system
Given the following post, respond as if you're commenting on Reddit:
human
If someone gets a blood transfusion, wouldn’t they have a mishmash of genetic material appear in a DNA test?
gpt
From a review of an article in *Scientific American*:

Scientific American explains that when donor blood is mixed into the body with a transfusion, that person’s DNA will be present in your body for some days, “but its presence is unlikely to alter genetic tests significantly.” It is likely minimized because the majority of blood is red cells, which do not carry DNA — the white blood cells do. That publication notes studies have shown that highly sensitive equipment can pick up donor DNA from blood transfusions up to a week after the procedure, but with particularly large transfusions, donor white blood cells were present for up to a year and a half afterward. Still, even in those latter cases, the recipient’s DNA was clearly dominant over the donor DNA, which is easily identifiable as “a relatively inconsequential interloper.”

====

This review raises a question for me.   Suppose the white blood cells from the donor, that can persist for up to a year in the blood of the recipient, have a high risk of becoming cancerous.  Is there any evidence of this occurring, that is, a recipient developing cancer of a type of white blood cell that came from a donor ?