nationwide retrospective cohort study using the Korean National Health Insurance Service database. Adult patients (≥20 years) who underwent kidney transplantation between 2004 and 2020 were included. KTRs were compared to an age- and sex-matched control group from the general population. Cancer incidence rates were calculated, and relative risks were estimated using Cox proportional hazards models.

Results

Among 22,947 KTRs and 114,735 matched general population, the overall cancer incidence was higher in KTRs (10.32 per 1,000 person-years) than in the general population (5.98 per 1,000 person-years; hazard ratio [HR], 1.56; 95% confidence interval, 1.45–1.67; p < 0.001). The risks of renal (HR, 6.64), bladder (HR, 2.56), skin (HR, 6.89), and hematologic cancers, including lymphoma (HR, 5.69), were significantly elevated in KTRs compared to the general population. Notably, the incidence of colorectal cancer (HR, 0.77) and liver cancer (HR, 0.67) was lower in KTRs.

Conclusion

KTRs have a significantly elevated risk of several cancers compared to the general population, with unique patterns in the South Korean cohort. The reduced incidence of colorectal and liver cancers may reflect the impact of systematic pretransplant cancer screening. These findings support the need for individualized cancer surveillance strategies tailored to recipient risk profiles and regional healthcare systems.

Introduction

Kidney transplantation (KT) has become the gold standard treatment for patients with end-stage kidney disease, significantly improving survival and quality of life [1]. However, long-term immunosuppressive therapy to prevent graft rejection post-KT is associated with an increased risk of malignancy [25]. With the advancements in immunosuppressive regimens and evolving clinical practices including cancer screening before transplantation, contemporary data on cancer risk among kidney transplant recipients (KTRs) remain to be clarified [1]. Additionally, there is a growing need for real-world evidence that accounts for the diverse clinical profiles of KTRs, particularly regarding underlying comorbidities and transplant-related suppression of immunological surveillance of cancer.

Previous population-based nationwide cohort studies have primarily compared KTRs and the general populations without appropriate matching [4,6,7]. Furthermore, most studies have not incorporated differences related to underlying comorbidities. These methodological limitations highlight the need for a more tailored assessment of cancer incidence in KTRs compared to a well-matched general population.

This national study investigated the incidence of de novo malignancies among Korean KTRs by using a matched cohort designed to compare the cancer risk of KTRs with that of the general population. We aimed to evaluate the incidence of cancer following KT and assess the impact of pre-existing comorbidities on cancer occurrence. Identifying the elevated cancer risk and specific cancer types with increased incidence in KTRs is essential for informed decision-making before transplantation and for guiding evidence-based surveillance strategies post-KT.

Methods

Ethical statement

This study was approved by the Institutional Review Board of the Samsung Medical Center in compliance with the Declaration of Helsinki (No. 2023-01-006). The requirement for informed consent was waived because of the anonymized and de-identified data collection.

Data source and study population

We conducted a nationwide, population-based, retrospective cohort study using the Korean National Health Insurance Service (NHIS) database spanning January 1, 2004 to December 31, 2020. Adults aged ≥20 years who underwent KT during this period were identified (n = 25,361). The NHIS provides mandatory universal coverage for 97% of the South Korean population, with the remaining 3% covered by Medicaid beneficiaries. The Korean NHIS database includes nearly the entire population of South Korea and has been widely utilized for epidemiological studies [810]. This database comprises an eligibility dataset (including demographic variables such as age, sex, disability type and severity, socioeconomic variables, and income level) and a medical treatment dataset (containing claims data submitted by healthcare providers).

Inclusion and exclusion criteria

Participants with complete baseline information who received KT surgery (code R3280) or were diagnosed as kidney transplant status (code Z94.0) during the study period were included. The inclusion and exclusion processes are illustrated in Fig. 1. A total of 22,947 KTRs were included in the final analysis after excluding individuals with (1) missing baseline demographic or clinical data (n = 464), (2) a history of malignancy before KT (n = 1,243), and (3) death or cancer occurrence within 1-year post-KT to minimize detection bias (n = 707).

Figure 1.

Flow diagram of study population selection.

From 25,361 kidney transplant recipients (KTRs) in the National Health Insurance Service (NHIS) database, 2,414 were excluded due to missing data, prior malignancy, or cancer within 1-year posttransplant. The final KTR cohort (n = 22,947) was matched with controls from the general population (1:5 ratio, n = 114,735).

KT, kidney transplantation.

Control group selection and matching

Each KTR was matched to five individuals from the general population via incidence-density sampling based on age, sex, and calendar year of transplantation. Controls had no history of KT or cancer prior to the index date. We chose a 1:5 matching ratio to improve statistical efficiency and precision while maintaining analytic feasibility. Epidemiologic principles support that increasing the control-to-case ratio up to 4:1 or 5:1 substantially enhances power without incurring substantial inefficiency [11,12].

Covariates

Socioeconomic status was determined from household income and dichotomized at the lowest 20th percentile, including Medicaid beneficiaries, according to the NHIS premium categorization. Comorbidities were defined based on the prescription records at baseline as follows: diabetes mellitus (use of at least one oral antidiabetic agent or insulin), hypertension (use of at least one antihypertensive medication), and dyslipidemia (use of at least one lipid-lowering agent).

Outcomes and follow-up

The primary outcome was the incidence of newly diagnosed malignancies 1 year after KT. Cancer cases were identified using the International Classification of Diseases, 10th Revision, codes for malignancies (code C0–97). We evaluated the incidence and relative risk of specific cancers based on their prevalence in KTRs (e.g., kidney, bladder, skin, and hematologic malignancies) as well as those common in the general Korean population (e.g., stomach and thyroid cancers). Follow-up started 1 year post-KT and continued until the earliest occurrence of cancer diagnosis, death, or the study endpoint.

