Tag: Pediatric

Improved neuropsychological outcomes following proton therapy relative to x-ray therapy for pediatric brain tumor patients

Jeffrey P Gross, Stephanie Powell, Frank Zelko, William Hartsell, Stewart Goldman, Jason Fangusaro, Rishi R Lulla, Natasha Pillay Smiley, John Han-Chih Chang, Vinai Gondi, Neuro-Oncology, , noz070, https://doi.org/10.1093/neuonc/noz070

Abstract

Survivors of pediatric brain tumors are at risk for impaired development in multiple neuropsychological domains. The purpose of this study was to compare neuropsychological outcomes of pediatric brain tumor patients who underwent x-ray radiotherapy (XRT) versus proton radiotherapy (PRT).Methods

Pediatric patients who underwent either XRT or PRT and received post-treatment age-appropriate neuropsychological evaluation including measures of intelligence (IQ), attention, memory, visuographic skills, academic skills, and parent-reported adaptive functioning were identified. Multivariate analyses were performed to assess differences in neuropsychological outcomes and included tests for interaction between treatment cohort and follow-up time.Results

Between 1998 and 2017, 125 patients with tumors located in the supratentorial (17.6%), midline (28.8%) or posterior fossa (53.6%) compartments received radiation and had post-treatment neuropsychological evaluation. Median age at treatment was 7.4 years. The PRT patient cohort had higher estimated socioeconomic status and shorter median time from radiotherapy completion to last neuropsychological evaluation (6.7 vs. 2.6 years, p<0.001). On multivariable analysis, PRT was associated with higher full-scale IQ (=10.6, p=0.048) and processing speed (=14.4, p=0.007) relative to XRT, with trend toward higher verbal IQ (=9.9, p=0.06) and general adaptive functioning (=11.4, p=0.07). Planned sensitivity analyses truncating follow-up interval in the XRT cohort re-demonstrated higher verbal IQ, (p=0.01) and IQ (p=0.04) following PRT, with trend toward improved processing speed (p=0.09).Conclusions

PRT is associated with favorable outcomes for intelligence and processing speed. Combined with other strategies for treatment de-intensification, PRT may further reduce neuropsychological morbidity of brain tumor treatment.

Study supports expanded use of proton therapy to minimize radiation exposure to healthy, developing organs.

Researchers analyzed the largest cohort to date of pediatric patients with high-risk neuroblastoma treated with proton radiation therapy (PRT), finding both that proton therapy was effective at reducing tumors and demonstrated minimal toxicity to surrounding organs. “These data are extremely encouraging and could be a game-changer for a number of reasons,” said lead author Christine Hill-Kayser, MD, Chief of the Pediatric Radiation Oncology Service at Penn Medicine and an attending physician at CHOP. “Not only did we observe excellent outcomes and minimal side effects that validate the use of PRT in high-risk neuroblastoma patients, we answered a lingering question about proton therapy — the concern that because it is so targeted, tumors may come back. Tumors mostly did not come back — suggesting PRT is effective, less toxic and a superior choice for our young patients who must endure intense treatment modalities in an effort to cure this high-risk cancer.”

ScienceDaily. ScienceDaily, 9 April 2019 <www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2019/04/190409153631.htm>.

https://www.redjournal.org/article/S0360-3016(19)30190-7/fulltext

Myxuan Huynh, Loredana Gabriela Marcu, Eileen Giles, Michala Short, Donna Matthews, Eva Bezak

Abstract

Clinical implementation of proton therapy demonstrated its potential to overcome some limitations of the more traditional, photon-based radiotherapy, due to physical and radiobiological advantages of protons. However, questions concerning the long-term effects of protons on paediatric patients need outcome analysis of the reported literature in order to be answered. The current paper has analysed the available clinical trials and comparative studies (protons vs photons) for paediatric cancers of the central nervous system (CNS) analysing the reported outcomes and follow-up times in order to evaluate the safety of proton therapy for this patient group.

Based on the literature analysis, proton therapy for treatment of paediatric cancers of the CNS was found to provide survival and tumour control outcomes comparable, and frequently superior, to photon therapy. Furthermore, the use of protons was shown to decrease the incidence of severe acute and late toxicities, including reduced severity of endocrine, neurological, IQ and QoL deficits. Most commonly, the reported median follow-up time was up to 5 years. Only a few studies reported promising, longer follow-up results. Considering that these patients are likely to survive many of the malignancies reported on, the incidence of long term sequellae impacting growth, development and quality of life into adulthood, should be viewed longitudinally for completeness.

The evidence surrounding proton therapy in paediatric tumour management supports its effectiveness and potential benefits in reducing the incidence of late-onset toxicities and second malignancies. For stronger evidence, it is highly desired for future studies to improve current reporting by (1) highlighting the paediatric patient cohort’s outcome (in mixed patient groups), (2) reporting the follow-up time, (3) clearly indicating the toxicity criteria used in their evaluation, and (4) identifying the risk group. With this suggested clarity of future reporting, meaningful data to support treatment choice may then be available.

Table 1 Compilation of comparative studies (protons vs photons) for paediatric CNS tumours (treatment planning comparison studies not included).

