Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-v9fdk Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-20T04:31:41.843Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Malignant Tumors among Twins: A Study of Divergent Views

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 August 2014

Louis Keith  and
Eric Brown
Louis Keith*
Affiliation:
Departments of Microbiology and of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Chicago Medical School, Chicago, Illinois
Eric Brown
Affiliation:
Departments of Microbiology and of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Chicago Medical School, Chicago, Illinois
*
The Chicago Medical School, 2020 West Ogden Avenue, Chicago, Illinois 60612, USA

Summary

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

Agreement prevails that MZ twins have higher concordance rates for cancer than do DZ twins. The exact genetic influence on concordance remains doubtful. Neither the patient groups nor the means by which data are analyzed are comparable. The naturally higher perinatal mortality rate among twins affects statistical analysis of diseases among surviving cotwins. Classification of zygosity among all studies of twins is not entirely reliable.

A review of published reports of cancer among twins notes concordance in a variety of tumors. Genetic factors appear to operate either in the concordance of the cancer or in the site of the specific tumors. A genetic origin of tumors in MZ twins is possible. Tumors, including type, site, and age of onset, affect MZ twins more than both members of a DZ pair.

Computerized permanent twin registers should be established for study of prospective follow-up of large twin populations. Suggestions are made for implementation.

Type
Research Article
Information
Acta geneticae medicae et gemellologiae: twin research , Volume 19 , Issue 4 , October 1970 , pp. 576 - 583
Copyright
Copyright © The International Society for Twin Studies 1970

References

Allen, G. (1965). Twin research: problems and prospects. Progr. Med. Genet., 4: 242.Google Scholar
Ansaldi, N. (1965). Malattie infettive, tumori ed emopatie nei gemelli. Minerva Nipiol., 15: 83.Google Scholar
Benirschke, K. (1961a). Examination of the placenta. Obstet. Gynec., 18: 309.Google Scholar
Benirschke, K. (1961b). The accurate recording of twin placentation. Obstet. Gynec., 18: 334.Google Scholar
Brindley, B. I., Collins, J. D. Jr. (1961). Bilateral retinoblastoma in identical twins. Arch. Ophthal. (Chicago), 66: 37.Google Scholar
Busk, T., Clemmesen, J., Nielsen, A. (1948). Twin studies and other genetical investigations in the Danish Cancer Registry. Brit. J. Cancer, 2: 156.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Cederlöf, R., Friberg, L., Jonsson, E., Kaij, L. (1961). Studies on similarity diagnosis in twins with the aid of mailed questionnaires. Acta Genet. (Basel), 11: 338.Google Scholar
Champlin, H. W. (1930). Similar tumors of testis occurring in identical twins. J.A.M.A., 95: 96.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Frasier, S. D., Bashore, R. A., Mosier, H. D. (1964). Gonadoblastoma associated with pure gonadal dysgenesis in monozygous twins. J. Pediat., 64: 740.Google Scholar
Gedda, L. (1966). Studio sui tumori nei gemelli. El Cancero, 19: 239.Google Scholar
Gedda, L., Milani-Comparetti, M. (1966). Computerization of a permanent Twin Register; a basic tool in twin research. Acta Genet. Med. Gemellol., 4: 333.Google Scholar
Greulich, W. W. (1938). Birth of six pairs of fraternal twins to the same parents; discussion of possible significance of such cases in light of recent observations. J.A.M.A., 110: 559.Google Scholar
Harvald, B. (1958). Catamnestic investigation of Danish twins; survey of 1300 pairs. Acta Genet. (Basel), 8: 287.Google Scholar
Harvald, B. (1963). Heredity of cancer elucidated by a study of unselected twins. J.A.M.A., 186: 749.Google Scholar
Harvald, B., Hauge, M. (1956). A catamnestic investigation of Danish twins: preliminary report. Danish Med. Bull., 3: 150.Google ScholarPubMed
Hauge, M., Harvald, B. (1961). Malignant growths in twins. Acta Genet. (Basel), 11: 372.Google Scholar
Heizer, W. D., Lewison, E. F. (1964). Concordant disease in identical twins. J.A.M.A., 188: 217.Google Scholar
Herorld, J., Venta, J., Zavadil, M. (1964). Prispevek K Vyskytu Zhoubnych Nadoru U Duojcat. Cas. Lek. Cesk., 111: 361.Google Scholar
Jablon, S., Neel, J. V., Gershowitz, H., Atkinson, G. F. (1967). NAS-NRC twin panel: methods of construction of panel, zygosity diagnosis and proposed use. Amer. J. Hum. Genet., 19: 133.Google Scholar
Jarvik, L. F., Falek, A., Kallmann, F. J., Lorge, I. (1960). Survival trends in a senescent twin population. Amer. J. Hum. Genet., 12: 170.Google Scholar
Jarvik, L. F., Falek, A., (1961). Cancer rates in ageing twins. Amer. J. Hum. Genet., 13: 413.Google Scholar
Jarvik, L. F., Falek, A., (1962). Comparative data on cancer in ageing twins. Cancer, 15: 1009.Google Scholar
Lehmann, F. E., Huber, W. Cit. Allen, 1965.Google Scholar
Lynch, H. T. (1967). Hereditary Factors in Carcinoma. Springer-Verlag, New York, p. 3.Google Scholar
Macklin, M. (1940). An analysis of tumors in monozygous and dizygous twins. J. Hered., 31: 277.Google Scholar
Macklin, M. (1947). Inheritance and human cancer. Ohio Med. J., 43: 836.Google Scholar
McFarland, J., Meade, T. S. (1932). Genetic origin of tumors supported by their simultaneous and symmetrical occurrence in homologous twins. Amer. J. Med. Sci., 184: 66.Google Scholar
Militzer, R. E. (1935). Carcinoma of stomach in identical twins. Amer. J. Cancer, 25: 544.Google Scholar
Mumford, S. A., Linder, H. (1936). Carcinoma of breast in homologous twins. Amer. J. Cancer, 28: 393.Google Scholar
Mysberg, W. A. (1957). Genetic-statistical data on the presence of secondary oocytary twins among non-identical twins. Acta Genet. (Basel), 7: 39.Google Scholar
Nichols, R. C., Bilbro, W. C. Jr. (1966). Diagnosis of twin zygosity. Acta Genet. (Basel), 16: 265.Google Scholar
Nielsen, A., Clemmesen, (1951). Twin studies in the Danish Cancer Registry. 1942-1955. Brit. J. Cancer, 11: 327.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Oliver, C. P. (1965). Formal discussion of cancer in man. Cancer Res., 25: 1327.Google Scholar
Osborne, R. H., De George, F. V. (1964). Neoplastic diseases in twins: evidence for pre- or perinatal factors; conditioning cancer susceptibility. Cancer, 17: 1149.Google Scholar
Palmer, J. P., Mitchell, R. W. (1948). Adenocarcinoma of uterine fundus in identical twins. Amer. J. Obstet. Gynec., 50: 981.Google Scholar
Potter, E. L. (1963). Twin zygosity and placental form in relation to outcome of pregnancy. Amer. J. Obstet. Gynec., 87: 566.Google Scholar
Protic, M. F., Prcic, M. (1960). Our contribution to the heredity of carcinoma. A case of carcinoma of the rectum in twin brothers observed at the same time and the same place. Med. Arch., 14: 53.Google Scholar
Russell, P. S., Monaco, A. P. (1964). Biology of tissue transplantation. New Eng. J. Med., 271: 502.Google Scholar
Smith, S. M., Penrose, L. S. (1955). Monozygotic and dizygotic twin diagnosis. Ann. Hum. Genet., 19: 273.Google Scholar
Spranger, J., Von Verschuer, O. (1964). Untersuchungen zur Frage der Erblichkeit des Krebs. Z. Menschl. Vererb. Konstitutionsl., 37: 549.Google Scholar
Strong, S. J., Carney, G. (1967). Placenta in Twin Pregnancy. Pergamon Press, London.Google Scholar
Twinem, F. P. (1927). Identical twins and problem of heredity. New York J. Med., 27: 1192.Google Scholar
Von Verschuer, O. (1956a). Tuberculose und Krebs bei Zwillingen. Acta Genet. (Basel), 6: 103.Google Scholar
Von Verschuer, O. (1956b). Cancer in twins. German Med. Monthly, 1: 302; Deutsch. Med. Wschr., 81: 1456.Google Scholar
Von Verschuer, O., Kober, E. (1940). Die Frage der Erblichen Desposition zum Krebs. Z. Krebsforsch., 50: 5.Google Scholar
World Health Organization (1966). Use of twins in epidemiological studies. Acta Genet. Med. Gemellol., 15: 109.Google Scholar