Statistical analysis

Baseline characteristics are summarized using means with standard deviations for continuous variables and frequencies with percentages for categorical variables. The incidence rate of cancer is expressed per 1,000 person-years. Cox proportional hazards regression models were used to estimate hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for cancer risk after adjusting for age, sex, income, diabetes mellitus, hypertension, and dyslipidemia. Stratified analyses were performed according to age groups (20–39, 40–54, and ≥55 years). All statistical analyses were conducted using SAS version 9.4 (SAS Institute), with the significance threshold set at p < 0.05.

Results

Baseline characteristics of the study population

The cohort comprised 137,682 participants (22,947 KTRs and 114,735 age and sex-matched members of the general population), with a mean follow-up duration of 6.6 ± 4.44 years. The mean age of KTRs at the time of KT was 47.4 ± 11.39 years, and men accounted for 59.7% of the cohort. Table 1 presents the baseline characteristics of the KTRs compared with those of the matched general population. The KTRs had a higher prevalence of diabetes mellitus, hypertension, and dyslipidemia and tended to have lower income levels than the matched general population. The residential areas were similar between the two groups.

Baseline characteristics

Incidence rate and relative risk of cancer

During the study period, the overall incidence of cancer was significantly higher in KTRs than in the general population (10.32 vs. 5.98 per 1,000 person-years, p < 0.001). KTRs exhibited a consistently higher cumulative incidence of any cancer throughout the follow-up period (Fig. 2). Table 2 shows the incidence rates and HR according to malignancy type. The incidence rate for overall cancer was 10.32 in the KTRs and 5.98 in the matched general population. Models were adjusted for the following variables: none in Model 1; age and sex in Model 2; and age, sex, income level, and comorbidities (diabetes mellitus, hypertension, and dyslipidemia) in Model 3. A multivariable-adjusted analysis revealed an HR of 1.56 (95% CI, 1.45–1.67) for overall cancer. The incidence rates of stomach, thyroid, oropharynx, kidney, bladder, nervous system, skin, and hematologic malignancies including lymphoma and leukemia were significantly higher in KTRs than in the matched general population. Specifically, KTRs exhibited markedly elevated HR for kidney (HR, 6.64; 95% CI, 5.02–8.78), bladder (HR, 2.56; 95% CI, 1.79–3.66), skin (HR, 6.89; 95% CI, 5.11–9.28), stomach cancers (HR, 1.34; 95% CI, 1.10–1.62), and lymphoma (HR, 7.03; 95% CI, 1.75–28.18 for Hodgkin; HR, 5.69; 95% CI, 4.06–7.97 for non-Hodgkin). The wide CI for Hodgkin’s lymphoma was attributable to the small number of observed events. However, the incidence rates of colorectal cancer (HR, 0.77; 95% CI, 0.63–0.93) and hepatocellular carcinoma (HR, 0.67; 95% CI, 0.53–0.86) were lower in KTRs than in the general population. The risks of cancer in the pancreas, lung, esophagus, biliary tract, larynx, multiple myeloma, breast, cervix, ovary, endometrium, and prostate were comparable between KTRs and the matched general population.

Figure 2.

Cumulative incidence of malignancies in KTRs versus the matched general population.

The plot shows the cumulative incidence probability of cancer over time (in years) among KTRs (red line) and the matched general population (black line). KTRs exhibit a consistently higher incidence of cancer throughout the follow-up period, indicating a significantly increased risk of cancer associated with kidney transplantation (p < 0.001).

KTR, kidney transplant recipient.

Incidence rate of cancers

Stratified incidence rate by age and sex according to cancer type

We conducted further analyses of the incidence rates and HR of cancer development stratified by sex and age (Table 3). In both men and women, KTRs exhibited a consistently higher incidence of cancer than the general population (male, 6.05 vs. 10.20 per 1,000 person-years; female, 5.87 vs. 10.49 per 1,000 person-years) (Fig. 3). Across all age groups, KTRs showed a consistently higher incidence of cancer, with a persistent gap throughout the 15-year follow-up period (20–39 years, 2.35 vs. 5.96 per 1,000 person-years; 40–54 years, 5.74 vs. 9.68 per 1,000 person-years; ≥55 years, 11.65 vs. 18.11 per 1,000 person-years) (Fig. 4). Although most subgroup analyses revealed findings consistent with those observed in the overall cohort, male KTRs demonstrated a reduced risk of colorectal, liver, and pancreatic cancers. Furthermore, the risks of breast cancer, gynecological cancer (excluding ovarian cancer), prostate cancer, and multiple myeloma were only elevated in the 20–39-year age group. KT exerted a greater impact on the occurrence of renal cancer and lymphoma in the 20–39-year age group than in the other age groups (p for interaction, <0.05).

Subgroup analysis for HR of cancer incidence according to sex and age

Figure 3.

Cumulative incidence of malignancies in KTRs versus the matched general population, stratified by sex.

(A) Male and (B) female populations. The plots display the cumulative incidence probability of cancers over time (in years) among KTRs (red line) and the matched general populations (black line), stratified by sex. In both male and female, KTRs exhibit consistently higher incidence of cancer than the matched general populations, highlighting the increased oncologic burden associated with kidney transplantation irrespective of sex (all p < 0.001).

KTR, kidney transplant recipient.

Figure 4.

Cumulative incidence of malignancies in KTRs versus the matched general population, stratified by age groups.

Age of 20–39 years (A), 40–54 years (B), and ≥55 years (C). Each panel illustrates the cumulative incidence probability of cancers over time (in years) for KTRs (red line) compared with the matched general populations (black line). Across all age groups, KTRs show a consistently higher incidence of cancer, with the gap persisting throughout the 15-year follow-up period (all p < 0.001). These results indicate an increased cancer burden after kidney transplantation regardless of age at the time of transplantation.

KTR, kidney transplant recipient.

