Literature DB >> 15714448

Role of active follow-up for early diagnosis of relapse after elective end of therapies.

Simona Biasotti1, Alberto Garaventa, Paola Padovani, Maura Faraci, Francesca Fioredda, Guia Hanau, Francesca Grisolia, Stefano Parodi, Riccardo Haupt.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the role of active follow-up for the detection of relapses occurring after completion of therapy in children with cancer.
METHODS: The clinical records of all children who had a cancer relapse more than 3 months after the end of therapies in the period 1985-2000 were reviewed. Relapses were defined "diagnosed at a scheduled visit" or "at an unscheduled visit" based upon how the visit that lead to the suspected diagnosis was scheduled. Information was collected on how the first suspicion of relapse was made. Survival after relapse was calculated, by type of visit and tumor type.
RESULTS: Among 739 children who completed therapy for a malignant tumor in first complete remission (CR), 101 relapses [74 after solid tumors (ST), 27 after leukemia/lymphoma (L)] occurred after a median time of 12 months (range 3-87). Fifty-one (50.5%) first relapses were diagnosed during a visit scheduled because of symptoms (36 ST, 15 L), and 50 relapses (49.5%) at a regularly scheduled visit (38 ST, 12 L). Overall, 75% of relapses were first suspected on clinical basis, 16% via imaging, and only 9% via lab tests. Survival more than 10 years from first relapse was 25.7% (SE: 0.05%), with no significant differences between relapses diagnosed at a scheduled visit (20.5%), or at an unscheduled visit (32.1%; P = 0.826). Children with L had a better overall survival (OS, 70.6%) as compared to those with ST (9.2%, P < 0.001), probably because of a more extensive use of stem cell transplantation (SCT) as part of the salvage regimens.
CONCLUSIONS: Scheduled follow-up programs failed to detect relapses in 50% of cases presented here. Survival after relapse is not affected by whether relapse was detected at a scheduled or an unscheduled visit. (c) 2005 Wiley-Liss, Inc.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2005        PMID: 15714448     DOI: 10.1002/pbc.20356

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Pediatr Blood Cancer        ISSN: 1545-5009            Impact factor:   3.167


  9 in total

1.  Is routine pelvic surveillance imaging necessary in patients with Wilms tumor?

Authors:  Sue C Kaste; Samuel L Brady; Brian Yee; Valerie J McPherson; Robert A Kaufman; Catherine A Billups; Najat C Daw; Alberto S Pappo
Journal:  Cancer       Date:  2012-06-26       Impact factor: 6.860

2.  Total estimated effective doses from radiologic imaging modalities of children with cancer: a single center experience.

Authors:  Derya Özyörük; Suna Emir; Hacı Ahmet Demir; Gülşah Bayram Kabaçam; Bahattin Tunç
Journal:  World J Pediatr       Date:  2016-11-23       Impact factor: 2.764

3.  Pediatric Hodgkin lymphoma: are we over-scanning our patients?

Authors:  N Rathore; H M Eissa; J F Margolin; H Liu; M F Wu; T Horton; K Kamdar; Z Dreyer; P Steuber; K R Rabin; M Redell; C E Allen; K L McClain; R P Guillerman; C M Bollard
Journal:  Pediatr Hematol Oncol       Date:  2012-05-25       Impact factor: 1.969

Review 4.  Oncological imaging: tumor surveillance in children.

Authors:  Sue C Kaste
Journal:  Pediatr Radiol       Date:  2011-08-17

5.  The role of chest computed tomography (CT) as a surveillance tool in children with high-risk neuroblastoma.

Authors:  Sara M Federico; Samuel L Brady; Alberto Pappo; Jianrong Wu; Shenghua Mao; Valerie J McPherson; Alison Young; Wayne L Furman; Robert Kaufman; Sue Kaste
Journal:  Pediatr Blood Cancer       Date:  2015-01-13       Impact factor: 3.167

6.  Relapse after treatment of pediatric Hodgkin lymphoma: outcome and role of surveillance after end of therapy.

Authors:  Alison M Friedmann; Julie A Wolfson; Melissa M Hudson; Howard J Weinstein; Michael P Link; Amy Billett; Eric C Larsen; Torunn Yock; Sarah S Donaldson; Karen Marcus; Matthew J Krasin; Scott C Howard; Monika L Metzger
Journal:  Pediatr Blood Cancer       Date:  2013-05-15       Impact factor: 3.167

Review 7.  Imaging in childhood cancer: a Society for Pediatric Radiology and Children's Oncology Group Joint Task Force report.

Authors:  Daniel A Weiser; Sue C Kaste; Marilyn J Siegel; Peter C Adamson
Journal:  Pediatr Blood Cancer       Date:  2013-04-09       Impact factor: 3.167

8.  A systematic review of evidence for and against routine surveillance imaging after completing treatment for childhood extracranial solid tumors.

Authors:  Jessica E Morgan; Ruth Walker; Melissa Harden; Robert S Phillips
Journal:  Cancer Med       Date:  2020-05-19       Impact factor: 4.452

9.  Role of surveillance screening in detecting tumor recurrence after treatment of childhood cancers.

Authors:  Pelin Teke Kısa; Suna Emir
Journal:  Turk Arch Pediatr       Date:  2021-01-06
  9 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.