The Relationship Between Rh Negative Blood and Cancer

Rh-negative blood does not carry a clear, consistent cancer risk across the board. Dozens of studies have looked for links between Rh status and various cancers, and the results point in different directions depending on the type of cancer, the population studied, and whether researchers measured risk of developing cancer or chances of surviving it. For a few specific cancers, intriguing patterns have emerged, but the overall picture is one of contradictions and small sample sizes rather than a settled verdict.

What Rh Status Is and Why Researchers Care About It

Your Rh status comes down to whether your red blood cells carry a particular surface protein called RhD. If they do, you are Rh-positive; if they do not, you are Rh-negative. The underlying Rh proteins sit in the red cell membrane alongside several partner proteins, forming a complex that helps maintain the structural integrity of the cell itself.¹ These proteins belong to an ancient family involved in ammonia transport, and they appear to play a role in how the body handles blood ammonia.²

Most people are Rh-positive. Roughly 85 percent of people of European descent carry the RhD protein, and the proportion is even higher in many African and Asian populations. The Rh-negative variant is most common among Europeans, where the underlying gene deletion reaches a frequency of about 0.43.³ This relatively high frequency has puzzled geneticists for decades, because Rh incompatibility between mother and fetus can cause hemolytic disease of the newborn, which should theoretically push the negative variant out of the population. The fact that it persists has led researchers to wonder whether Rh-negative status might carry some compensating advantage, and cancer susceptibility is one area they have explored.

Breast Cancer

Breast cancer has been the most studied cancer in the Rh context, and the findings have been genuinely conflicting. A large Turkish retrospective study of nearly 4,000 breast cancer patients found that Rh-positive patients had higher rates of the lobular subtype, more estrogen receptor overexpression, and greater odds of distant metastasis. The risk of metastasis was about 63 percent higher in Rh-positive patients compared to Rh-negative patients, and the risk of lobular histology was roughly double.⁴ If taken at face value, that would suggest Rh-negative status might be somewhat protective, at least against certain breast cancer features.

But another study that focused specifically on triple-negative breast cancer, one of the most aggressive subtypes, found no difference at all. In a cohort of 283 triple-negative patients with known blood types, the distribution of Rh-positive and Rh-negative patients mirrored the general population. There was no difference in breast cancer-specific mortality between Rh-positive and Rh-negative women.⁵ A separate study of breast cancer patients treated with radiation and chemotherapy found that overall survival and disease-free survival did not differ between Rh-positive and Rh-negative groups either.⁶

So the breast cancer picture is messy. One well-powered study sees a pattern; others see nothing. Part of the issue is that breast cancer is not one disease. It encompasses multiple subtypes with different molecular profiles, and Rh status may interact differently with each. The Turkish study’s observation about lobular cancer and metastasis is worth noting but has not been widely replicated.

Lung Cancer and Rh Subtypes

Lung cancer research has produced some of the more striking Rh findings, particularly around small cell lung cancer. In a study of over 1,000 lung cancer cases, researchers found that Rh-negative patients made up about 21 percent of small cell lung cancer cases, compared to roughly 13 percent of non-small cell cases. That difference was statistically significant and suggested that Rh-negative individuals might be overrepresented among patients with this particularly aggressive cancer type.⁷

Beyond the simple positive/negative split, researchers have also looked at the less-discussed Rh subtypes. The Rh system actually includes several related proteins beyond RhD, designated by letters like C, c, E, and e. A study of lung adenocarcinoma found that specific combinations of these Rh antigens predicted survival. Patients with the “ee” Rh phenotype had a median survival of about 29 months, while those with the “C·E·” combination survived a median of just 10 months. The “ee” group also had fewer brain metastases and fewer total metastatic sites.⁸ This is a genuinely unusual finding. It suggests the broader Rh protein family, not just the D antigen, might influence how lung cancers behave.

Gastrointestinal Cancers

For colorectal cancer, two independent studies reached essentially the same conclusion: Rh status does not appear to be a meaningful factor. One Iranian study comparing colorectal adenocarcinoma patients with controls found comparable Rh-positive rates in both groups, around 87 percent, with no significant difference.⁹ A study from Baghdad found similar overall Rh distributions between colorectal cancer patients and controls, though it did identify significant associations with specific ABO blood types and obesity.¹⁰

Stomach cancer tells a different story, at least in one Libyan study. That research found that while Rh-positive blood type was associated with higher breast cancer rates, Rh-negative blood type had a high incidence of stomach cancer.¹¹ This is a single study with a specific population, so it is far from definitive, but it illustrates how Rh status might relate to cancer differently depending on which organ is involved.

Gynecological and Other Cancers

For ovarian, endometrial, and cervical cancer risk, a study of women in South-East Siberia found no relationship between Rh factor and the chance of developing any of these cancers.¹² However, when researchers shifted from risk to survival, a different pattern appeared. In a study of cervical cancer patients, Rh-negative women were diagnosed at a younger age but actually had higher overall survival compared to Rh-positive women.¹³ This distinction between getting cancer and surviving it once you have it comes up repeatedly in the Rh literature and is one of the most common points of confusion.