Discussion

This nationwide cohort study investigated the incidence and relative risk of cancer among KTRs compared with those among an age- and sex-matched general population. KTRs showed a significantly higher overall incidence of malignancies, particularly kidney, bladder, skin, and stomach cancers and lymphomas, but a lower incidence of colorectal cancer and hepatocellular carcinoma than the general population. Notably, male KTRs showed a relatively lower incidence of colorectal, liver, and pancreatic cancers. These data provide valuable epidemiological insights into the risk of cancer post-KT and reinforce the need for tailored cancer screening and surveillance strategies for KTRs.

The increased risk of cancer in transplant recipients compared with the general population has been reported in previous studies conducted in the United Kingdom and the United States, where the overall cancer incidence rate was over twice that of the general population [6,7]. In the United States, non-Hodgkin lymphoma (NHL) is the most common cancer, followed by lung cancer, prostate cancer, and liver cancer. The standardized incidence rates are the highest for Kaposi sarcoma, lip cancer, non-melanoma skin cancer (NMSC), and liver cancer [7]. In the United Kingdom, NMSC and NHL are the most frequently observed, with higher standardized incidence rates for lip cancer, NMSC, Kaposi sarcoma, NHL, and anal cancer [6]. In contrast, thyroid and renal cancers were the most frequently reported cancers in our KTR cohort, whereas Hodgkin’s lymphoma showed the highest relative risk compared with that in the general population (although with a wide CI due to the small number of cases), followed by skin cancer, renal cancer, and NHL. Considering that thyroid cancer incidence in Korea increased 6.4-fold due to screening-detected small tumors [13], the high incidence in KTRs likely reflects detection bias from intensive surveillance. Although Kaposi sarcoma is a recognized posttransplant malignancy, events were exceedingly rare in our cohort rendering adjusted effect estimates not reliably estimable; therefore, we report descriptive counts and incidence rates only.

The increased risk of certain cancers among KTRs can be attributed to several factors. Long dialysis duration and acquired cystic kidney disease in native kidneys have been suggested as risk factors for renal cell carcinoma [14,15]. Additionally, ultraviolet light exposure and long-term immunosuppressive therapy after KT are known factors contributing to the development of skin cancer [1618]. Specific immunosuppressive agents used for induction or antirejection therapy, such as anti-thymocyte globulin and interleukin-2 receptor inhibitors, and Epstein-Barr virus seronegativity, have also been associated with an elevated risk of posttransplant lymphoproliferative disease (PTLD) [16,19].

Previous studies have reported an increased risk of colorectal cancer among transplant recipients compared with the general population [4,6,7,20]. However, in our study, the reduced incidence of colorectal and liver cancers in KTRs, particularly among men, represented an intriguing finding. This discrepancy may be attributed to active medical surveillance and thorough pretransplant workups including mandatory endoscopy and abdominal imaging tests in South Korea, which facilitate the early detection and management of precancerous lesions. Pretransplant screening, including assessments for viral infections and malignancies, has been widely recommended [2123]. The KDIGO (Kidney Disease: Improving Global Outcomes) guidelines emphasize the importance of comprehensive cancer screening for transplant candidates as per general population guidelines [24,25], and the screening should include several antiviral marker tests, chest computed tomography, esophagogastroduodenoscopy, colonoscopy, breast ultrasound, and abdominal ultrasound. Screening colonoscopy significantly reduces the risk of colorectal cancer in both the general population and KTRs [26,27]. Similarly, screening for hepatocellular carcinoma with abdominal ultrasound is well-documented to lower mortality in both low- and high-risk populations [28,29]. These findings underscore the critical role of systematic pretransplant screening programs for reducing cancer risks in KTRs. However, this paradoxical decrease might also be influenced by competing risks; higher non-cancer mortality (e.g., from cardiovascular disease or infection) in KTRs may preclude the development of these late-onset malignancies. Furthermore, strict selection criteria for transplantation often exclude candidates with severe comorbidities or poor lifestyle habits associated with these cancers, potentially introducing a ‘healthy candidate effect’ or selection bias.

Given the significantly elevated cancer risk in KTRs, there is a critical need for tailored cancer screening and prevention programs. Strategies such as adjusting immunosuppressive regimens to prevent PTLD, minimizing ultraviolet light exposure, and implementing targeted screenings for high-risk cancers could help reduce the risks of related cancers [19]. Furthermore, gastric cancer, one of the most common malignancies in South Korea, also showed a significantly higher risk in KTRs than in the general population, highlighting the importance of screening for it in posttransplant cancer surveillance in regions with high incidence. Notably, bladder cancer also exhibited a distinct pattern, being more frequent in younger KTRs. Prior exposure to cyclophosphamide for younger patients with rapidly progressive glomerulonephritis [30,31], BK virus reactivation [32,33], or age-related differences in cancer surveillance and competing mortality [34] might be associated with these results. Given the distinct risk profiles observed in our cohort, post-KT surveillance protocols should be tailored to prioritize gastric, renal, bladder, thyroid, skin, and lymphoid cancers, which demonstrated the highest risk elevations compared with the general population.