Full article https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0167814019300131

Rao, Avani D. et al. International Journal of Radiation Oncology • Biology • Physics , Volume 103 , Issue 3 , 669 – 679

With the increasing use of advanced radiation techniques such as intensity modulated radiation therapy, stereotactic radiation therapy, and proton therapy, radiation oncologists now have the tools to mitigate radiation-associated toxicities. This is of utmost importance in the treatment of a pediatric patient. To best use these advanced techniques to mitigate radiation-induced growth abnormalities, the radiation oncologist should be equipped with a nuanced understanding of the anatomy of centers of growth. This article aims to enable the radiation oncologist to better understand, predict, and minimize radiation-mediated toxicities on growth. We review the process of bone development and radiation-induced growth abnormalities and provide an atlas for contouring important growth plates to guide radiation treatment planning. A more detailed recognition of important centers of growth may improve future treatment outcomes in children receiving radiation therapy.

1. Introduction
2. Complexities of a Standard Dose Constraint
3. Assessment of Skeletal Maturity and Completion of Growth
4. Anatomic Road Map of Important Growth Plates and Clinical Correlates of Radiation-Associated Growth Toxicity
   1. Whole-brain radiation therapy
   2. Craniofacial radiation therapy
      1. Facial hypoplasia
      2. Orbital defects
   3. Shoulder and arm radiation therapy
      1. Clavicular narrowing
      2. Slipped proximal humeral epiphysis
      3. Arm-length discrepancy
   4. Pelvic radiation therapy
      1. Slipped capital femoral epiphysis
      2. Osteonecrosis
      3. Leg-length discrepancy
   5. Spinal irradiation
      1. Reduced final height
      2. Scoliosis
5. Conclusion and Future Directions
6. Supplementary Data
7. References

Chloe J Bright, PhD Raoul C Reulen, PhD David L Winter, HNC Daniel P Stark, MD Martin G McCabe, PhD Angela B Edgar, MD et al.

“A previous large case-control study showed a dose-response relation between radiotherapy and risk of lung cancer in breast cancer survivors diagnosed at any age (not AYA-specific). Existing literature suggests that chest radiotherapy and smoking are both likely contributors to the substantial number of excess neoplasms accounted for by lung cancer.

The bladder and bowel would be directly exposed if external-beam radiotherapy was used to treat cervical cancer. A large case-control study showed a dose-response relation between radiotherapy and the risk of both bladder and rectal cancers in cervical cancer survivors. Existing literature suggests that pelvic irradiation and smoking are likely contributors to the number of excess neoplasms accounted for by lung, colorectal, and bladder cancer. Clinical follow-up of survivors of AYA cervical cancer, particularly where pelvic irradiation is used, should focus on lung, bowel, and bladder cancers.

Treatment for testicular cancer can involve irradiating the para-aortic lymph nodes, which might explain the excess of subsequent primary neoplasms seen in abdominal sites (prostate, bladder, and colorectal). The excess of subsequent primary neoplasms observed in the abdomen is consistent with international studies of testicular cancer survivors. The excess of lung subsequent primary neoplasms might be caused by radiotherapy to the lungs, since previous studies have reported an increased risk of lung cancer in survivors of testicular cancer who were given chest radiotherapy. Clinical follow-up of survivors of AYA testicular cancer should focus on prostate, bladder, colorectal, and lung cancers.

The lungs would be directly exposed if external-beam radiotherapy was used to treat Hodgkin lymphoma; previous studies of Hodgkin lymphoma survivors have provided evidence of a dose-dependent increase in lung cancer risk with radiotherapy with or without chemotherapy.”

https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lanonc/article/PIIS1470-2045(18)30903-3/fulltext

Christine E. Hill-Kayser, MD, Zelig Tochner, MD, Yimei Li∗, Goldie Kurtz, MD, Robert A. Lustig, MD, Paul James, Naomi Balamuth, MD, Richard Womer, MD, Peter Mattei, Stephen Grupp, MD PhD, Yael P. Mosse, MD, John M. Maris, MD, Rochelle Bagatell, MD

Conclusions : “excellent outcomes in patients treated with Proton Therapy for high-risk neuroblastoma from 2010-2015, with 82% of patients alive and 97% free of primary site recurrence. No patient has experienced long-term renal or liver toxicity. This treatment maximizes normal tissue preservation and is appropriate for this patient population.”

https://www.redjournal.org/article/S0360-3016(19)30190-7/pdf

February 15th is the the International Childhood Cancer Day. It gives us the opportunity to thank all individuals who devote their life to fighting pediatric cancers : medical staff, researchers, engineers, care givers, and families.

We love our young patients and we work tirelessly for them.

Proton Therapy is particularly recommended for children. The small bodies and organs of infants and children can be especially sensitive to rigorous cancer treatments and invasive surgical procedures, despite the best efforts of caring physicians and nurses.

Proton Therapy can aggressively treat the cancer while substantially reducing side effects that could impact the child’s quality of life. It has been proven to protect vital organs, important tissues, nerves, and glands during treatment, while also decreasing the estimated risk of secondary malignancies. Proton Therapy holds the promise of more aggressively fighting pediatric cancers while keeping infants and children feeling better during treatment.

Proton Therapy is now covered by some private insurance companies, without further review, for persons younger than 19 years of age. More and more governments also reimburse the cost of treatment for children and young adults, in country or overseas.

Let’s keep advocating for our patients !