For skin cancer, a large prospective study found no association between Rh factor and the risk of any type of skin cancer, including melanoma, squamous cell carcinoma, and basal cell carcinoma.¹⁴ Yet a smaller European study suggested an increased risk of malignant melanoma specifically in the O Rh-negative blood group, reporting an odds ratio of 1.4.¹⁵ A prospective study and a smaller case-control study arriving at different conclusions is the norm in this field, not the exception.

Blood Cancers and Childhood Leukemia

The data on blood cancers and Rh status is particularly contradictory. One study found that Rh-negative status was a highly significant risk factor for childhood leukemia, with Rh-negative children having over six times the odds of developing the disease compared to Rh-positive children.¹⁶ That is an eye-catching finding, but another study of pediatric leukemia reached the opposite conclusion, identifying blood group O and Rh-positive status as risk factors for acute lymphoblastic leukemia in children.¹⁷ Both studies were small, which is a recurring theme here.

For adult lymphoma, the picture is clearer, if unexciting. A study of diffuse large B-cell lymphoma patients found no increase in incidence based on Rh status compared to controls, and blood groups were not predictive of overall survival.¹⁸

Risk Versus Prognosis

One of the most important distinctions in this area is between whether Rh status affects your chances of developing a cancer versus how that cancer behaves once it appears. These are fundamentally different questions, and studies often conflate them.

The most dramatic prognosis finding comes from a Norwegian study of oral squamous cell carcinoma. Among 70 patients with floor-of-mouth cancers, Rh-negative patients had a five-year survival rate of just 8 percent, compared to 30 percent for Rh-positive patients.¹⁹ That is a stark difference, though it comes from a small and now quite old study. The cervical cancer data mentioned earlier pointed in the opposite direction, with Rh-negative patients showing better survival.¹³ These contradictions make it impossible to say that Rh-negative status generally leads to better or worse cancer outcomes. The relationship, if it exists, is cancer-specific.

The Chromosome 1p Connection

One reason researchers keep looking at this question is that the RHD gene sits on the short arm of chromosome 1, specifically at region 1p34-36. This chromosomal neighborhood happens to contain several genes that are important in cancer biology. Loss of genetic material in this region has been documented in various malignancies. In at least one case report, routine blood typing in a patient with acute myeloid leukemia revealed mixed-field reactions on RhD testing, which turned out to be caused by loss of heterozygosity on chromosome 1p encompassing the RHD gene locus.²⁰

This does not mean that being Rh-negative causes cancer or that Rh genes directly drive tumor growth. What it means is that the genomic region where the RHD gene lives is one that tumors sometimes disrupt during their development. In some cancers, the tumor cells themselves may lose their RhD expression as part of broader chromosomal rearrangements, which can complicate blood typing and transfusion. The Rh proteins form part of a conserved family with 12 transmembrane helices, and their structural role in the red cell membrane means that disruption of this region can have downstream effects on cell biology.²¹

Blood Transfusions and Rh Status in Cancer Patients

A more immediate concern for Rh-negative cancer patients is what happens when they need blood transfusions during treatment. Cancer patients often require red blood cell transfusions, and Rh-negative blood is less available simply because fewer donors carry it. In emergencies, or when Rh-negative supply runs low, hospitals may give Rh-positive blood to Rh-negative patients, a practice called RhD-incompatible transfusion.

A study tracking 545 Rh-negative oncology patients who received a total of over 4,200 Rh-positive transfusions found that about 14 percent developed antibodies against the D antigen. Interestingly, the type of cancer mattered: patients with myelodysplastic syndrome or solid tumors were more likely to mount an immune response than those with acute leukemia.²² This is a practical consideration because once a patient develops anti-D antibodies, future transfusions become more complicated. The lower immunization rate in leukemia patients likely reflects the immunosuppressive nature of the disease and its treatment.

For Rh-negative patients undergoing cancer treatment, this means that blood compatibility decisions involve weighing the immediate need for transfusion against the risk of future antibody complications. Younger patients and those expected to need many transfusions over a long treatment course generally warrant stricter matching.

Why the Evidence Is So Inconsistent

If you have been tracking the contradictions across different cancer types, you are seeing the central problem with this research area. The inconsistency is not just normal scientific uncertainty. There are structural reasons the data is messy.

Most of these studies are retrospective, meaning researchers looked backward at hospital records to see which blood types showed up in cancer patients. That design is vulnerable to all sorts of biases, from who gets referred to a particular hospital to how completely records are kept. Sample sizes tend to be small, especially for Rh-negative subgroups, since only about 15 percent of most study populations are Rh-negative. When you further divide those patients by cancer type, stage, and subtype, the numbers in each cell of the analysis become tiny.

There is also a population problem. The frequency of Rh-negative blood varies dramatically across ethnic groups. Studies from Turkey, Libya, Iraq, Iran, Siberia, and Norway are all studying populations with different baseline Rh frequencies, different genetic backgrounds, and different environmental exposures. An association found in one population may be absent in another for reasons that have nothing to do with the Rh protein itself and everything to do with other genes that happen to travel alongside the RHD deletion in that particular group.

