A Laprie1, Y Hu2, C Alapetite3, C Carrie4, J-L Habrand5, S Bolle6, P-Y Bondiau7, A Ducassou8, A Huchet9, A-I Bertozzi10, Y Perel11, É Moyal12, J Balosso13. 1. Université Paul-Sabatier, Toulouse, France; Institut Claudius-Regaud, institut universitaire du cancer de Toulouse (IUCT)-Oncopole, radiation oncology, 1, avenue Irene-Joliot-Curie, 31059 Toulouse, France; Périclès-France-Hadron, Toulouse, France. Electronic address: laprie.anne@iuct-oncopole.fr. 2. GCS-Étoile-France-Hadron, Lyon, France. 3. Institut Curie Paris Orsay (ICPO)-France-Hadron, Orsay, France. 4. GCS-Étoile-France-Hadron, Lyon, France; Centre Léon-Bérard, Lyon, France. 5. Institut Curie Paris Orsay (ICPO)-France-Hadron, Orsay, France; Université Paris Sud, Orsay, France; Archade-France-Hadron, Caen, France; Centre François-Baclesse, Caen, France; Gustave-Roussy, Villejuif, France. 6. Institut Curie Paris Orsay (ICPO)-France-Hadron, Orsay, France; Impact-France-Hadron, Nice, France. 7. Centre Antoine-Lacassagne, Nice, France; CHU de Bordeaux, Bordeaux, France. 8. Institut Claudius-Regaud, institut universitaire du cancer de Toulouse (IUCT)-Oncopole, radiation oncology, 1, avenue Irene-Joliot-Curie, 31059 Toulouse, France; Périclès-France-Hadron, Toulouse, France. 9. Hôpital des Enfants, Toulouse, France. 10. Périclès-France-Hadron, Toulouse, France; Université Grenoble Alpes, Grenoble, France. 11. Université Grenoble Alpes, Grenoble, France. 12. Université Paul-Sabatier, Toulouse, France; Institut Claudius-Regaud, institut universitaire du cancer de Toulouse (IUCT)-Oncopole, radiation oncology, 1, avenue Irene-Joliot-Curie, 31059 Toulouse, France; Périclès-France-Hadron, Toulouse, France. 13. GCS-Étoile-France-Hadron, Lyon, France; CHU de Grenoble, Grenoble, France.
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Brain tumours are the most frequent solid tumours in children and the most frequent radiotherapy indications in paediatrics, with frequent late effects: cognitive, osseous, visual, auditory and hormonal. A better protection of healthy tissues by improved beam ballistics, with particle therapy, is expected to decrease significantly late effects without decreasing local control and survival. This article reviews the scientific literature to advocate indications of protontherapy and carbon ion therapy for childhood central nervous system cancer, and estimate the expected therapeutic benefits. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A systematic review was performed on paediatric brain tumour treatments using Medline (from 1966 to March of 2014). To be included, clinical trials had to meet the following criteria: age of patients 18 years or younger, treated with radiation, and report of survival. Studies were also selected according to the evidence level. A secondary search of cited references found other studies about cognitive functions, quality of life, the comparison of photon and proton dosimetry showing potential dose escalation and/or sparing of organs at risk with protontherapy; and studies on dosimetric and technical issues related to protontherapy. RESULTS: A total of 7051 primary references published were retrieved, among which 40 clinical studies and 60 papers about quality of life, dose distribution and dosimetry were analysed, as well as the ongoing clinical trials. These papers have been summarized and reported in a specific document made available to the participants of a final 1-day workshop. Tumours of the meningeal envelop and bony cranial structures were excluded from the analysis. Protontherapy allows outstanding ballistics to target the tumour area, while substantially decreasing radiation dose to the normal tissues. There are many indications of protontherapy for paediatric brain tumours in curative intent, either for localized treatment of ependymomas, germ-cell tumours, craniopharyngiomas, low-grade gliomas; or panventricular irradiation of pure non-secreting germinoma; or craniospinal irradiation of medulloblastomas and metastatic pure germinomas. Carbon ion therapy is just emerging and may be studied for highly aggressive and radioresistant tumours, as an initial treatment for diffuse brainstem gliomas, and for relapse of high-grade gliomas. CONCLUSION: Both protontherapy and carbon ion therapy are promising for paediatric brain tumours. The benefit of decreasing late effects without altering survival has been described for most paediatric brain tumours with protontherapy and is currently assessed in ongoing clinical trials with up-to-date proton devices. Unfortunately, in 2015, only a minority of paediatric patients in France can receive protontherapy due to the lack of equipment.
