3.8 Article

Posterior Reversible Encephalopathy Syndrome in Pediatric Cancer: Clinical and Radiologic Findings

Journal

JOURNAL OF GLOBAL ONCOLOGY
Volume 4, Issue -, Pages -

Publisher

AMER SOC CLINICAL ONCOLOGY
DOI: 10.1200/JGO.17.00089

Keywords

-

Categories

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Purpose Posterior reversible encephalopathy syndrome (PRES) is associated with a range of medical conditions and medications. In this retrospective analysis, we present 19 pediatric patients with PRES who had undergone chemotherapy. Methods We identified four female and 15 male patients diagnosed with PRES on the basis of clinical and radiologic features. Patient charts were reviewed from January 2013 to June 2016 after authorization from the institutional review board. Results The average age of patients with PRES was 7 years. Primary diagnoses were non-Hodgkin lymphoma (n = 9), acute pre-B-cell leukemia (n = 5), relapsed pre-B-cell leukemia (n = 2), Hodgkin lymphoma (n = 2), and Ewing sarcoma (n = 1). PRES occurred during induction chemotherapy in 12 patients. Sixteen patients had hypertension when they developed PRES. Most of these patients (n = 13) were receiving corticosteroids on diagnosis of PRES. Common clinical features were hypertension, seizures, and altered mental status. With the exclusion of three patients, all others required antiepileptic therapy. Ten of these patients underwent additional magnetic resonance imaging. Ten patients are still alive. Conclusion In patients who presented to our center with signs and symptoms of hypertension, seizures, visual loss, or altered mental status, PRES was mostly seen in those who were undergoing systemic and intrathecal chemotherapy. Approximately 40% of the patients had reversal of clinical and radiologic findings. Antiepileptic medications were discontinued after being seizure free for approximately 6 months. (c) 2017 by American Society of Clinical Oncology.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

3.8
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available