Stefan Essig1, Qiaozhi Li2, Yan Chen2, Johann Hitzler3, Wendy Leisenring4, Mark Greenberg3, Charles Sklar5, Melissa M Hudson6, Gregory T Armstrong7, Kevin R Krull8, Joseph P Neglia9, Kevin C Oeffinger5, Leslie L Robison7, Claudia E Kuehni1, Yutaka Yasui2, Paul C Nathan10. 1. Institute of Social and Preventive Medicine, University of Bern, Bern, Switzerland. 2. School of Public Health, University of Alberta, Edmonton, Alberta, AB, Canada. 3. The Hospital for Sick Children, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada. 4. Programs in Clinical Statistics and Cancer Prevention, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle, WA, USA. 5. Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA. 6. Departments of Oncology and Epidemiology and Cancer Control, St Jude Children's Research Hospital, Memphis, TN, USA. 7. Department of Epidemiology and Cancer Control, St Jude Children's Research Hospital, Memphis, TN, USA. 8. Departments of Epidemiology and Cancer Control and Psychology, St Jude Children's Research Hospital, Memphis, TN, USA. 9. Department of Pediatrics, University of Minnesota Medical School, Minneapolis, MN, USA. 10. The Hospital for Sick Children, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada. Electronic address: paul.nathan@sickkids.ca.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Treatment of patients with paediatric acute lymphoblastic leukaemia has evolved such that the risk of late effects in survivors treated in accordance with contemporary protocols could be different from that noted in those treated decades ago. We aimed to estimate the risk of late effects in children with standard-risk acute lymphoblastic leukaemia treated with contemporary protocols. METHODS: We used data from similarly treated members of the Childhood Cancer Survivor Study cohort. The Childhood Cancer Survivor Study is a multicentre, North American study of 5-year survivors of childhood cancer diagnosed between 1970 and 1986. We included cohort members if they were aged 1·0-9·9 years at the time of diagnosis of acute lymphoblastic leukaemia and had received treatment consistent with contemporary standard-risk protocols for acute lymphoblastic leukaemia. We calculated mortality rates and standardised mortality ratios, stratified by sex and survival time, after diagnosis of acute lymphoblastic leukaemia. We calculated standardised incidence ratios and absolute excess risk for subsequent neoplasms with age-specific, sex-specific, and calendar-year-specific rates from the Surveillance, Epidemiology and End Results Program. Outcomes were compared with a sibling cohort and the general US population. FINDINGS: We included 556 (13%) of 4329 cohort members treated for acute lymphoblastic leukaemia. Median follow-up of the survivors from 5 years after diagnosis was 18·4 years (range 0·0-33·0). 28 (5%) of 556 participants had died (standardised mortality ratio 3·5, 95% CI 2·3-5·0). 16 (57%) deaths were due to causes other than recurrence of acute lymphoblastic leukaemia. Six (1%) survivors developed a subsequent malignant neoplasm (standardised incidence ratio 2·6, 95% CI 1·0-5·7). 107 participants (95% CI 81-193) in each group would need to be followed-up for 1 year to observe one extra chronic health disorder in the survivor group compared with the sibling group. 415 participants (376-939) in each group would need to be followed-up for 1 year to observe one extra severe, life-threatening, or fatal disorder in the group of survivors. Survivors did not differ from siblings in their educational attainment, rate of marriage, or independent living. INTERPRETATION: The prevalence of adverse long-term outcomes in children treated for standard risk acute lymphoblastic leukaemia according to contemporary protocols is low, but regular care from a knowledgeable primary-care practitioner is warranted. FUNDING: National Cancer Institute, American Lebanese-Syrian Associated Charities, Swiss Cancer Research.
BACKGROUND: Treatment of patients with paediatric acute lymphoblastic leukaemia has evolved such that the risk of late effects in survivors treated in accordance with contemporary protocols could be different from that noted in those treated decades ago. We aimed to estimate the risk of late effects in children with standard-risk acute lymphoblastic leukaemia treated with contemporary protocols. METHODS: We used data from similarly treated members of the Childhood Cancer Survivor Study cohort. The Childhood Cancer Survivor Study is a multicentre, North American study of 5-year survivors of childhood cancer diagnosed between 1970 and 1986. We included cohort members if they were aged 1·0-9·9 years at the time of diagnosis of acute lymphoblastic leukaemia and had received treatment consistent with contemporary standard-risk protocols for acute lymphoblastic leukaemia. We calculated mortality rates and standardised mortality ratios, stratified by sex and survival time, after diagnosis of acute lymphoblastic leukaemia. We calculated standardised incidence ratios and absolute excess risk for subsequent neoplasms with age-specific, sex-specific, and calendar-year-specific rates from the Surveillance, Epidemiology and End Results Program. Outcomes were compared with a sibling cohort and the general US population. FINDINGS: We included 556 (13%) of 4329 cohort members treated for acute lymphoblastic leukaemia. Median follow-up of the survivors from 5 years after diagnosis was 18·4 years (range 0·0-33·0). 28 (5%) of 556 participants had died (standardised mortality ratio 3·5, 95% CI 2·3-5·0). 16 (57%) deaths were due to causes other than recurrence of acute lymphoblastic leukaemia. Six (1%) survivors developed a subsequent malignant neoplasm (standardised incidence ratio 2·6, 95% CI 1·0-5·7). 107 participants (95% CI 81-193) in each group would need to be followed-up for 1 year to observe one extra chronic health disorder in the survivor group compared with the sibling group. 415 participants (376-939) in each group would need to be followed-up for 1 year to observe one extra severe, life-threatening, or fatal disorder in the group of survivors. Survivors did not differ from siblings in their educational attainment, rate of marriage, or independent living. INTERPRETATION: The prevalence of adverse long-term outcomes in children treated for standard risk acute lymphoblastic leukaemia according to contemporary protocols is low, but regular care from a knowledgeable primary-care practitioner is warranted. FUNDING: National Cancer Institute, American Lebanese-Syrian Associated Charities, Swiss Cancer Research.
