PURPOSE: To assess the rate of tumor response and activity of carboplatin in stabilizing the growth of progressive low-grade gliomas. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Eligible patients received carboplatin 560 mg/m(2) intravenously every 4 weeks for 1 year after maximum tumor response or until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity. RESULTS: Between October 1993 and October 2000, 81 children (median age, 79 months; range, 6 to 204) were enrolled onto this study. Patients received a median of 11 cycles of carboplatin (range, one to 29). Median follow-up from the time of enrollment was 55 months (range, 10 to 93). The overall objective response (complete response [CR] + partial response [PR] + minor response [MR]) and disease stabilization (CR + PR + stable disease + MR) rates to carboplatin treatment were 28% (95% confidence interval [CI], 18% to 38%) and 85% (95% CI, 74% to 93%), respectively. Eleven and 14 patients suffered progressive disease on study and after stopping therapy, respectively. Toxicity was predominantly myelosuppression and included grade 3/4 neutropenia in 56 patients and grade 3/4 thrombocytopenia in 40 patients. The 3-year failure-free survival (FFS) and overall survival (OS) for all patients were 64% (95% CI, 54% to 76%) and 84% (95% CI, 76% to 93%), respectively. Patients with diencephalic tumors had inferior FFS and OS compared with those with tumor at other sites (38% v 74% for FFS, P =.011; 54% v 91% for OS, P =.004). Neurofibromatosis type 1 patients with progressive low-grade glioma had a significantly better OS (95% v 80%; P =.052). CONCLUSION: Carboplatin, in the schedule used in this study, produced disease stabilization or improvement in a majority of children with progressive low-grade glioma, with manageable toxicity. Improved treatment strategies are particularly required for patients with diencephalic tumors.
PURPOSE: To assess the rate of tumor response and activity of carboplatin in stabilizing the growth of progressive low-grade gliomas. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Eligible patients received carboplatin 560 mg/m(2) intravenously every 4 weeks for 1 year after maximum tumor response or until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity. RESULTS: Between October 1993 and October 2000, 81 children (median age, 79 months; range, 6 to 204) were enrolled onto this study. Patients received a median of 11 cycles of carboplatin (range, one to 29). Median follow-up from the time of enrollment was 55 months (range, 10 to 93). The overall objective response (complete response [CR] + partial response [PR] + minor response [MR]) and disease stabilization (CR + PR + stable disease + MR) rates to carboplatin treatment were 28% (95% confidence interval [CI], 18% to 38%) and 85% (95% CI, 74% to 93%), respectively. Eleven and 14 patients suffered progressive disease on study and after stopping therapy, respectively. Toxicity was predominantly myelosuppression and included grade 3/4 neutropenia in 56 patients and grade 3/4 thrombocytopenia in 40 patients. The 3-year failure-free survival (FFS) and overall survival (OS) for all patients were 64% (95% CI, 54% to 76%) and 84% (95% CI, 76% to 93%), respectively. Patients with diencephalic tumors had inferior FFS and OS compared with those with tumor at other sites (38% v 74% for FFS, P =.011; 54% v 91% for OS, P =.004). Neurofibromatosis type 1 patients with progressive low-grade glioma had a significantly better OS (95% v 80%; P =.052). CONCLUSION:Carboplatin, in the schedule used in this study, produced disease stabilization or improvement in a majority of children with progressive low-grade glioma, with manageable toxicity. Improved treatment strategies are particularly required for patients with diencephalic tumors.
Authors: Andrea Maria Cappellano; Antonio Sergio Petrilli; Nasjla Saba da Silva; Frederico Adolfo Silva; Priscila Mendes Paiva; Sergio Cavalheiro; Eric Bouffet Journal: J Neurooncol Date: 2014-11-01 Impact factor: 4.130
Authors: Thomas Noh; Manuel S Vogt; David W Pruitt; Trent R Hummel; Francesco T Mangano Journal: Childs Nerv Syst Date: 2018-05-25 Impact factor: 1.475
Authors: David A Reardon; Annick Desjardins; James J Vredenburgh; James E Herndon; April Coan; Sridharan Gururangan; Katherine B Peters; Roger McLendon; Sith Sathornsumetee; Jeremy N Rich; Eric S Lipp; Dorothea Janney; Henry S Friedman Journal: Cancer Date: 2012-02-27 Impact factor: 6.860
Authors: Michael J Fisher; Michael Loguidice; David H Gutmann; Robert Listernick; Rosalie E Ferner; Nicole J Ullrich; Roger J Packer; Uri Tabori; Robert O Hoffman; Simone L Ardern-Holmes; Trent R Hummel; Darren R Hargrave; Eric Bouffet; Joel Charrow; Larissa T Bilaniuk; Laura J Balcer; Grant T Liu Journal: Neuro Oncol Date: 2012-04-03 Impact factor: 12.300
Authors: John Glod; Gilbert J Rahme; Harpreet Kaur; Eric H Raabe; Eugene I Hwang; Mark A Israel Journal: J Pediatr Hematol Oncol Date: 2016-05 Impact factor: 1.289
Authors: Guillaume Bergthold; Pratiti Bandopadhayay; Wenya Linda Bi; Lori Ramkissoon; Charles Stiles; Rosalind A Segal; Rameen Beroukhim; Keith L Ligon; Jacques Grill; Mark W Kieran Journal: Biochim Biophys Acta Date: 2014-02-28
Authors: E Franceschi; G Cavallo; L Scopece; A Paioli; A Pession; E Magrini; R Conforti; E Palmerini; S Bartolini; S Rimondini; R Degli Esposti; L Crinò Journal: Br J Cancer Date: 2004-09-13 Impact factor: 7.640