PURPOSE: Chemotherapy for relapsed medulloblastoma has been inadequate, and most patients succumb to disease. METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed nine cases of relapsed medulloblastoma treated with bevacizumab, irinotecan, ± temozolomide. Patients received one to three prior therapeutic regimens. Five patients received 10 mg/kg bevacizumab and 125-150 mg/m(2) irinotecan IV every 2 weeks, with temozolomide, starting at a median dose of 150 mg/m(2) orally for 5 days monthly. Two patients received bevacizumab and irinotecan, but not temozolomide, due to provider preference. Two of nine patients received 15 mg/kg bevacizumab IV, 90 mg/m(2) irinotecan orally for five consecutive days, 100 mg/m(2)/day temozolomide IV for 5 days, and 1.5 mg/m(2) vincristine IV, each administered every 21 days. RESULTS: Median time to progression was 11 months. Median overall survival was 13 months. Objective tumor response at 3 months was 67 %, including six patients with partial response (PR) and three patients with stable disease (SD). At 6 months, objective response was 55 %, with two patients with PR and three with complete response. Additionally, one patient had SD and three had PD. Two patients remain alive and progression free at 15 and 55 months; another is alive with disease at 20 months. Toxicities included two patients with grade III neutropenia, two with grade III thrombocytopenia, one with grade III elevation of liver function tests, and one patient with grade III diarrhea. CONCLUSIONS: The combination of bevacizumab and irinotecan, with or without temozolomide, produces objective responses with minimal toxicity in children with recurrent medulloblastoma. Prospective clinical trials are needed to evaluate the efficacy of this strategy.
PURPOSE: Chemotherapy for relapsed medulloblastoma has been inadequate, and most patients succumb to disease. METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed nine cases of relapsed medulloblastoma treated with bevacizumab, irinotecan, ± temozolomide. Patients received one to three prior therapeutic regimens. Five patients received 10 mg/kg bevacizumab and 125-150 mg/m(2) irinotecan IV every 2 weeks, with temozolomide, starting at a median dose of 150 mg/m(2) orally for 5 days monthly. Two patients received bevacizumab and irinotecan, but not temozolomide, due to provider preference. Two of nine patients received 15 mg/kg bevacizumab IV, 90 mg/m(2) irinotecan orally for five consecutive days, 100 mg/m(2)/day temozolomide IV for 5 days, and 1.5 mg/m(2) vincristine IV, each administered every 21 days. RESULTS: Median time to progression was 11 months. Median overall survival was 13 months. Objective tumor response at 3 months was 67 %, including six patients with partial response (PR) and three patients with stable disease (SD). At 6 months, objective response was 55 %, with two patients with PR and three with complete response. Additionally, one patient had SD and three had PD. Two patients remain alive and progression free at 15 and 55 months; another is alive with disease at 20 months. Toxicities included two patients with grade III neutropenia, two with grade III thrombocytopenia, one with grade III elevation of liver function tests, and one patient with grade III diarrhea. CONCLUSIONS: The combination of bevacizumab and irinotecan, with or without temozolomide, produces objective responses with minimal toxicity in children with recurrent medulloblastoma. Prospective clinical trials are needed to evaluate the efficacy of this strategy.
Authors: D M Ashley; L Meier; T Kerby; F M Zalduondo; H S Friedman; A Gajjar; L Kun; P K Duffner; S Smith; D Longee Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 1996-06 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: A E Evans; R D Jenkin; R Sposto; J A Ortega; C B Wilson; W Wara; I J Ertel; S Kramer; C H Chang; S L Leikin Journal: J Neurosurg Date: 1990-04 Impact factor: 5.115
Authors: M A Grotzer; R Wiewrodt; A J Janss; H Zhao; A Cnaan; L N Sutton; L B Rorke; P C Phillips Journal: Neuropediatrics Date: 2001-04 Impact factor: 1.947
Authors: P M Zeltzer; J M Boyett; J L Finlay; A L Albright; L B Rorke; J M Milstein; J C Allen; K R Stevens; P Stanley; H Li; J H Wisoff; J R Geyer; P McGuire-Cullen; J A Stehbens; S B Shurin; R J Packer Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 1999-03 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Lisa R Bomgaars; Mark Bernstein; Mark Krailo; Richard Kadota; Soma Das; Zhengjia Chen; Peter C Adamson; Susan M Blaney Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2007-10-10 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: V W Li; R D Folkerth; H Watanabe; C Yu; M Rupnick; P Barnes; R M Scott; P M Black; S E Sallan; J Folkman Journal: Lancet Date: 1994-07-09 Impact factor: 79.321
Authors: C F Torres; S Rebsamen; J H Silber; L N Sutton; L T Bilaniuk; R A Zimmerman; J W Goldwein; P C Phillips; B J Lange Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 1994-03-31 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Wan-Shui Wu; Jing-Jing Liu; Yan-Ling Sun; Shu-Xu DU; Chun-De Li; Miao Li; Si-Qi Ren; Jin Zhang; Xiao-Jun Gong; Li-Ming Sun Journal: Zhongguo Dang Dai Er Ke Za Zhi Date: 2019-12
Authors: Hyery Kim; Hyoung Jin Kang; Ji Won Lee; June Dong Park; Kyung Duk Park; Hee Young Shin; Hyo Seop Ahn Journal: Childs Nerv Syst Date: 2013-06-09 Impact factor: 1.475
Authors: Eric M Thompson; Stephen T Keir; Talaignair Venkatraman; Christopher Lascola; Kristen W Yeom; Andrew B Nixon; Yingmiao Liu; Daniel Picard; Marc Remke; Darell D Bigner; Vijay Ramaswamy; Michael D Taylor Journal: Neuro Oncol Date: 2017-09-01 Impact factor: 12.300