Our study has some limitations. First, identifying the causal relationships was challenging because of the retrospective study design. Prospective studies are warranted to validate these associations and explore the underlying mechanisms. Second, this nationwide cohort reflects South Korea’s unique healthcare system, where the national health insurance system provides universal health coverage including that for transplant candidates, and ensures access to a variety of screening tests. The relatively low medical costs in South Korea enable thorough pretransplant screening, which typically costs approximately USD 1,500–2,000 for an entire workup. This is notably lower than in the United States, where the average cost of a colonoscopy alone ranges from USD 2,400 to 2,750. Although these workup processes have been shown to reduce cancer risk, their applicability to other countries with different healthcare systems may be limited. Nevertheless, our findings indicate that active pretransplant screening may help lower cancer risk post-KT. Third, the follow-up period may appear relatively short for assessing malignancy risk after KT, as follow-up ended at the time of death or cancer diagnosis. However, the mean time to cancer occurrence in our study was 6.4 ± 4.37 years, which is comparable to the previous large cohort studies reporting time to malignancy, particularly for posttransplant lymphomas and other early-onset cancers [4,35]. Thus, the duration might be adequate for estimating overall cancer risk in this context, though longer-term follow-up is needed to fully evaluate late-onset malignancies and the long-term effects of immunosuppressive therapy. In addition, time-related trends may alter absolute risk attributed to KT per se with extended observation, underscoring the value of future analyses stratified by time since KT. Finally, we could not evaluate the impacts of detailed immunosuppressive regimens, donor type, and lifestyle factors such as diet, smoking, alcohol consumption, and physical activity, which may play a significant role in modulating cancer risk and incidence. Future research should incorporate prospective designs, diverse healthcare settings, detailed data on immunosuppressive regimens or donor type, and lifestyle factors to provide a more robust understanding of cancer risk in KTRs.

In conclusion, this study supports the clinical importance of individualized assessment and active surveillance of cancer in KTRs. By identifying specific malignancies with an increased risk after KT, our data may support future studies for establishing evidence-based clinical guidelines with a specified cancer screening program and optimizing posttransplant care of early detection and better outcomes. Further prospective studies including diverse healthcare systems are warranted to validate these findings, refine screening strategies, and clarify the impact of immunosuppressive modifications and underlying mechanisms.

Notes

Conflicts of interest

All authors have no conflicts of interest to declare.

Funding

KL was supported by the National Research Foundation of Korea (NRF) grant funded by the Korean government (MSIT) (RS-2025-00519288). JJ was supported by a National Research Foundation of Korea grant that was funded by the Korean government (NRF-2022R1F1A1068198) and the Bio&Medical Technology Development Program of the National Research Foundation (NRF) funded by the Korean government (MSIT) (RS-2023-00222838). HRJ was supported by grants from the National Research Foundation (grant number: RS-2025-00554916) and the Korean Health Technology Research and Development Project (grant number: RS-2024-00340973) through the Korean Health Industry Development Institute, funded by the Ministry of Health and Welfare, Republic of Korea.

Acknowledgments

The authors thank Yebin Park of the Department of Statistics and Actuarial Science, Soongsil University, for her statistical analysis.

Data sharing statement

The datasets generated and/or analyzed during the current study are available from the South Korean National Health Insurance Sharing Service database repository (https://nhiss.nhis.or.kr). The datasets used and/or analyzed during the current study will be available from the NHIS upon reasonable request.

Authors’ contributions

Conceptualization: KH, HRJ

Data curation, Formal analysis, Methodology: KH

Funding acquisition: KL, JJ, HRJ

Investigation: KL, JJ

Project administration, Resources: DWS

Supervision: KL, JJ, JEL, WH, HRJ

Visualization: HJ, SMS

Writing–original draft: HJ, SMS

Writing–review & editing: HRJ

All authors read and approved the final manuscript.