The Evolutionary Puzzle

The persistence of the Rh-negative trait in human populations has long been a puzzle, and researchers have explored whether some hidden health benefit, including reduced cancer risk, might explain it. One hypothesis holds that Rh heterozygotes, people who carry one copy of the RHD deletion and one functional copy, might enjoy a survival advantage that keeps the deletion circulating at relatively high frequencies. A preregistered study testing this idea found strong support for heterozygote advantage as a mechanism maintaining Rh polymorphism in humans.²³

However, a separate genomic analysis using HapMap data found no clear evidence that positive natural selection had acted on the RHD deletion. The researchers suggested that the deletion’s rise to its current frequency in European populations could be explained by genetic drift or founder effects, and that once the frequency reached a middling level, the selection pressure against it was too weak to push it back down.³ If there were a strong cancer-protective effect of Rh-negative status, you would expect to see some evolutionary signal of selection, and the genomic evidence for that signal is either absent or too faint to detect with current methods. That does not rule out a small effect, but it argues against a dramatic one.

Rh-Negative Blood and Immune Surveillance

One speculative thread in the research concerns whether Rh status might influence the immune system’s ability to recognize and destroy abnormal cells. The Rh complex interacts with CD47, a protein on the surface of red blood cells that sends a “don’t eat me” signal to immune cells called macrophages. CD47 has attracted enormous interest in cancer research because many tumor cells overexpress it, effectively cloaking themselves from immune detection. Whether variations in the Rh complex alter CD47 signaling in a way that affects cancer outcomes is not established, but the molecular proximity of these systems is why some immunologists consider the connection worth investigating.

For now, if you are Rh-negative and wondering whether your blood type puts you at higher or lower risk for cancer, the honest answer is that the evidence does not support confident advice in either direction. The scattered findings of elevated risk for one cancer and reduced risk for another, or worse prognosis in one type and better prognosis in another, do not add up to a coherent biological story. Your Rh status is medically relevant for pregnancy, blood transfusions, and organ transplantation. Whether it meaningfully shapes your cancer risk remains an open question that existing research, limited as it is, has not been able to close.

1
PubMed. Rh proteins: key structural and functional components of the red cell membrane
2
Seminars in Hematology. The Structure and Function of the Rh Antigen Complex
3
PubMed Central. Evolutionary genetics of the human Rh blood group system
4
PubMed Central. Associations with ABO Blood Group and Rhesus Blood Group Status in Patients with Breast Cancer
5
Annals of Surgical Oncology. ABO blood type/Rh factor and the incidence and outcomes for patients with triple-negative breast cancer
6
Asian Pacific Journal of Cancer Prevention. Significance of ABO-Rh Blood Groups in Response and Prognosis in Breast Cancer Patients Treated with Radiotherapy and Chemotherapy
7
Frontiers in Oncology. The Prevalence of Rhesus-Negative Blood Group Among Patient With Small Cell Lung Cancer and Analysis of Its Effect on Overall Survival
8
PubMed. Rhesus CE expression on patient red blood cells is an independent prognostic factor for adenocarcinoma of the lung
9
ASIAN PACIFIC JOURNAL OF CANCER PREVENTION. ABO and Rh Blood Groups and Risk of Colorectal Adenocarcinoma
10
PubMed Central. Correlation between blood group, Rh, and obesity with colorectal carcinoma among patients attending Al-Kindy Teaching Hospital/Baghdad
11
PubMed. A Study on the Relationship between Blood Group and Type of Cancer
12
PubMed. ABO and Rh blood groups in relation to ovarian, endometrial and cervical cancer risk among the population of South-East Siberia
13
PubMed Central. ABO/Rh Blood Group and Cervical Cancer Survival: Results from Our Own and Other Studies
14
PubMed Central. ABO Blood Group and Incidence of Skin Cancer
15
European Journal of Cancer Prevention. ABO blood group and risk of cutaneous malignant melanoma
16
Archives of Clinical Case Studies. The Association of ABO Blood Types with Childhood Leukemia
17
Al-Iraqia Medical College Journal. Impact of ABO and Rh Blood Groups Combined with Family History on Pediatric Leukemia Risk
18
Leukemia Research. Could blood groups have prognostic significance on survival in patients with diffuse large B cell lymphoma?
19
Cancer. Prognostic value of rhesus blood groups in oral squamous cell carcinomas
20
Taylor & Francis Online (Informa Healthcare / Leuk Lymphoma). Mixed fields on RhD typing as an indication of loss of heterozygosity on chromosome 1p in acute myeloid leukemia
21
PubMed Central. The Rh protein family: gene evolution, membrane biology, and disease association
22
PubMed. Cancer type predicts alloimmunization following RhD-incompatible RBC transfusions
23
PubMed. The role of balancing selection in maintaining human RhD blood group polymorphism