K C J M Kraal1, G M Bleeker2, B L F van Eck-Smit3, N K A van Eijkelenburg4, F Berthold5, M M van Noesel6, H N Caron7, G A M Tytgat8. 1. Department of Pediatric Oncology, Emma Children's Hospital, Amsterdam, The Netherlands; Princess Máxima Centre for Pediatric Oncology, Utrecht, The Netherlands. Electronic address: K.C.J.Kraal@prinsesmaximacentrum.nl. 2. Department of Radiology/Nuclear Medicine, NWZ Alkmaar, Alkmaar, The Netherlands. 3. Department of Nuclear Medicine, Academic Medical Centre (AMC), Amsterdam, The Netherlands. 4. Princess Máxima Centre for Pediatric Oncology, Utrecht, The Netherlands. 5. Department of Pediatric Oncology and Hematology, University Children's Hospital, Center for Molecular Medicine Cologne (CMMC), Cologne, Germany. 6. Department of Pediatric Oncology/Hematology, Erasmus MC (EMC)-Sophia Children's Hospital, Rotterdam, The Netherlands; Princess Máxima Centre for Pediatric Oncology, Utrecht, The Netherlands. 7. Department of Pediatric Oncology, Emma Children's Hospital, Amsterdam, The Netherlands. 8. Department of Pediatric Oncology, Emma Children's Hospital, Amsterdam, The Netherlands; Princess Máxima Centre for Pediatric Oncology, Utrecht, The Netherlands.
Abstract
AIM OF THE STUDY: Radiolabelled meta-iodobenzylguanidine (MIBG) is an effective option in treatment of neuroblastoma (NBL) tumours. We studied feasibility, toxicity and efficacy of upfront 131I-MIBG and induction treatment in stage 4 NBL patients. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Retrospective, multi-centre (AMC and EMC) pilot regimen (1/1/2005-2011). Newly diagnosed stage 4 NBL patients, were treated with 2 courses of 131I-MIBG, GPOH 2004 NBL protocol, myeloablative therapy (MAT) and autologous stem cell rescue (ASCT). 131I-MIBG was administered in a fixed dose. Response rate (RR) was defined as complete remission, very good partial response and partial response. RESULTS: Thirty-two patients, (median age [range] 2.9 [0-11.4] years), 21 received 131I-MIBG therapy, 11 did not because of: MIBG non-avid (N = 5) and poor clinical condition (N = 6). In 95% of eligible patients 131I-MIBG treatment was feasible within 2 weeks from diagnosis. Interval between chemotherapy courses was 25 days (131I-MIBG group) versus 22 days (chemotherapy group). No stem cell support was needed after 131I-MIBG therapy. Stem cell harvest in both groups was feasible, neutrophil recovery was comparable, but platelet recovery post MAT, ASCT was slower for 131I-MIBG-treated patients. RR post 131I-MIBG was 38%, post MAT + ASCT was 71% (131I-MIBG group), 36% (chemotherapy group) and overall 59%. CONCLUSIONS: Induction therapy with 131I-MIBG before the HR GPOH NB 2004 protocol is feasible, tolerable and effective in newly diagnosed stage 4 NBL patients. 131I-MIBG upfront therapy induces early responses.
AIM OF THE STUDY: Radiolabelled meta-iodobenzylguanidine (MIBG) is an effective option in treatment of neuroblastoma (NBL) tumours. We studied feasibility, toxicity and efficacy of upfront 131I-MIBG and induction treatment in stage 4 NBL patients. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Retrospective, multi-centre (AMC and EMC) pilot regimen (1/1/2005-2011). Newly diagnosed stage 4 NBL patients, were treated with 2 courses of 131I-MIBG, GPOH 2004 NBL protocol, myeloablative therapy (MAT) and autologous stem cell rescue (ASCT). 131I-MIBG was administered in a fixed dose. Response rate (RR) was defined as complete remission, very good partial response and partial response. RESULTS: Thirty-two patients, (median age [range] 2.9 [0-11.4] years), 21 received 131I-MIBG therapy, 11 did not because of: MIBG non-avid (N = 5) and poor clinical condition (N = 6). In 95% of eligible patients131I-MIBG treatment was feasible within 2 weeks from diagnosis. Interval between chemotherapy courses was 25 days (131I-MIBG group) versus 22 days (chemotherapy group). No stem cell support was needed after 131I-MIBG therapy. Stem cell harvest in both groups was feasible, neutrophil recovery was comparable, but platelet recovery post MAT, ASCT was slower for 131I-MIBG-treated patients. RR post 131I-MIBG was 38%, post MAT + ASCT was 71% (131I-MIBG group), 36% (chemotherapy group) and overall 59%. CONCLUSIONS: Induction therapy with 131I-MIBG before the HR GPOH NB 2004 protocol is feasible, tolerable and effective in newly diagnosed stage 4 NBL patients. 131I-MIBG upfront therapy induces early responses.
Authors: Julie R Park; Susan G Kreissman; Wendy B London; Arlene Naranjo; Susan Lerner Cohn; Michael D Hogarty; Sheena C Tenney; Daphne Haas-Kogan; Peter John Shaw; Jacqueline M Kraveka; Stephen S Roberts; James Duncan Geiger; John J Doski; Stephan D Voss; John M Maris; Stephan A Grupp; Lisa Diller Journal: JAMA Date: 2019-08-27 Impact factor: 56.272
Authors: Jianhua Feng; Frankie Wt Cheng; Alex Wk Leung; Vincent Lee; Eva Wm Yeung; Hoi Ching Lam; Jeanny Cheung; Grace Ks Lam; Terry Tw Chow; Carol Ls Yan; Chi Kong Li Journal: Pediatr Investig Date: 2020-09-27
Authors: Christine Chung; Tom Boterberg; John Lucas; Joseph Panoff; Dominique Valteau-Couanet; Barbara Hero; Rochelle Bagatell; Christine E Hill-Kayser Journal: Pediatr Blood Cancer Date: 2021-05 Impact factor: 3.167
Authors: Esther M van Wezel; Lieke M J van Zogchel; Jalenka van Wijk; Ilse Timmerman; Ngoc-Kim Vo; Lily Zappeij-Kannegieter; Boris deCarolis; Thorsten Simon; Max M van Noesel; Jan J Molenaar; Tim van Groningen; Rogier Versteeg; Huib N Caron; C Ellen van der Schoot; Jan Koster; Johan van Nes; Godelieve A M Tytgat Journal: JCO Precis Oncol Date: 2019-10-03
Authors: Lieke M J van Zogchel; Lily Zappeij-Kannegieter; Ahmad Javadi; Marjolein Lugtigheid; Nina U Gelineau; Nathalie S M Lak; Danny A Zwijnenburg; Jan Koster; Janine Stutterheim; C Ellen van der Schoot; Godelieve A M Tytgat Journal: Cancers (Basel) Date: 2021-01-05 Impact factor: 6.639
Authors: Steven G DuBois; M Meaghan Granger; Susan Groshen; Denice Tsao-Wei; Lingyun Ji; Anasheh Shamirian; Scarlett Czarnecki; Fariba Goodarzian; Rachel Berkovich; Hiroyuki Shimada; Judith G Villablanca; Kieuhoa T Vo; Navin Pinto; Yael P Mosse; John M Maris; Suzanne Shusterman; Susan L Cohn; Kelly C Goldsmith; Brian Weiss; Gregory A Yanik; Clare J Twist; Meredith S Irwin; Daphne A Haas-Kogan; Julie R Park; Araz Marachelian; Katherine K Matthay Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2021-07-16 Impact factor: 44.544