BACKGROUND: Although screening for familial retinoblastoma has been shown to be beneficial we suspected that such screening programs may be less than optimal in developing countries (DC). METHODS: Retrospective cohort study comparing patients with familial retinoblastoma from five centers in DC (Argentina, Brazil, Turkey, Jordan, and Venezuela) versus a reference center in the USA. RESULTS: Ninety-two (32 from the USA and 60 from DC) patients were included. Forty-one (44.6%) patients avoided enucleation, 42 (45.7%) had 1 eye removed, and 9 (9.8%) underwent bilateral enucleation. Eleven (11.9%) had major pathology risk factors at enucleation. There were no cases of metastatic disease at diagnosis. Detection via screening was significantly less common in DC than in the USA (23.3% vs. 71.8%, P < 0.0001). Patients in DC were diagnosed at a significantly later age and with more advanced intraocular disease that led to increased risk of bilateral enucleation. Patients detected by screening in DC were significantly younger at diagnosis, had less advanced intraocular disease, better ocular preservation rates and survival results than those whose retinoblastoma was not detected via early screening. Five-year pEFS was 0.92 for the patients treated in the USA and 0.81 for the patients in DC (P = 0.42). Seven events occurred (extraocular relapse four in patients from DC and second malignancies in three). CONCLUSIONS: Patients with familial retinoblastoma are less likely to be diagnosed by screening in DC and had higher morbidity and mortality caused by recurrent extraocular retinoblastoma. (c) 2009 Wiley-Liss, Inc.
BACKGROUND: Although screening for familial retinoblastoma has been shown to be beneficial we suspected that such screening programs may be less than optimal in developing countries (DC). METHODS: Retrospective cohort study comparing patients with familial retinoblastoma from five centers in DC (Argentina, Brazil, Turkey, Jordan, and Venezuela) versus a reference center in the USA. RESULTS: Ninety-two (32 from the USA and 60 from DC) patients were included. Forty-one (44.6%) patients avoided enucleation, 42 (45.7%) had 1 eye removed, and 9 (9.8%) underwent bilateral enucleation. Eleven (11.9%) had major pathology risk factors at enucleation. There were no cases of metastatic disease at diagnosis. Detection via screening was significantly less common in DC than in the USA (23.3% vs. 71.8%, P < 0.0001). Patients in DC were diagnosed at a significantly later age and with more advanced intraocular disease that led to increased risk of bilateral enucleation. Patients detected by screening in DC were significantly younger at diagnosis, had less advanced intraocular disease, better ocular preservation rates and survival results than those whose retinoblastoma was not detected via early screening. Five-year pEFS was 0.92 for the patients treated in the USA and 0.81 for the patients in DC (P = 0.42). Seven events occurred (extraocular relapse four in patients from DC and second malignancies in three). CONCLUSIONS: Patients with familial retinoblastoma are less likely to be diagnosed by screening in DC and had higher morbidity and mortality caused by recurrent extraocular retinoblastoma. (c) 2009 Wiley-Liss, Inc.
Authors: P-R Rothschild; D Lévy; A Savignoni; L Lumbroso-Le Rouic; I Aerts; M Gauthier-Villars; M Esteve; D Bours; L Desjardins; F Doz; C Lévy-Gabriel Journal: Eye (Lond) Date: 2011-09-16 Impact factor: 3.775
Authors: Helen Dimaras; Timothy W Corson; David Cobrinik; Abby White; Junyang Zhao; Francis L Munier; David H Abramson; Carol L Shields; Guillermo L Chantada; Festus Njuguna; Brenda L Gallie Journal: Nat Rev Dis Primers Date: 2015-08-27 Impact factor: 52.329