PURPOSE: Hepatoblastomas often require neoadjuvant chemotherapy to facilitate partial hepatectomy, which necessitates freedom of tumor borders from the confluence of hepatic veins (COHV), portal vein bifurcation (PVB), and retrohepatic inferior vena cava (IVC). This study aimed to clarify the effect of incremental neoadjuvant cycles on the AHEP0731 protocol criteria of hepatoblastoma resectability. METHODS: Hepatoblastoma responses to neoadjuvant chemotherapy were analyzed among patients (n=23) treated at two children's hospitals between 1996 and 2010. Using digital imaging data, ellipsoid and point-based models were created to measure tumor volume regression and respective distances from tumor borders nearest to the COHV, PVB, and IVC. RESULTS: Hepatoblastoma volumes regressed with incremental neoadjuvant chemotherapy cycles (p<0.001). Although tumor borders regressed away from the COHV (p=0.008), on average only 1.1mm was gained. No change from tumor borders to the PVB was detected (p=0.102). Distances from tumor borders to the IVC remained stable at one hospital (p=0.612), but increased only 0.15 mm every 10 days of therapy at the other (p=0.002). Neoadjuvant chemotherapy induced slightly more tumors to meet the threshold vascular margin of 1cm (baseline to completion): COHV, 11 (47.8%) to 17 (73.9%; p=0.058); PVB, 11 (47.8%) to 15 (65.2%; p=0.157); and IVC, 4 (17.4%) to 10 (43.5%; p=0.034). No differences were detected in demographic or disease-specific characteristics between patients who did or did not achieve this 1-cm margin after conclusion of chemotherapy. CONCLUSION: Hepatoblastoma volumes regress significantly with increasing neoadjuvant chemotherapy cycles. However, tumors often remain anchored to the major hepatic vasculature, showing marginal improvement in resectability criteria.
PURPOSE:Hepatoblastomas often require neoadjuvant chemotherapy to facilitate partial hepatectomy, which necessitates freedom of tumor borders from the confluence of hepatic veins (COHV), portal vein bifurcation (PVB), and retrohepatic inferior vena cava (IVC). This study aimed to clarify the effect of incremental neoadjuvant cycles on the AHEP0731 protocol criteria of hepatoblastoma resectability. METHODS:Hepatoblastoma responses to neoadjuvant chemotherapy were analyzed among patients (n=23) treated at two children's hospitals between 1996 and 2010. Using digital imaging data, ellipsoid and point-based models were created to measure tumor volume regression and respective distances from tumor borders nearest to the COHV, PVB, and IVC. RESULTS:Hepatoblastoma volumes regressed with incremental neoadjuvant chemotherapy cycles (p<0.001). Although tumor borders regressed away from the COHV (p=0.008), on average only 1.1mm was gained. No change from tumor borders to the PVB was detected (p=0.102). Distances from tumor borders to the IVC remained stable at one hospital (p=0.612), but increased only 0.15 mm every 10 days of therapy at the other (p=0.002). Neoadjuvant chemotherapy induced slightly more tumors to meet the threshold vascular margin of 1cm (baseline to completion): COHV, 11 (47.8%) to 17 (73.9%; p=0.058); PVB, 11 (47.8%) to 15 (65.2%; p=0.157); and IVC, 4 (17.4%) to 10 (43.5%; p=0.034). No differences were detected in demographic or disease-specific characteristics between patients who did or did not achieve this 1-cm margin after conclusion of chemotherapy. CONCLUSION:Hepatoblastoma volumes regress significantly with increasing neoadjuvant chemotherapy cycles. However, tumors often remain anchored to the major hepatic vasculature, showing marginal improvement in resectability criteria.
Authors: Daniël C Aronson; J Marco Schnater; Chris R Staalman; Gerrit J Weverling; Jack Plaschkes; Giorgio Perilongo; Julia Brown; Angela Phillips; Jean-Bernard Otte; Piotr Czauderna; Gordon MacKinlay; Anton Vos Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2005-02-20 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Piotr Czauderna; Jean Bernard Otte; Daniel C Aronson; Frederic Gauthier; Gordon Mackinlay; Derek Roebuck; Jack Plaschkes; Giorgio Perilongo Journal: Eur J Cancer Date: 2005-05 Impact factor: 9.162
Authors: Gregory M Tiao; Nicola Bobey; Steven Allen; Neris Nieves; Maria Alonso; John Bucuvalas; Robert Wells; Frederick Ryckman Journal: J Pediatr Date: 2005-02 Impact factor: 4.406
Authors: J A Ortega; E C Douglass; J H Feusner; M Reynolds; J J Quinn; M J Finegold; J E Haas; D R King; W Liu-Mares; M G Sensel; M D Krailo Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2000-07 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: John C Gore; H Charles Manning; C Chad Quarles; Kevin W Waddell; Thomas E Yankeelov Journal: Magn Reson Imaging Date: 2011-04-27 Impact factor: 2.546
Authors: Rebecka L Meyers; Jon R Rowland; Mark Krailo; Zhengjia Chen; Howard M Katzenstein; Marcio H Malogolowkin Journal: Pediatr Blood Cancer Date: 2009-12 Impact factor: 3.167
Authors: Harold N Lovvorn; Dan Ayers; Zhiguo Zhao; Melissa Hilmes; Pinki Prasad; Myrick C Shinall; Barry Berch; Wallace W Neblett; James A O'Neill Journal: J Pediatr Surg Date: 2010-01 Impact factor: 2.545
Authors: Derek J Roebuck; Daniel Aronson; Philippe Clapuyt; Piotr Czauderna; Jean de Ville de Goyet; Frédéric Gauthier; Gordon Mackinlay; Rudolf Maibach; Kieran McHugh; Oystein E Olsen; Jean-Bernard Otte; Danièle Pariente; Jack Plaschkes; Margaret Childs; Giorgio Perilongo Journal: Pediatr Radiol Date: 2006-12-21
Authors: Rosa Nguyen; M Beth McCarville; April Sykes; Shenghua Mao; Jianrong Wu; Max R Langham; Wayne L Furman Journal: Int J Clin Oncol Date: 2018-05-09 Impact factor: 3.402
Authors: Kewei Li; Fanwen Jiang; Matthew Aizpuru; Ellen L Larson; Xiaolong Xie; Rongxing Zhou; Bo Xiang Journal: Medicine (Baltimore) Date: 2021-02-12 Impact factor: 1.817
Authors: Sara A Mansfield; M Beth McCarville; John T Lucas; Matthew J Krasin; Sara M Federico; Victor M Santana; Wayne L Furman; Andrew M Davidoff Journal: Ann Surg Oncol Date: 2021-07-02 Impact factor: 5.344