Authors: Eric J Chow; Debra L Friedman; Yutaka Yasui; John A Whitton; Marilyn Stovall; Leslie L Robison; Charles A Sklar Journal: J Pediatr Date: 2007-04 Impact factor: 4.406
Authors: Yousif Matloub; Bruce C Bostrom; Stephen P Hunger; Linda C Stork; Anne Angiolillo; Harland Sather; Mei La; Julie M Gastier-Foster; Nyla A Heerema; Scott Sailer; Patrick J Buckley; Blythe Thomson; Catherine Cole; James B Nachman; Gregory Reaman; Naomi Winick; William L Carroll; Meenakshi Devidas; Paul S Gaynon Journal: Blood Date: 2011-05-11 Impact factor: 22.113
Authors: Stephen P Hunger; Mignon L Loh; James A Whitlock; Naomi J Winick; William L Carroll; Meenakshi Devidas; Elizabeth A Raetz Journal: Pediatr Blood Cancer Date: 2012-12-19 Impact factor: 3.167
Authors: Kevin R Krull; Tara M Brinkman; Chenghong Li; Gregory T Armstrong; Kirsten K Ness; Deo Kumar Srivastava; James G Gurney; Cara Kimberg; Matthew J Krasin; Ching-Hon Pui; Leslie L Robison; Melissa M Hudson Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2013-11-04 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Nina S Kadan-Lottick; Pim Brouwers; David Breiger; Thomas Kaleita; James Dziura; Haibei Liu; Lu Chen; Megan Nicoletti; Linda Stork; Bruce Bostrom; Joseph P Neglia Journal: Blood Date: 2009-06-22 Impact factor: 22.113
Authors: M M Hawkins; E R Lancashire; D L Winter; C Frobisher; R C Reulen; A J Taylor; M C G Stevens; M Jenney Journal: Pediatr Blood Cancer Date: 2008-05 Impact factor: 3.167
Authors: Pinki K Prasad; Kristina K Hardy; Nan Zhang; Kim Edelstein; Deokumar Srivastava; Lonnie Zeltzer; Marilyn Stovall; Nita L Seibel; Wendy Leisenring; Gregory T Armstrong; Leslie L Robison; Kevin Krull Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2015-07-06 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Judy Y Ou; Rochelle R Smits-Seemann; Sapna Kaul; Mark N Fluchel; Carol Sweeney; Anne C Kirchhoff Journal: Cancer Epidemiol Date: 2017-07-19 Impact factor: 2.984
Authors: Ronay Thomas; Wendy S W Wong; Reem Saadon; Thierry Vilboux; John Deeken; John Niederhuber; Suchitra K Hourigan; Elizabeth Yang Journal: Pediatr Hematol Oncol Date: 2020-05-19 Impact factor: 1.969
Authors: Stephanie B Dixon; Yan Chen; Yutaka Yasui; Ching-Hon Pui; Stephen P Hunger; Lewis B Silverman; Kirsten K Ness; Daniel M Green; Rebecca M Howell; Wendy M Leisenring; Nina S Kadan-Lottick; Kevin R Krull; Kevin C Oeffinger; Joseph P Neglia; Ann C Mertens; Melissa M Hudson; Leslie L Robison; Gregory T Armstrong; Paul C Nathan Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2020-07-24 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Alexandra M Boland; Todd M Gibson; Lu Lu; Sue C Kaste; James P DeLany; Robyn E Partin; Jennifer Q Lanctot; Carrie R Howell; Heather H Nelson; Wassim Chemaitilly; Ching-Hon Pui; Leslie L Robison; Daniel A Mulrooney; Melissa M Hudson; Kirsten K Ness Journal: Phys Ther Date: 2016-02-18
Authors: Yin Ting Cheung; Michelle N Edelmann; Daniel A Mulrooney; Daniel M Green; Wassim Chemaitilly; Neena John; Leslie L Robison; Melissa M Hudson; Kevin R Krull Journal: Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev Date: 2016-06-26 Impact factor: 4.254