Pediatric Intracranial Ependymoma: The Roles of Surgery, Radiation, and Chemotherapy
Department of Radiation Oncology, University of California, San Francisco and UCSF Benioff Children's Hospital, 1600 Divisadero Street, Suite H1031, San Francisco, CA 94115-1708, USA. Journal of Neuro-Oncology
(Impact Factor: 3.07).
08/2011; 106(2):367-75. DOI: 10.1007/s11060-011-0671-9
Management of pediatric intracranial ependymomas poses a major challenge, and optimal treatment remains controversial. We sought to investigate the roles of surgery, radiation, and chemotherapy in a historical cohort. Thirty-nine children, age 21 or younger, with non-metastatic intracranial ependymomas were treated from 1972 to 2008. Median age was 8 years (range 0.2-19.1). Twenty-one patients (54%) underwent GTRs, and 18 (45%) underwent STRs. Twenty-six patients (67%) received upfront adjuvant RT (67%), and 14 (44%) received adjuvant chemotherapy. Twenty-four patients had disease recurrence and 12 died. Only one patient recurred after 5 years. Median PFS was 2.7 years and median OS was 20 years. Fifteen year PFS and OS were 30 and 67%. Adjuvant RT was associated with improved PFS (P = 0.045), and remained significant after adjusting for EOR (P = 0.04). Greater EOR trended towards prolonged survival, but did not reach statistical significance (P = 0.156). Of the patients that underwent GTR, the median PFS was 38 months for those treated with adjuvant RT versus 30 months for those that were not treated with RT. Of the patients that had STR, the median PFS for those treated with RT was 26.3 months versus 6.9 months for those were not treated with RT. In conclusion, for localized intracranial pediatric ependymomas, adjuvant RT is associated with improved PFS, even after adjusting for EOR. Our findings suggest the benefit of RT even in the presence of GTR. Future prospective studies with larger sample number are needed to validate our findings.
Available from: thejns.org
[Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: Ependymomas in children continue to generate controversy regarding their histological diagnosis and grading. optimal management, and possible prognostic factors. To increase our knowledge of these tumors the authors addressed these issues in a cohort of children with prospectively staged ependymomas treated with radiotherapy and chemotherapy.
Children between the ages of 2 and 17.3 years harboring an intracranial ependymoma confirmed by a central review of the tumor's pathological characteristics were treated according to Children's Cancer Group Protocol 921 from 1986 to 1992. Treatment following surgery and postoperative tumor staging (including brain computerized tomography or magnetic resonance [MR] imaging, spinal MR imaging or myelography, and cerebrospinal fluid cytological investigation) included craniospinal irradiation with a local boost to the primary tumor and patient randomization to receive adjuvant chemotherapy with either 1) CCNU, vincristine, and prednisone, or 2) the eight-drugs-in-1-day regimen. Centralized review of the tumor pathological characteristics revealed 20 ependymomas and 12 anaplastic ependymomas in the 32 children included in the study. Diagnoses made at the individual institutions included anaplastic (malignant) ependymoma (15 patients), ependymoma (four patients), ependymoblastoma (nine patients), ependymoastrocytoma (one patient), and primitive neuroectodermal tumor (three patients), which were discordant with the centralized review diagnosis in 22 of 32 cases. Only three of the 32 patients had metastatic disease (two with M and one with M3 stages). At surgery, 47% of tumors were estimated to be totally resected. Among the 14 of 17 patients who suffered a relapse and were evaluated for site of relapse, 10 (71%) had an isolated local relapse, three (21%) had concurrent local and metastatic relapse, and only one (7%) had an isolated metastatic relapse. Kaplan-Meier estimates of 5-year progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival rates were 50 +/- 10% and 64 +/- 9%, respectively.
Predictors of PFS duration included an estimate of the extent of resection made at surgery (total compared with less than total, p = 0.0001) and the amount of residual tumor on postoperative imaging as verified by centralized radiological review (< or = 1.5 cm2 compared with > 1.5 cm2, p < 0.0001). No other factors, including centrally reviewed tumor histopathological type, location, metastasis and tumor (M and T) stages, patient age, race, gender, or chemotherapy treatment regimen significantly correlated with PFS duration. The pattern of predominantly local relapse and the important influence of residual tumor or the extent of resection on PFS duration confirms a prevailing impression that local disease control is the major factor in the prediction of outcome of ependymoma. Survival rates were comparable with those reported by other investigators who have treated patients with similar doses of radiation and no chemotherapy.
Available from: Alexa Jury
[Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: New molecularly targeted therapies are needed for childhood ependymoma. Angiogenesis and the PDGFR pathway could be potential therapeutic targets. This study aimed to screen ependymomas for the expression and clinicopathological correlates of angiogenic factors and potential therapeutic targets including VEGFR, endoglin (CD105), CD34, CD31, c-Kit, PDGFR-α and PDGFR-β. Immunohistochemistry for angiogenesis factors and PDGFR-α and β was performed in 24 archival tumor samples from children and adults treated for ependymoma at our institution. CD31 density, CD105 density and pericyte coverage index (PCI) were calculated. These findings were correlated with clinical outcome. VEGFR2 was overexpressed in tumor cells in only one out of 24 cases, but was found overexpressed in the vessels in 6 cases. PDGFR-α and β were found to be over-expressed in the ependymoma tumor cells in seven out of 24 cases (29.2 %). CD31 density, CD105 density and PCI did not correlate with expression of PDGFRs. Overexpression of PDGFR-α and β in tumor cells and overexpression of PDGFR-α in tumor endothelium had prognostic significance and this was maintained in multivariate analysis for overexpression of PDGFR-α in tumor cells (2 year progression free survival was 16.7 ± 15.2 for cases with overexpression of PDGFR-α in the tumor vs. 74.5 ± 15.2 for those with low/no expression, hazard ratio = 5.78, p = 0.04). A number of angiogenic factors are expressed in ependymoma tumor cells and tumor endothelium. Preliminary evidence suggests that the expression of PDGFRs could have a prognostic significance in ependymoma. This data suggests that PDGFRs should be further evaluated as targets using novel PDGFR inhibitors.
Available from: Francois Fauchon
[Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: Papillary tumor of the pineal region (PTPR), recently described as a distinct clinicopathological entity, can show aggressive biological behavior. The optimal therapeutic approach of PTPR has not been well defined. The role of surgery, radiotherapy, and chemotherapy in the treatment of PTPR was analyzed in a large multicenter series. In order to determine factors that influence prognosis, outcome data of a series of 44 patients with histopathologically proven PTPR were retrospectively analyzed. Of the 44 patients, 32 were still alive after a median follow-up of 63.1 months. Twelve patients experienced progressive disease, with seven undergoing two relapses and five more than two. Median overall survival (OS) was not achieved. Median progression-free survival (PFS) was 58.1 months. Only gross total resection and younger age were associated with a longer OS, radiotherapy and chemotherapy having no significant impact. PFS was not influenced by gross total resection. Radiotherapy and chemotherapy had no significant effect. This retrospective series confirms the high risk of recurrence in PTPR and emphasizes the importance of gross total resection. However, our data provide no evidence for a role of adjuvant radiotherapy or chemotherapy in the treatment of PTPR.
Data provided are for informational purposes only. Although carefully collected, accuracy cannot be guaranteed. The impact factor represents a rough estimation of the journal's impact factor and does not reflect the actual current impact factor. Publisher conditions are provided by RoMEO. Differing provisions from the publisher's actual policy or licence agreement may be applicable.