References

1. Au E, Wong G, Chapman JR. Cancer in kidney transplant recipients. Nat Rev Nephrol 2018;14:508–520. 10.1038/s41581-018-0022-6. 29802400.
2. Li WH, Chen YJ, Tseng WC, et al. Malignancies after renal transplantation in Taiwan: a nationwide population-based study. Nephrol Dial Transplant 2012;27:833–839. 10.1093/ndt/gfr277. 21633099.
3. Piselli P, Serraino D, Segoloni GP, et al. Risk of de novo cancers after transplantation: results from a cohort of 7217 kidney transplant recipients, Italy 1997-2009. Eur J Cancer 2013;49:336–344. 10.1016/j.ejca.2012.09.013. 23062667.
4. Vajdic CM, McDonald SP, McCredie MR, et al. Cancer incidence before and after kidney transplantation. JAMA 2006;296:2823–2831. 10.1001/jama.296.23.2823. 17179459.
5. Villeneuve PJ, Schaubel DE, Fenton SS, Shepherd FA, Jiang Y, Mao Y. Cancer incidence among Canadian kidney transplant recipients. Am J Transplant 2007;7:941–948. 10.1111/j.1600-6143.2007.01736.x. 17331115.
6. Collett D, Mumford L, Banner NR, Neuberger J, Watson C. Comparison of the incidence of malignancy in recipients of different types of organ: a UK Registry audit. Am J Transplant 2010;10:1889–1896. 10.1111/j.1600-6143.2010.03181.x. 20659094.
7. Engels EA, Pfeiffer RM, Fraumeni JF, et al. Spectrum of cancer risk among US solid organ transplant recipients. JAMA 2011;306:1891–1901. 10.1001/jama.2011.1592. 22045767.
8. Lee YH, Han K, Ko SH, Ko KS, Lee KU. Data analytic process of a nationwide population-based study using national health information database established by National Health Insurance Service. Diabetes Metab J 2016;40:79–82. 10.4093/dmj.2016.40.1.79. 26912157.
9. Kim MK, Han K, Park YM, et al. Associations of variability in blood pressure, glucose and cholesterol concentrations, and body mass index with mortality and cardiovascular outcomes in the general population. Circulation 2018;138:2627–2637. 10.1161/circulationaha.118.034978. 30571256.
10. Hong JY, Han K, Jung JH, Kim JS. Association of exposure to diagnostic low-dose ionizing radiation with risk of cancer among youths in South Korea. JAMA Netw Open 2019;2e1910584. 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2019.10584. 31483470.
11. Iwagami M, Shinozaki T. Introduction to matching in case-control and cohort studies. Ann Clin Epidemiol 2022;4:33–40. 10.37737/ace.22005. 38504854.
12. Hong S, Kim KS, Han K, Park CY. A cohort study found a high risk of end-stage kidney disease associated with acromegaly. Kidney Int 2023;104:820–827. 10.1016/j.kint.2023.06.037. 37490954.
13. Park S, Oh CM, Cho H, et al. Association between screening and the thyroid cancer “epidemic” in South Korea: evidence from a nationwide study. BMJ 2016;355:i5745. 10.1136/bmj.i5745. 27903497.
14. Goh A, Vathsala A. Native renal cysts and dialysis duration are risk factors for renal cell carcinoma in renal transplant recipients. Am J Transplant 2011;11:86–92. 10.1111/j.1600-6143.2010.03303.x. 20973916.
15. Karami S, Yanik EL, Moore LE, et al. Risk of renal cell carcinoma among kidney transplant recipients in the United States. Am J Transplant 2016;16:3479–3489. 10.1111/ajt.13862. 27160653.
16. Bustami RT, Ojo AO, Wolfe RA, et al. Immunosuppression and the risk of post-transplant malignancy among cadaveric first kidney transplant recipients. Am J Transplant 2004;4:87–93. 10.1046/j.1600-6135.2003.00274.x. 14678038.
17. de Vries E, Arnold M, Altsitsiadis E, et al. Potential impact of interventions resulting in reduced exposure to ultraviolet (UV) radiation (UVA and UVB) on skin cancer incidence in four European countries, 2010-2050. Br J Dermatol 2012;167 Suppl 2:53–62. 10.1111/j.1365-2133.2012.11087.x. 22881588.
18. Keller B, Braathen LR, Marti HP, Hunger RE. Skin cancers in renal transplant recipients: a description of the renal transplant cohort in Bern. Swiss Med Wkly 2010;140:w13036. 10.4414/smw.2010.13036. 20652847.
19. Caillard S, Dharnidharka V, Agodoa L, Bohen E, Abbott K. Posttransplant lymphoproliferative disorders after renal transplantation in the United States in era of modern immunosuppression. Transplantation 2005;80:1233–1243. 10.1097/01.tp.0000179639.98338.39. 16314791.
20. Safaeian M, Robbins HA, Berndt SI, Lynch CF, Fraumeni JF, Engels EA. Risk of colorectal cancer after solid organ transplantation in the United States. Am J Transplant 2016;16:960–967. 10.1111/ajt.13549. 26731613.
21. Fischer SA, Avery RK. Screening of donor and recipient prior to solid organ transplantation. Am J Transplant 2009;9 Suppl 4(Suppl 4):S7–S18. 10.1111/j.1600-6143.2009.02888.x. 20070698.
22. Kasiske BL, Cangro CB, Hariharan S, et al. The evaluation of renal transplantation candidates: clinical practice guidelines. Am J Transplant 2001;1 Suppl 2:3–95. 12108435.
23. Schaffner A. Pretransplant evaluation for infections in donors and recipients of solid organs. Clin Infect Dis 2001;33 Suppl 1:S9–S14. 10.1086/320898. 11389516.
24. Chadban SJ, Ahn C, Axelrod DA, et al. KDIGO clinical practice guideline on the evaluation and management of candidates for kidney transplantation. Transplantation 2020;104(4S1 Suppl 1):S11–S103. 10.1097/tp.0000000000003136. 32301874.
25. Smith RA, Andrews KS, Brooks D, et al. Cancer screening in the United States, 2019: a review of current American Cancer Society guidelines and current issues in cancer screening. CA Cancer J Clin 2019;69:184–210. 10.3322/caac.21557. 30875085.
26. Privitera F, Gioco R, Civit AI, et al. Colorectal cancer after kidney transplantation: a screening colonoscopy case-control study. Biomedicines 2021;9:937. 10.3390/biomedicines9080937. 34440142.
27. Bretthauer M, Løberg M, Wieszczy P, et al. Effect of colonoscopy screening on risks of colorectal cancer and related death. N Engl J Med 2022;387:1547–1556. 10.1056/nejmoa2208375. 36214590.
28. Yang J, Yang Z, Zeng X, et al. Benefits and harms of screening for hepatocellular carcinoma in high-risk populations: systematic review and meta-analysis. J Natl Cancer Cent 2023;3:175–185. 10.1016/j.jncc.2023.02.001. 39035193.
29. Singal AG, Zhang E, Narasimman M, et al. HCC surveillance improves early detection, curative treatment receipt, and survival in patients with cirrhosis: a meta-analysis. J Hepatol 2022;77:128–139. 10.1016/j.jhep.2022.01.023. 35139400.
30. Tsai TC, Chen YC, Lo CW, et al. Incidence and renal survival of ESRD in the young Taiwanese population. Clin J Am Soc Nephrol 2014;9:302–309. 10.2215/cjn.12761212. 24262507.
31. Ryu H, Kim K, Ryu J, et al. Cancer development and mortality differences in patients with glomerulonephritis after renal biopsy: a single center retrospective cohort study. BMC Nephrol 2020;21:221. 10.1186/s12882-020-01882-x. 32522167.
32. Iwasaki S, Takahashi K, Katano H, et al. BK polyomavirus-associated urothelial carcinoma of the bladder with a background of BK polyomavirus nephropathy in a kidney transplant recipient. Nephron 2023;147 Suppl 1:53–60. 10.1159/000531822. 37531946.
33. Borgogna C, Albertini S, Martuscelli L, et al. Evidence of BK polyomavirus infection in urothelial but not renal tumors from a single center cohort of kidney transplant recipients. Viruses 2021;13:56. 10.3390/v13010056. 33401589.
34. Kiberd BA, Rose C, Gill JS. Cancer mortality in kidney transplantation. Am J Transplant 2009;9:1868–1875. 10.1111/j.1600-6143.2009.02728.x. 19563337.
35. Webster AC, Craig JC, Simpson JM, Jones MP, Chapman JR. Identifying high risk groups and quantifying absolute risk of cancer after kidney transplantation: a cohort study of 15,183 recipients. Am J Transplant 2007;7:2140–2151. 10.1111/j.1600-6143.2007.01908.x. 17640312.

Article information Continued

Figure 1.

Flow diagram of study population selection.

From 25,361 kidney transplant recipients (KTRs) in the National Health Insurance Service (NHIS) database, 2,414 were excluded due to missing data, prior malignancy, or cancer within 1-year posttransplant. The final KTR cohort (n = 22,947) was matched with controls from the general population (1:5 ratio, n = 114,735).

KT, kidney transplantation.

Figure 2.

Cumulative incidence of malignancies in KTRs versus the matched general population.

The plot shows the cumulative incidence probability of cancer over time (in years) among KTRs (red line) and the matched general population (black line). KTRs exhibit a consistently higher incidence of cancer throughout the follow-up period, indicating a significantly increased risk of cancer associated with kidney transplantation (p < 0.001).

KTR, kidney transplant recipient.

Figure 3.

Cumulative incidence of malignancies in KTRs versus the matched general population, stratified by sex.

(A) Male and (B) female populations. The plots display the cumulative incidence probability of cancers over time (in years) among KTRs (red line) and the matched general populations (black line), stratified by sex. In both male and female, KTRs exhibit consistently higher incidence of cancer than the matched general populations, highlighting the increased oncologic burden associated with kidney transplantation irrespective of sex (all p < 0.001).

KTR, kidney transplant recipient.

Figure 4.

Cumulative incidence of malignancies in KTRs versus the matched general population, stratified by age groups.

Age of 20–39 years (A), 40–54 years (B), and ≥55 years (C). Each panel illustrates the cumulative incidence probability of cancers over time (in years) for KTRs (red line) compared with the matched general populations (black line). Across all age groups, KTRs show a consistently higher incidence of cancer, with the gap persisting throughout the 15-year follow-up period (all p < 0.001). These results indicate an increased cancer burden after kidney transplantation regardless of age at the time of transplantation.

KTR, kidney transplant recipient.

Table 1.

Baseline characteristics

Characteristic Matched general population KTRs
No. of patients 114,735 22,947
Age (yr) 47.4 ± 11.39 47.4 ± 11.39
 20–39 29,400 (25.6) 5,880 (25.6)
 40–54 51,435 (44.8) 10,287 (44.8)
 ≥55 33,900 (29.6) 6,780 (29.6)
Male sex 68,520 (59.7) 13,704 (59.7)
Low income, <20% 24,355 (21.2) 6,630 (28.9)
Seoul or city place 53,360 (46.5) 10,778 (47.0)
Diabetes mellitus 11,984 (10.4) 9,998 (43.6)
Hypertension 30,645 (26.7) 21,226 (92.5)
Dyslipidemia 28,657 (25.0) 10,967 (47.8)
Cancer incidence 4,561 (4.0) 1,508 (6.6)
Follow-up (yr) 6.7 ± 4.46 6.4 ± 4.37

Data are expressed as number only, mean ± standard deviation, or number (%).

KTR, kidney transplantation recipient.

Table 2.

