Erin K Barr1, Kathryn Laurie2, Kristen Wroblewski3, Mark A Applebaum4, Susan L Cohn4. 1. Department of Pediatrics, Texas Tech University Health Sciences, Lubbock, Texas. 2. Pediatric Hematology, Oncology and Stem Cell Transplantation, Ann and Robert H. Lurie Children's Hospital of Chicago, Chicago, Illinois. 3. Department of Public Health Sciences, University of Chicago, Chicago, Illinois. 4. Department of Pediatrics, University of Chicago, Chicago, Illinois.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The 1993 International Neuroblastoma Response Criteria (INRC) were revised in 2017 to include modern functional imaging studies and methods for quantifying disease in bone marrow. We hypothesized the 2017 INRC would enable more precise assessment of response to treatment and provide superior prognostic information compared with the 1993 criteria. METHODS: High-risk (HR) neuroblastoma patients from two institutions in Chicago diagnosed between 2006 and 2016 were identified. Patients were assessed post induction chemotherapy via the 1993 and 2017 INRC and classified as responder (≥ mixed response [MXR] or ≥ minor response [MR], respectively) or nonresponder (< MXR or < MR). Event-free survival (EFS) and overall survival (OS) for responders versus nonresponders were determined from end induction and stratified by Cox regression. Patients with progressive disease at end induction were eliminated from the EFS analyses but included in the OS analysis. RESULTS: The 1993 criteria classified 52 of the 60 HR patients as responders, whereas 54 responders were identified using the 2017 criteria (Spearman correlation r = 0.82, P < 0.001). No statistically significant difference in EFS was observed for responders versus nonresponders using either criteria (P = 0.48 and P = 0.08). However, superior OS was observed for responders (P = 0.01) using either criteria. Both criteria were sensitive in identifying responders among those with good outcomes. The specificity to identify nonresponders among those with poor outcomes was poor. CONCLUSIONS: In HR neuroblastoma, end-induction response defined by the 1993 or 2017 INRC is associated with survival. Larger cohorts are needed to determine if the 2017 INRC provides more precise prognostication.
BACKGROUND: The 1993 International Neuroblastoma Response Criteria (INRC) were revised in 2017 to include modern functional imaging studies and methods for quantifying disease in bone marrow. We hypothesized the 2017 INRC would enable more precise assessment of response to treatment and provide superior prognostic information compared with the 1993 criteria. METHODS: High-risk (HR) neuroblastomapatients from two institutions in Chicago diagnosed between 2006 and 2016 were identified. Patients were assessed post induction chemotherapy via the 1993 and 2017 INRC and classified as responder (≥ mixed response [MXR] or ≥ minor response [MR], respectively) or nonresponder (< MXR or < MR). Event-free survival (EFS) and overall survival (OS) for responders versus nonresponders were determined from end induction and stratified by Cox regression. Patients with progressive disease at end induction were eliminated from the EFS analyses but included in the OS analysis. RESULTS: The 1993 criteria classified 52 of the 60 HR patients as responders, whereas 54 responders were identified using the 2017 criteria (Spearman correlation r = 0.82, P < 0.001). No statistically significant difference in EFS was observed for responders versus nonresponders using either criteria (P = 0.48 and P = 0.08). However, superior OS was observed for responders (P = 0.01) using either criteria. Both criteria were sensitive in identifying responders among those with good outcomes. The specificity to identify nonresponders among those with poor outcomes was poor. CONCLUSIONS: In HR neuroblastoma, end-induction response defined by the 1993 or 2017 INRC is associated with survival. Larger cohorts are needed to determine if the 2017 INRC provides more precise prognostication.
Authors: Navin Pinto; Arlene Naranjo; Emily Hibbitts; Susan G Kreissman; M Meaghan Granger; Meredith S Irwin; Rochelle Bagatell; Wendy B London; Emily G Greengard; Julie R Park; Steven G DuBois Journal: Eur J Cancer Date: 2019-04-01 Impact factor: 9.162
Authors: Daniel von Allmen; Andrew M Davidoff; Wendy B London; Collin Van Ryn; Daphne A Haas-Kogan; Susan G Kreissman; Geetika Khanna; Nancy Rosen; Julie R Park; Michael P La Quaglia Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2016-11-21 Impact factor: 44.544
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: Katherine K Matthay; John M Maris; Gudrun Schleiermacher; Akira Nakagawara; Crystal L Mackall; Lisa Diller; William A Weiss Journal: Nat Rev Dis Primers Date: 2016-11-10 Impact factor: 52.329
Authors: Gregory A Yanik; Marguerite T Parisi; Barry L Shulkin; Arlene Naranjo; Susan G Kreissman; Wendy B London; Judith G Villablanca; John M Maris; Julie R Park; Susan L Cohn; Patrick McGrady; Katherine K Matthay Journal: J Nucl Med Date: 2013-02-25 Impact factor: 10.057
Authors: Gregory A Yanik; Marguerite T Parisi; Arlene Naranjo; Helen Nadel; Michael J Gelfand; Julie R Park; Ruth L Ladenstein; Ulrike Poetschger; Ariane Boubaker; Dominique Valteau-Couanet; Bieke Lambert; Maria-Rita Castellani; Zvi Bar-Sever; Aurore Oudoux; Anna Kaminska; Susan G Kreissman; Barry L Shulkin; Katherine K Matthay Journal: J Nucl Med Date: 2017-09-08 Impact factor: 10.057
Authors: Jin Yan; Li Jie; Yang Jiaxing; Cao Yanna; Li Zhanglin; Li Zhongyuan; Wang Daowei; Zhao Guangzong; Zhong Benfu; Yan Jie; Zhao Qiang Journal: Int J Med Sci Date: 2022-09-25 Impact factor: 3.642