4.5 Article

Phase II TPDCV protocol for pediatric low-grade hypothalamic/chiasmatic gliomas: 15-year update

Journal

JOURNAL OF NEURO-ONCOLOGY
Volume 100, Issue 1, Pages 121-127

Publisher

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s11060-010-0151-7

Keywords

Low-grade gliomas; Pediatric; Chemotherapy; Radiation; Hypothalamic/chiasmatic

Funding

  1. NIHPO1 [NS-42927-27A2]
  2. NIH [P50 CA097257]
  3. Nancy and Stephen Grand Philanthropic Fund
  4. V Foundation for Cancer Research (DHK) [CA 82103]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

To report long-term results for children with low-grade hypothalamic/chiasmatic gliomas treated on a phase II chemotherapy protocol. Between 1984 and 1992, 33 children with hypothalamic/chiasmatic LGGs received TPDCV chemotherapy on a phase II prospective trial. Median age was 3.0 years (range 0.3-16.2). Twelve patients (36%) underwent STRs, 14 (42%) biopsy only, and seven (21%) no surgery. Twenty patients (61%) had pathologic JPAs, nine (27%) grade II gliomas, and four (12%) no surgical sampling. Median f/u for surviving patients was 15.2 years (range 5.3-20.7); 20 of the 23 surviving patients had 14 or more years of follow-up. Fifteen-year PFS and OS were 23.4 and 71.2%, respectively. Twenty-five patients progressed, of whom 13 are NED, two are AWD, and 10 have died. All children who died were diagnosed and first treated at age three or younger. Age at diagnosis was significantly associated with relapse and survival (P = 0.004 for PFS and P = 0.037 for OS). No PFS or OS benefit was seen with STR versus biopsy/no sampling (P = 0.58 for PFS, P = 0.59 for OS). For patients with JPAs and WHO grade II tumors, the 15-year PFS was 18.8 and 22.2% (P = 0.95) and 15-year OS was 73.7 and 55.6% (P = 0.17), respectively. Upfront TPDCV for children with hypothalamic/chiasmatic LGGs resulted in 15-year OS of 71.2% and 15-year PFS of 23.4%. No survival benefit is demonstrated for greater extent of resection. Age is a significant prognostic factor for progression and survival.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available