Incidence rate of cancers

Cancer type KT Participant (n) Event (n) IRa Adjusted HR (95% CI)
Model 1 Model 2 Model 3
Any cancer No 114,735 4,561 5.98 1 (Reference) 1 (Reference) 1 (Reference)
Yes 22,947 1,508 10.32 1.73 (1.63–1.83) 1.76 (1.66–1.86) 1.56 (1.45–1.67)
Stomach No 114,735 693 0.89 1 (Reference) 1 (Reference) 1 (Reference)
Yes 22,947 175 1.16 1.30 (1.10–1.53) 1.32 (1.12–1.56) 1.34 (1.10–1.62)
Colorectal No 114,735 841 1.08 1 (Reference) 1 (Reference) 1 (Reference)
Yes 22,947 143 0.95 0.88 (0.73–1.05) 0.89 (0.75–1.06) 0.77 (0.63–0.93)
Liver No 114,735 503 0.65 1 (Reference) 1 (Reference) 1 (Reference)
Yes 22,947 93 0.61 0.95 (0.76–1.20) 0.97 (0.78–1.21) 0.67 (0.53–0.86)
Pancreatic No 114,735 347 0.45 1 (Reference) 1 (Reference) 1 (Reference)
Yes 22,947 64 0.42 0.95 (0.73–1.25) 0.97 (0.75–1.27) 0.84 (0.63–1.14)
Lung No 114,735 553 0.71 1 (Reference) 1 (Reference) 1 (Reference)
Yes 22,947 126 0.83 1.18 (0.97–1.43) 1.21 (0.99–1.47) 1.04 (0.84–1.29)
Thyroid No 114,735 671 0.86 1 (Reference) 1 (Reference) 1 (Reference)
Yes 22,947 236 1.57 1.81 (1.56–2.10) 1.81 (1.56–2.10) 1.51 (1.25–1.81)
Oral cavity and pharyngealb No 114,735 90 0.12 1 (Reference) 1 (Reference) 1 (Reference)
Yes 22,947 32 0.21 1.84 (1.23–2.76) 1.87 (1.25–2.80) 1.89 (1.16–3.07)
Esophagus No 114,735 74 0.09 1 (Reference) 1 (Reference) 1 (Reference)
Yes 22,947 15 0.10 1.04 (0.60–1.82) 1.07 (0.62–1.87) 0.78 (0.42–1.43)
Biliary No 114,735 140 0.18 1 (Reference) 1 (Reference) 1 (Reference)
Yes 22,947 35 0.23 1.29 (0.89–1.87) 1.33 (0.92–1.93) 1.09 (0.72–1.63)
Laryngeal No 114,735 36 0.05 1 (Reference) 1 (Reference) 1 (Reference)
Yes 229,47 4 0.03 0.57 (0.20–1.60) 0.58 (0.21–1.63) 0.40 (0.13–1.18)
Renal No 114,735 123 0.16 1 (Reference) 1 (Reference) 1 (Reference)
Yes 22,947 205 1.36 8.66 (6.92–10.83) 8.74 (6.99–10.93) 6.64 (5.02–8.78)
Bladder No 114,735 124 0.16 1 (Reference) 1 (Reference) 1 (Reference)
Yes 22,947 61 0.40 2.55 (1.87–3.46) 2.62 (1.93–3.56) 2.56 (1.79–3.66)
Nervous system No 114,735 61 0.08 1 (Reference) 1 (Reference) 1 (Reference)
Yes 22,947 20 0.13 1.69 (1.02–2.80) 1.70 (1.03–2.82) 1.87 (1.00–3.50)
Hodgkin No 114,735 11 0.01 1 (Reference) 1 (Reference) 1 (Reference)
Yes 22,947 5 0.03 2.32 (0.81–6.69) 2.34 (0.81–6.73) 7.03 (1.75–28.18)
Non-Hodgkin lymphoma No 114,735 110 0.14 1 (Reference) 1 (Reference) 1 (Reference)
Yes 22,947 123 0.81 5.79 (4.48–7.49) 5.83 (4.51–7.55) 5.69 (4.06–7.97)
Multiple myeloma No 114,735 57 0.07 1 (Reference) 1 (Reference) 1 (Reference)
Yes 22,947 18 0.12 1.64 (0.96–2.78) 1.67 (0.98–2.83) 1.70 (0.93–3.11)
Leukemia No 114,735 61 0.08 1 (Reference) 1 (Reference) 1 (Reference)
Yes 22,947 29 0.19 2.45 (1.57–3.81) 2.47 (1.59–3.84) 1.99 (1.17–3.38)
Skin No 114,735 120 0.15 1 (Reference) 1 (Reference) 1 (Reference)
Yes 22,947 144 0.95 6.22 (4.88–7.92) 6.43 (5.05–8.20) 6.89 (5.11–9.28)
Breastc No 46,215 518 1.61 1 (Reference) 1 (Reference) 1 (Reference)
Yes 9,243 118 1.88 1.17 (0.96–1.43) 1.18 (0.96–1.44) 1.13 (0.89–1.44)
Cervicalc No 46,215 91 0.28 1 (Reference) 1 (Reference) 1 (Reference)
Yes 9,243 29 0.46 1.64 (1.08–2.49) 1.64 (1.08–2.49) 1.64 (0.96–2.79)
Ovarianc No 46,215 125 0.39 1 (Reference) 1 (Reference) 1 (Reference)
Yes 9,243 20 0.32 0.82 (0.51–1.32) 0.83 (0.52–1.33) 0.82 (0.48–1.41)
Corpusc No 46,215 67 0.21 1 (Reference) 1 (Reference) 1 (Reference)
Yes 9,243 15 0.24 1.15 (0.66–2.02) 1.16 (0.66–2.02) 0.82 (0.43–1.56)
Prostated No 68,520 379 0.84 1 (Reference) 1 (Reference) 1 (Reference)
Yes 13,704 97 1.10 1.33 (1.06–1.66) 1.39 (1.11–1.73) 1.24 (0.97–1.58)
Testiculard No 68,520 8 0.02 1 (Reference) 1 (Reference) 1 (Reference)
Yes 13,704 0 0.00 ND ND ND

Model 1 was not adjusted for any variable. Model 2 was adjusted for age and sex. Model 3 was adjusted for age, sex, low income, diabetes mellitus, hypertension, and dyslipidemia.

CI, confidence interval; HR, hazard ratio; IR, incidence rate; KT, kidney transplantation; ND, not detected.

a

Incidence rate is presented as per 1,000 person-years.

b

Oral cavity and pharyngeal cancers: ICD-10 C00–C14 (including salivary gland and pharyngeal sites).

c

Data of female participants were analyzed.

d

Data of male participants were analyzed.

Table 3.

