Treatment of pediatric average-risk medulloblastoma using craniospinal irradiation less than 2500 cGy and chemotherapy: single center experience in Korea
- 216 Downloads
Although craniospinal irradiation (CSI) of 2340 cGy plus tumor booster with chemotherapy have been established as a standard treatment of childhood average-risk (AvR) medulloblastoma (MBL) in Western counties, there are a few recent reports in outcomes of AvR MBL using this strategy in Korean and other Asian children. We investigated the outcome of the Korean children with AvR MBL who were treated with CSI <2500 cGy and chemotherapy.
Between January 2001 and December 2010, clinical characteristics and outcomes of 42 patients who were diagnosed with AvR MBL postoperatively and treated with radiation including CSI <2500 cGy and chemotherapy in Seoul National University Children’s Hospital were analyzed.
Their median age was 9 years (range: 3–18.8), and 29 were male. Histological subtypes were classic type in 28 patients, nodular/desmoplastic in 7, and large cell/anaplastic (LCA) in 7. All the patients received adjuvant radiotherapy (CSI with median 2340 cGy and booster) and multiagent chemotherapy as the first-line treatment. With a median follow-up of 54 months, 12 patients experienced relapse or progression of the tumor. The 3- and 5-year disease-free survival (DFS) rates were 78.0%±6.5% and 75.0%±6.9%, respectively, and overall survival (OS) rates were 85.3%±5.6% and 76.8%±6.9%, respectively. The LCA subtype was associated with poorer DFS (P=0.023) and OS (P=0.008), compared with non-LCA subtypes.
The outcomes of children and adolescents with AvR MBL treated with radiation including CSI <2500 cGy and chemotherapy, are compatible to those in Western countries; however, the LCA subtype has a poor outcome with this strategy.
Key wordsaverage-risk craniospinal irradiation medulloblastoma
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
- 3.Zeltzer PM, Boyett JM, Finlay JL, Albright AL, Rorke LB, Milstein JM, et al. Metastasis stage, adjuvant treatment, and residual tumor are prognostic factors for medulloblastoma in children: conclusions from the Children’s Cancer Group 921 randomized phase III study. J Clin Oncol 1999;17:832–845.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 9.Merchant TE, Kun LE, Krasin MJ, Wallace D, Chintagumpala MM, Woo SY, et al. Multi-institution prospective trial of reduceddose craniospinal irradiation (23.4 Gy) followed by conformal posterior fossa (36 Gy) and primary site irradiation (55.8 Gy) and dose-intensive chemotherapy for average-risk medulloblastoma. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2008;70:782–787.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 11.Gajjar A, Chintagumpala M, Ashley D, Kellie S, Kun LE, Merchant TE, et al. Risk-adapted craniospinal radiotherapy followed by high-dose chemotherapy and stem-cell rescue in children with newly diagnosed medulloblastoma (St Jude Medulloblastoma-96): long-term results from a prospective, multicentre trial. Lancet Oncol 2006;7:813–820.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 12.Lannering B, Rutkowski S, Doz F, Pizer B, Gustafsson G, Navajas A, et al. Hyperfractionated versus conventional radiotherapy followed by chemotherapy in standard-risk medulloblastoma: results from the randomized multicenter HITSIOP PNET 4 trial. J Clin Oncol 2012;30:3187–3193.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 13.Shin HY. Korean Society for Pediatric Neuro-Oncology (KSPNO): prospective study of reduced craniospinal radiotherapy plus conformal tumor bed boost followed by adjuvant chemotherapy regimen (CPM, CDDP, VCR) in children with newly diagnosed average-risk medulloblastoma. Korean J Pediatr Hematol Oncol 2005;12:175–187.Google Scholar
- 15.Jang PS, Yoo KH, Lee DS, Kim CJ, Shin HY, Wang KC, et al. Survival rates and prognostic factors in childhood medulloblastoma and supratentorial primitive neuroectodermal tumor. Korean J Pediatr Hematol Oncol 2000;7:249–255.Google Scholar
- 16.Allen J, Donahue B, Mehta M, Miller DC, Rorke LB, Jakacki R, et al. A phase II study of preradiotherapy chemotherapy followed by hyperfractionated radiotherapy for newly diagnosed highrisk medulloblastoma/primitive neuroectodermal tumor: a report from the Children’s Oncology Group (CCG 9931). Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2009;74:1006–1011.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
- 18.Park HJ, Nam BH, Lim HS, Shin HY, Hah JO, Kang HJ, et al. Outcome of multicenter study for Korean children with medulloblastoma. Clin Pediatr Hematol Oncol 2007;14:167–175.Google Scholar
- 19.Yoon SH, Lee KS, Park YG, Choi JU, Chung SS, Lee KC. Medulloblastoma: outcome and prognostic factors. J Korean Neurosurg Soc 1993;22:188–198.Google Scholar
- 20.Shin KM, Choi SY, Won SC, Yang CH, Lyu CJ, Suh CO, et al. Influence of prognostic factors on survival rate of medulloblastoma patient with chemotherapy. J Korean Pediatr Soc 2003;46:178–182.Google Scholar
- 22.Saito RI, Kumabe T, Sonoda Y, Kanamori M, Yamashita Y, Watanabe M, et al. Combination chemotherapy with ifosfamide, cisplatin, and etoposide for medulloblastoma: single-institute experience and differences in efficacy for subgroups of medulloblastoma. Childs Nerv Syst 2011;27:1399–1406.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 33.Das P, Puri T, Suri V, Sharma MC, Sharma BS, Sarkar C. Medulloblastomas: a correlative study of MIB-1 proliferation index along with expression of c-Myc, ERBB2, and antiapoptotic proteins along with histological typing and clinical outcome. Childs Nerv Syst 2009;25:825–835.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 34.Meurer RT, Martins DT, Hilbig A, Ribeiro Mde C, Roehe AV, Barbosa-Coutinho LM, et al. Immunohistochemical expression of markers Ki-67, neun, synaptophysin, p53 and HER2 in medulloblastoma and its correlation with clinicopathological parameters. Arq Neuropsiquiatr 2008;66:385–390.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar