Dataset Information

Pineoblastoma in children less than six years of age: The Head Start I, II, and III experience.

ABSTRACT:

Background

We report the outcomes of patients with pineoblastoma and trilateral retinoblastoma syndrome enrolled on the Head Start (HS) I-III trials.

Methods

Twenty-three children were enrolled prospectively between 1991 and 2009. Treatment included maximal surgical resection followed by five cycles of intensive chemotherapy and consolidation with marrow-ablative chemotherapy and autologous hematopoietic cell rescue (HDCx/AuHCR). Irradiation following consolidation was reserved for children over six years of age or those with residual tumor at the end of induction.

Results

Median age was 3.12 years (range, 0.44-5.72). Three patients withdrew from the study treatment and two patients experienced chemotherapy-related death. Eight patients experienced progressive disease (PD) during induction chemotherapy and did not proceed to HDCx/AuHCR. Ten patients received HDCx/AuHCR; eight experienced PD post-consolidation. Seven patients received craniospinal irradiation (CSI) with a median dose of 20.7 Gy (range, 18-36 Gy) with boost(s) (median dose 27 Gy; range, 18-36 Gy); three received CSI as adjuvant therapy (two post-HDCx/AuHCR) and four upon progression/recurrence. The five-year progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) were 9.7% (95% confidence intervals [CI]: 2.6%-36.0%) and 13% (95% CI: 4.5%-37.5%), respectively. Only three patients survived beyond five years. Favorable OS prognostic factors were CSI (hazard ratio [HR] = 0.30 [0.11-0.86], P = 0.025) and HDCx/AuHCR (HR = 0.40 [0.16-0.99], P = 0.047).

Conclusions

Within the HS I-III trials, CSI and HDCx/AuHCR were statistically associated with improved survival. The high PD rate during later induction cycles and following consolidation chemotherapy warrants consideration of fewer induction cycles prior to consolidation and the potential intensification of consolidation with multiple cycles of marrow-ablative chemotherapy and irradiation.

SUBMITTER: Abdelbaki MS

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8428681 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundFood resource management (FRM), strategies to stretch limited food resource dollars, may mitigate the impact of household food insecurity (HFI) on family members, including young children. However, little is known about how FRM and HFI are associated with child feeding practices.ObjectivesThe study aimed to explore relationships between HFI, FRM, and child feeding practices of low-income parents.MethodsIn a cross-sectional sample of 304 Head Start households, caregivers completed the USDA HFI module [classifying them as either food secure (FS) or food insecure (FI)], FRM behavior subscale (classifying them as being high or low in management skills based on a median score split), Comprehensive Feeding Practices Questionnaire, and Perceived Stress Scale. Households were categorized into 4 HFI-FRM subgroups: FS/high FRM (30.6%), FS/low FRM (31.3%), FI/high FRM (18.8%), and FI/low FRM (19.4%). Multivariable linear regression was used to examine whether feeding practices differed across HFI-FRM categories and whether the addition of parental perceived stress contributed to differences in feeding practices by HFI-FRM group.ResultsIn our study, 38% of households were FI. Compared to the FS/high FRM group in the adjusted models, the FS/low FRM group used less monitoring (-0.53; 95% CI: -0.78 to -0.28), modeling (-0.38; 95% CI: -0.64 to -0.13), and involvement (-0.57; 95% CI: -0.82 to -0.32) in feeding. A similar pattern emerged for the FI/low FRM group. The use of food as a reward was higher in the FI/high FRM (0.35; 95% CI: 0.02-0.67) and FI/low FRM groups (0.33; 95% CI: 0.01-0.66) compared to the FS/high FRM group. Perceived stress was positively associated with the use of negative, controlling feeding practices, and contributed to differences in using food as a reward within the HFI-FRM group.ConclusionsSuboptimal child feeding is evident in low-income caregivers with low FRM skills, with or without food insecurity. Promoting high FRM skills, in addition to addressing food insecurity, could potentially synergistically improve child feeding practices in low-income households.