Subgroup analysis for HR of cancer incidence according to sex and age

Cancer type KT Adjusted HR (95% CI) p-value Adjusted HR (95% CI) p-value
Male participants Female participants Age 20–39 yr Age 40–54 yr Age ≥55 yr
Any cancer No 1 (Reference) 1 (Reference) 0.31 1 (Reference) 1 (Reference) 1 (Reference) <0.001
Yes 1.52 (1.39–1.65) 1.61 (1.46–1.77) 2.28 (1.95–2.65) 1.51 (1.37–1.67) 1.42 (1.29–1.57)
Stomach No 1 (Reference) 1 (Reference) 0.005 1 (Reference) 1 (Reference) 1 (Reference) 0.66
Yes 1.16 (0.93–1.45) 1.97 (1.43–2.72) 0.97 (0.45–2.09) 1.40 (1.07–1.83) 1.32 (1.03–1.69)
Colorectal No 1 (Reference) 1 (Reference) 0.03 1 (Reference) 1 (Reference) 1 (Reference) 0.98
Yes 0.66 (0.51–0.84) 0.98 (0.74–1.31) 0.77 (0.42–1.41) 0.78 (0.59–1.03) 0.75 (0.57–0.99)
Liver No 1 (Reference) 1 (Reference) 0.78 1 (Reference) 1 (Reference) 1 (Reference) 0.40
Yes 0.66 (0.50–0.87) 0.72 (0.44–1.16) 1.00 (0.49–2.05) 0.59 (0.41–0.85) 0.70 (0.50–0.99)
Pancreatic No 1 (Reference) 1 (Reference) 0.02 1 (Reference) 1 (Reference) 1 (Reference) 0.08
Yes 0.67 (0.46–0.97) 1.26 (0.82–1.96) 0.93 (0.31–2.77) 0.56 (0.35–0.91) 1.09 (0.76–1.57)
Lung No 1 (Reference) 1 (Reference) 0.39 1 (Reference) 1 (Reference) 1 (Reference) 0.91
Yes 0.99 (0.77–1.26) 1.20 (0.81–1.77) 1.06 (0.43–2.60) 0.98 (0.70–1.37) 1.07 (0.82–1.41)
Thyroid No 1 (Reference) 1 (Reference) 0.04 1 (Reference) 1 (Reference) 1 (Reference) 0.95
Yes 1.88 (1.43–2.48) 1.35 (1.09–1.67) 1.52 (1.16–2.05) 1.52 (1.20–1.93) 1.43 (1.01–2.03)
Oral No 1 (Reference) 1 (Reference) 0.96 1 (Reference) 1 (Reference) 1 (Reference) 0.69
Yes 1.88 (1.12–3.15) 1.93 (0.67–5.55) 3.17 (0.88–11.35) 1.79 (0.96–3.34) 1.77 (0.86–3.65)
Esophagus No 1 (Reference) 1 (Reference) 0.04 1 (Reference) 1 (Reference) 1 (Reference) 0.29
Yes 0.65 (0.33–1.25) 3.93 (0.78–19.83) ND 0.36 (0.11–1.23) 1.08 (0.55–2.13)
Biliary No 1 (Reference) 1 (Reference) 0.56 1 (Reference) 1 (Reference) 1 (Reference) 0.55
Yes 1.00 (0.61–1.64) 1.26 (0.67–2.40) 1.12 (0.23–5.51) 0.80 (0.40–1.62) 1.26 (0.78–2.06)
Laryngeal No 1 (Reference) 1 (Reference) 0.99 1 (Reference) 1 (Reference) 1 (Reference) 0.80
Yes 0.42 (0.14–1.25) ND ND 0.23 (0.03–1.82) 0.51 (0.15–1.80)
Renal No 1 (Reference) 1 (Reference) 0.51 1 (Reference) 1 (Reference) 1 (Reference) 0.002
Yes 6.35 (4.66–8.64) 7.56 (4.70–12.14) 17.61 (8.99–34.49) 7.05 (4.83–10.30) 4.62 (3.12–6.84)
Bladder No 1 (Reference) 1 (Reference) <0.001 1 (Reference) 1 (Reference) 1 (Reference) 0.14
Yes 1.60 (1.05–2.46) 10.02 (5.12–19.60) 7.41 (2.03–27.06) 3.10 (1.77–5.43) 2.12 (1.36–3.31)
Nervous system No 1 (Reference) 1 (Reference) 0.39 1 (Reference) 1 (Reference) 1 (Reference) 0.40
Yes 1.56 (0.73–3.35) 2.46 (1.04–5.83) 3.79 (1.16–12.32) 1.78 (0.73–4.30) 1.49 (0.60–3.65)
Hodgkin No 1 (Reference) 1 (Reference) 0.99 1 (Reference) 1 (Reference) 1 (Reference) 0.37
Yes 13.86 (3.03–63.52) ND 48.63 (4.25–556.42) 6.44 (1.00–41.49) ND
Non-Hodgkin lymphoma No 1 (Reference) 1 (Reference) 0.39 1 (Reference) 1 (Reference) 1 (Reference) 0.003
Yes 6.30 (4.18–9.48) 5.01 (3.22–7.82) 14.36 (7.58–27.21) 4.80 (3.04–7.58) 4.37 (2.70–7.06)
Multiple myeloma No 1 (Reference) 1 (Reference) 0.70 1 (Reference) 1 (Reference) 1 (Reference) 0.22
Yes 1.55 (0.73–3.33) 1.93 (0.82–4.55) 6.13 (1.30–28.97) 1.40 (0.57–3.43) 1.50 (0.63–3.56)
Leukemia No 1 (Reference) 1 (Reference) 0.20 1 (Reference) 1 (Reference) 1 (Reference) 0.37
Yes 1.67 (0.91–3.05) 3.19 (1.33–7.66) 1.84 (0.64–5.24) 2.86 (1.38–5.90) 1.37 (0.60–3.13)
Skin No 1 (Reference) 1 (Reference) 0.14 1 (Reference) 1 (Reference) 1 (Reference) 0.46
Yes 7.65 (5.50–10.64) 4.99 (2.97–8.40) 3.68 (1.14–11.95) 6.33 (4.09–9.82) 7.53 (5.27–10.76)
Breast No 1 (Reference) 1 (Reference) 1 (Reference) <0.001
Yes 2.03 (1.37–3.02) 1.06 (0.79–1.43) 0.49 (0.25–0.95)
Cervical No 1 (Reference) 1 (Reference) 1 (Reference) 0.24
Yes 2.40 (1.14–5.05) 1.11 (0.54–2.29) 2.02 (0.62–6.53)
Ovarian No 1 (Reference) 1 (Reference) 1 (Reference) 0.60
Yes 0.77 (0.26–2.34) 0.67 (0.32–1.41) 1.16 (0.50–2.71)
Corpus No 1 (Reference) 1 (Reference) 1 (Reference) 0.009
Yes 3.26 (1.14–9.30) 0.57 (0.23–1.44) 0.22 (0.03–1.70)
Prostate No 1 (Reference) 1 (Reference) 1 (Reference) 0.007
Yes 12.83 (2.58–63.92) 1.47 (0.97–2.25) 1.07 (0.80–1.44)
Testicular No 1 (Reference) 1 (Reference) 1 (Reference) ND
Yes ND ND ND

Each analysis was adjusted for sex, age, income, diabetes mellitus, hypertension, and dyslipidemia.

CI, confidence interval; HR, hazard ratio; KT, kidney transplantation; ND, not detected.