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE:Brain tumours are the most frequent solid tumours in children and the most frequent radiotherapy indications in paediatrics, with frequent late effects: cognitive, osseous, visual, auditory and hormonal. A better protection of healthy tissues by improved beam ballistics, with particle therapy, is expected to decrease significantly late effects without decreasing local control and survival. This article reviews the scientific literature to advocate indications of protontherapy and carbon ion therapy for childhood central nervous system cancer, and estimate the expected therapeutic benefits. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A systematic review was performed on paediatric brain tumour treatments using Medline (from 1966 to March of 2014). To be included, clinical trials had to meet the following criteria: age of patients 18 years or younger, treated with radiation, and report of survival. Studies were also selected according to the evidence level. A secondary search of cited references found other studies about cognitive functions, quality of life, the comparison of photon and proton dosimetry showing potential dose escalation and/or sparing of organs at risk with protontherapy; and studies on dosimetric and technical issues related to protontherapy. RESULTS: A total of 7051 primary references published were retrieved, among which 40 clinical studies and 60 papers about quality of life, dose distribution and dosimetry were analysed, as well as the ongoing clinical trials. These papers have been summarized and reported in a specific document made available to the participants of a final 1-day workshop. Tumours of the meningeal envelop and bony cranial structures were excluded from the analysis. Protontherapy allows outstanding ballistics to target the tumour area, while substantially decreasing radiation dose to the normal tissues. There are many indications of protontherapy for paediatric brain tumours in curative intent, either for localized treatment of ependymomas, germ-cell tumours, craniopharyngiomas, low-grade gliomas; or panventricular irradiation of pure non-secreting germinoma; or craniospinal irradiation of medulloblastomas and metastatic pure germinomas. Carbon ion therapy is just emerging and may be studied for highly aggressive and radioresistant tumours, as an initial treatment for diffuse brainstem gliomas, and for relapse of high-grade gliomas. CONCLUSION: Both protontherapy and carbon ion therapy are promising for paediatric brain tumours. The benefit of decreasing late effects without altering survival has been described for most paediatric brain tumours with protontherapy and is currently assessed in ongoing clinical trials with up-to-date proton devices. Unfortunately, in 2015, only a minority of paediatric patients in France can receive protontherapy due to the lack of equipment.
Authors: C Rodman; G Almeida-Porada; S K George; J Moon; S Soker; T Pardee; M Beaty; P Guida; S P Sajuthi; C D Langefeld; S J Walker; P F Wilson; C D Porada Journal: Leukemia Date: 2016-11-24 Impact factor: 11.528
Authors: Nishanth Gabriel; Kumaresh Balaji; Kay Jayachandran; Matthew Inkman; Jin Zhang; Sonika Dahiya; Michael Goldstein Journal: Cancer Res Date: 2022-05-16 Impact factor: 13.312
Authors: Stefan Dietzsch; Annett Braesigk; Clemens Seidel; Julia Remmele; Ralf Kitzing; Tina Schlender; Martin Mynarek; Dirk Geismar; Karolina Jablonska; Rudolf Schwarz; Montserrat Pazos; Marc Walser; Silke Frick; Kristin Gurtner; Christiane Matuschek; Semi Ben Harrabi; Albrecht Glück; Victor Lewitzki; Karin Dieckmann; Martin Benesch; Nicolas U Gerber; Stefan Rutkowski; Beate Timmermann; Rolf-Dieter Kortmann Journal: Strahlenther Onkol Date: 2020-11-23 Impact factor: 3.621
Authors: Miro-Pekka Jussila; Tiina Remes; Julia Anttonen; Arja Harila-Saari; Jaakko Niinimäki; Tytti Pokka; Päivi Koskenkorva; Anna Sutela; Sanna Toiviainen-Salo; Pekka Arikoski; Pekka Riikonen; Mikko Arola; Päivi Lähteenmäki; Kirsti Sirkiä; Heikki Rantala; Maria Suo-Palosaari; Marja Ojaniemi Journal: PLoS One Date: 2018-12-18 Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: E A Golubitskaya; O S Troitskaya; E V Yelak; P P Gugin; V A Richter; I V Schweigert; D E Zakrevsky; O A Koval Journal: Acta Naturae Date: 2019 Jul-Sep Impact factor: 1.845