One would hope that, when it comes to developing cancer, lightning doesn’t strike in the same place twice. Yet, unfair as it may seem, scientists have long known that patients who survive one cutaneous melanoma (CM) have a markedly higher risk of developing another skin cancer later in life. A recent study now reveals that those who have survived a non-skin cancer face an increased risk of developing CM as well.

Scientists at the University Hospitals Case Medical Center published a study this month in Archives Dermatology reporting results over the past thirty years observing over seventy thousand patients with CM as the first primary cancer, and over six thousand patients with CM following a previous cancer. The data revealed that patients first diagnosed with CM, other skin cancers, breast cancer, and lymphoma at younger than forty-five years old, and patients diagnosed with the above stated cancers, as well as ocular melanoma, prostate cancer, and leukemia, at older than forty-five years old, had a significantly higher risk of developing CM later in life. This risk remained elevated for fifteen years after diagnosis of the initial cancer.

Overall, the study demonstrated better cancer survival rates in white, married females under the age of forty-five at their first diagnosis. Generally, however, the results established the need for continued skin surveillance in all cancer survivors, especially in melanoma survivors, who are up to twelve times more likely than those in the U.S. population who have not had melanoma to develop a second CM.

Scientists believe the link between developing melanoma after surviving other cancers may be explained by an underlying genetic susceptibility to multiple types of cancer. Younger cancer survivors are thus more likely than people initially diagnosed after the age of forty-five to develop melanoma later on, because the cancer that developed early in life likely had a genetic basis.

Based on this hypothesis, one might wonder whether this genetic susceptibility has been specifically pinpointed to a particular gene, as is the case with the BRCA1/2 genes, which predict susceptibility to breast and ovarian cancers. Identifying these genes has brought with it a “myriad” of issues, however. Myriad Genetics mapped and patented the BRCA1/2 genes several years ago, and has since fought an uphill battle against scientists, doctors, scholars, and the court system in its attempt to monopolize the market on testing patients (at $3,000 a pop) for predisposition to developing cancer.

Yet, despite the adversity Myriad has faced, the Federal Circuit has allowed its patent to stand. In light of this, it is reasonable to be concerned that this underlying genetic susceptibility to multiple types of cancer may be fodder for future business’ patent monopolies at the expense of patients’ wallets. If one gene can predict susceptibility not just to one cancer but also to multiple cancers thereafter, the battle to own the intellectual property therefor would be heated, and the victor could charge whatever rate it desired for the susceptibility test, unopposed. Given the unwavering rate of skin cancer diagnoses, it is imperative that companies develop diagnostic tests early, and with a healthy dose of competitive pricing.