BACKGROUND: The authors exploited a large database to investigate the outcomes of patients with high-risk neuroblastoma in the contemporary era. METHODS: All patients with high-risk neuroblastoma aged <12 years who were treated during induction at the authors' institution from 2000 through 2011 were studied, including 118 patients with MYCN-amplified [MYCN(+)] disease and 127 patients aged >18 months with MYCN-nonamplified [MYCN(-)] stage 4 disease. RESULTS: A complete response/very good partial response (CR/VGPR) to induction was correlated with significantly superior event-free survival (EFS) (P < .001) and overall survival (OS) (P < .001) compared with a partial response or less. Patients with MYCN(+) and MYCN(-) disease had similar rates of CR/VGPR to induction (P = .366), and those with MYCN(+) and MYCN(-) disease who attained a CR/VGPR had similar EFS (P = .346) and OS (P = .542). In contrast, only MYCN(+) patients had progressive disease as a response to induction (P < .001), and early death from progressive disease (<366 days after diagnosis) was significantly more common (P < .001) among those with MYCN(+) disease. Overall, among patients who had a partial response or less, MYCN(+) patients had significantly inferior EFS (P < .001) and OS (P < .001) compared with MYCN(-) patients, which accounted for the significantly worse EFS (P = .008) and OS (P = .002) for the entire MYCN(+) cohort versus the MYCN(-) cohort. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with MYCN(-), high-risk neuroblastoma display a broad, continuous spectrum with regard to response and outcome, whereas MYCN(+) patients either have an excellent response to induction associated with good long-term outcome or develop early progressive disease with a poor outcome. This extreme dichotomy in the clinical course of MYCN(+) patients points to underlying biologic differences with MYCN(+) neuroblastoma, the elucidation of which may have far-reaching implications, including improved risk classification at diagnosis and the identification of targets for treatment.
BACKGROUND: The authors exploited a large database to investigate the outcomes of patients with high-risk neuroblastoma in the contemporary era. METHODS: All patients with high-risk neuroblastoma aged <12 years who were treated during induction at the authors' institution from 2000 through 2011 were studied, including 118 patients with MYCN-amplified [MYCN(+)] disease and 127 patients aged >18 months with MYCN-nonamplified [MYCN(-)] stage 4 disease. RESULTS: A complete response/very good partial response (CR/VGPR) to induction was correlated with significantly superior event-free survival (EFS) (P < .001) and overall survival (OS) (P < .001) compared with a partial response or less. Patients with MYCN(+) and MYCN(-) disease had similar rates of CR/VGPR to induction (P = .366), and those with MYCN(+) and MYCN(-) disease who attained a CR/VGPR had similar EFS (P = .346) and OS (P = .542). In contrast, only MYCN(+) patients had progressive disease as a response to induction (P < .001), and early death from progressive disease (<366 days after diagnosis) was significantly more common (P < .001) among those with MYCN(+) disease. Overall, among patients who had a partial response or less, MYCN(+) patients had significantly inferior EFS (P < .001) and OS (P < .001) compared with MYCN(-) patients, which accounted for the significantly worse EFS (P = .008) and OS (P = .002) for the entire MYCN(+) cohort versus the MYCN(-) cohort. CONCLUSIONS:Patients with MYCN(-), high-risk neuroblastoma display a broad, continuous spectrum with regard to response and outcome, whereas MYCN(+) patients either have an excellent response to induction associated with good long-term outcome or develop early progressive disease with a poor outcome. This extreme dichotomy in the clinical course of MYCN(+) patients points to underlying biologic differences with MYCN(+) neuroblastoma, the elucidation of which may have far-reaching implications, including improved risk classification at diagnosis and the identification of targets for treatment.
Authors: R L Saylors; K C Stine; J Sullivan; J L Kepner; D A Wall; M L Bernstein; M B Harris; R Hayashi; T J Vietti Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2001-08-01 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: F Berthold; B Hero; B Kremens; R Handgretinger; G Henze; F H Schilling; M Schrappe; T Simon; C Spix Journal: Cancer Lett Date: 2003-07-18 Impact factor: 8.679
Authors: Bruno De Bernardi; Brigitte Nicolas; Luca Boni; Paolo Indolfi; Modesto Carli; Luca Cordero Di Montezemolo; Alberto Donfrancesco; Andrea Pession; Massimo Provenzi; Andrea di Cataldo; Antonino Rizzo; Gian Paolo Tonini; Sandro Dallorso; Massimo Conte; Claudio Gambini; Alberto Garaventa; Federico Bonetti; Andrea Zanazzo; Paolo D'Angelo; Paolo Bruzzi Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2003-04-15 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Nai-Kong V Cheung; Irene Y Cheung; Brian H Kushner; Irina Ostrovnaya; Elizabeth Chamberlain; Kim Kramer; Shakeel Modak Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2012-08-06 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Tatjana Burkhardt-Hammer; Claudia Spix; Hermann Brenner; Peter Kaatsch; Frank Berthold; Barbara Hero; Jörg Michaelis Journal: Med Pediatr Oncol Date: 2002-09
Authors: Brian H Kushner; Shakeel Modak; Kim Kramer; Ellen M Basu; Stephen S Roberts; Nai-Kong V Cheung Journal: Cancer Date: 2012-09-05 Impact factor: 6.860
Authors: Brendan Murphy; Han Yin; John M Maris; E Anders Kolb; Richard Gorlick; C Patrick Reynolds; Min H Kang; Stephen T Keir; Raushan T Kurmasheva; Igor Dvorchik; Jianrong Wu; Catherine A Billups; Nana Boateng; Malcolm A Smith; Richard B Lock; Peter J Houghton Journal: Cancer Res Date: 2016-08-05 Impact factor: 12.701
Authors: Brian H Kushner; Nai-Kong V Cheung; Shakeel Modak; Oren J Becher; Ellen M Basu; Stephen S Roberts; Kim Kramer; Ira J Dunkel Journal: Int J Cancer Date: 2016-09-30 Impact factor: 7.396
Authors: Balakrishna Koneru; Gonzalo Lopez; Ahsan Farooqi; Karina L Conkrite; Thinh H Nguyen; Shawn J Macha; Apexa Modi; Jo Lynne Rokita; Eduardo Urias; Ashly Hindle; Heather Davidson; Kristyn Mccoy; Jonas Nance; Vanda Yazdani; Meredith S Irwin; Shengping Yang; David A Wheeler; John M Maris; Sharon J Diskin; C Patrick Reynolds Journal: Cancer Res Date: 2020-04-14 Impact factor: 12.701
Authors: Margaret J Zhou; Michelle Y Doral; Steven G DuBois; Judith G Villablanca; Gregory A Yanik; Katherine K Matthay Journal: Eur J Cancer Date: 2015-08-05 Impact factor: 9.162
Authors: Julie H Harreld; Emily M Bratton; Sara M Federico; Xingyu Li; William Grover; Yimei Li; Natalie C Kerr; Matthew W Wilson; Mary E Hoehn Journal: Pediatr Blood Cancer Date: 2015-11-24 Impact factor: 3.167
Authors: Huiyuan Zhang; Jun Dou; Yang Yu; Yanling Zhao; Yihui Fan; Jin Cheng; Xin Xu; Wei Liu; Shan Guan; Zhenghu Chen; Yan shi; Roma Patel; Sanjeev A Vasudevan; Peter E Zage; Hong Zhang; Jed G Nuchtern; Eugene S Kim; Songbin Fu; Jianhua Yang Journal: Apoptosis Date: 2015-01 Impact factor: 5.561