The threat of the COVID-19 pandemic on reversing global life-saving gains in the survival of childhood cancer: A call for collaborative action from SIOP, IPSO, PROS, WCC, CCI, st jude global, UICC and WHPCA

The COVID-19 pandemic poses an unprecedented health crisis in all socio-economic regions across the globe. While the pandemic has had a profound impact on access to and delivery of health care by all services, it has been particularly disruptive for the care of patients with life-threatening noncommunicable diseases (NCDs) such as the treatment of children and young people with cancer. The reduction in child mortality from preventable causes over the last 50 years has seen childhood cancer emerge as a major unmet health care need. Whilst survival rates of 85% have been achieved in high income countries, this has not yet been translated into similar outcomes for children with cancer in resource-limited settings where survival averages 30%. Launched in 2018, by the World Health Organization (WHO), the Global Initiative for Childhood Cancer (GICC) is a pivotal effort by the international community to achieve at least 60% survival for children with cancer by 2030. The WHO GICC is already making an impact in many countries but the disruption of cancer care during the COVID-19 pandemic threatens to set back this global effort to improve the outcome for children with cancer, wherever they may live. As representatives of the global community committed to fostering the goals of the GICC, we applaud the WHO response to the COVID-19 pandemic, in particular we support the WHO's call to ensure the needs of patients with life threatening NCDs including cancer are not compromised during the pandemic. Here, as collaborative partners in the GICC, we highlight specific areas of focus that need to be addressed to ensure the immediate care of children and adolescents with cancer is not disrupted during the pandemic; and measures to sustain the development of cancer care so the long-term goals of the GICC are not lost during this global health crisis.Fil: Pritchard Jones, Kathy. University College London; Estados UnidosFil: de Abib, Simone C.V.. International Society Of Paediatric Surgical Oncology; Surinam. Universidade Federal de Sao Paulo; BrasilFil: Esiashvili, Natia. University of Emory; Estados UnidosFil: Kaspers, Gertjan J.L.. Princess Máxima Center for Pediatric Oncology; Países BajosFil: Rosser, Jon. No especifíca;Fil: van Doorninck, John A.. Rocky Mountain Hospital for Children; Estados UnidosFil: Braganca, João M.L.. No especifíca;Fil: Hoffman, Ruth I.. No especifíca;Fil: Rodriguez Galindo, Carlos. St Jude Children’s Research Hospital; Estados UnidosFil: Adams, Cary. Union for International Cancer Control; SuizaFil: Connor, Stephen R.. Worldwide Hospice Palliative Care Alliance; Estados UnidosFil: Abdelhafeez, Abdelhafeez H.. International Society of Paediatric Surgical Oncology; Suiza. St. Jude Children’s Research Hospital; Estados UnidosFil: Bouffet, Eric. University Of Toronto. Hospital For Sick Children; Canadá. International Society of Paediatric Surgical Oncology; SuizaFil: Howard, Scott C.. International Society of Paediatric Surgical Oncology; Suiza. University of Tennessee; Estados UnidosFil: Challinor, Julia M.. International Society of Paediatric Surgical Oncology; Suiza. University of California; Estados UnidosFil: Hessissen, Laila. Children Hospital of Rabat; Marruecos. International Society of Paediatric Surgical Oncology; SuizaFil: Dalvi, Rashmi B.. Bombay Hospital Institute of Medical Sciences; India. International Society of Paediatric Surgical Oncology; SuizaFil: Kearns, Pamela. International Society of Paediatric Surgical Oncology; SuizaFil: Chantada, Guillermo Luis. International Society of Paediatric Surgical Oncology; Suiza. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas; ArgentinaFil: Frazier, Lindsay A.. International Society of Paediatric Surgical Oncology; Suiza. Dana-Farber Cancer Institute; Estados UnidosFil: Sullivan, Michael J.. University of Melbourne; Australia. International Society of Paediatric Surgical Oncology; SuizaFil: Schulte, Fiona S.M.. University of Calgary; Canadá. International Society of Paediatric Surgical Oncology; SuizaFil: Morrissey, Lisa K.. Boston Children’s Hospital; Estados Unidos. International Society of Paediatric Surgical Oncology; SuizaFil: Kozhaeva, Olga. European Society for Paediatric Oncology; BélgicaFil: Luna Fineman, Sandra. Children’s Hospital Colorado; Estados Unidos. International Society of Paediatric Oncology; SuizaFil: Khan, Muhammad S.. Tawam Hospital; Emiratos Arabes Unido

Twelve-month observational study of children with cancer in 41 countries during the COVID-19 pandemic

Introduction Childhood cancer is a leading cause of death. It is unclear whether the COVID-19 pandemic has impacted childhood cancer mortality. In this study, we aimed to establish all-cause mortality rates for childhood cancers during the COVID-19 pandemic and determine the factors associated with mortality. Methods Prospective cohort study in 109 institutions in 41 countries. Inclusion criteria: children <18 years who were newly diagnosed with or undergoing active treatment for acute lymphoblastic leukaemia, non-Hodgkin's lymphoma, Hodgkin lymphoma, retinoblastoma, Wilms tumour, glioma, osteosarcoma, Ewing sarcoma, rhabdomyosarcoma, medulloblastoma and neuroblastoma. Of 2327 cases, 2118 patients were included in the study. The primary outcome measure was all-cause mortality at 30 days, 90 days and 12 months. Results All-cause mortality was 3.4% (n=71/2084) at 30-day follow-up, 5.7% (n=113/1969) at 90-day follow-up and 13.0% (n=206/1581) at 12-month follow-up. The median time from diagnosis to multidisciplinary team (MDT) plan was longest in low-income countries (7 days, IQR 3-11). Multivariable analysis revealed several factors associated with 12-month mortality, including low-income (OR 6.99 (95% CI 2.49 to 19.68); p<0.001), lower middle income (OR 3.32 (95% CI 1.96 to 5.61); p<0.001) and upper middle income (OR 3.49 (95% CI 2.02 to 6.03); p<0.001) country status and chemotherapy (OR 0.55 (95% CI 0.36 to 0.86); p=0.008) and immunotherapy (OR 0.27 (95% CI 0.08 to 0.91); p=0.035) within 30 days from MDT plan. Multivariable analysis revealed laboratory-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection (OR 5.33 (95% CI 1.19 to 23.84); p=0.029) was associated with 30-day mortality. Conclusions Children with cancer are more likely to die within 30 days if infected with SARS-CoV-2. However, timely treatment reduced odds of death. This report provides crucial information to balance the benefits of providing anticancer therapy against the risks of SARS-CoV-2 infection in children with cancer

Impact of opioid-free analgesia on pain severity and patient satisfaction after discharge from surgery: multispecialty, prospective cohort study in 25 countries

Background: Balancing opioid stewardship and the need for adequate analgesia following discharge after surgery is challenging. This study aimed to compare the outcomes for patients discharged with opioid versus opioid-free analgesia after common surgical procedures.Methods: This international, multicentre, prospective cohort study collected data from patients undergoing common acute and elective general surgical, urological, gynaecological, and orthopaedic procedures. The primary outcomes were patient-reported time in severe pain measured on a numerical analogue scale from 0 to 100% and patient-reported satisfaction with pain relief during the first week following discharge. Data were collected by in-hospital chart review and patient telephone interview 1 week after discharge.Results: The study recruited 4273 patients from 144 centres in 25 countries; 1311 patients (30.7%) were prescribed opioid analgesia at discharge. Patients reported being in severe pain for 10 (i.q.r. 1-30)% of the first week after discharge and rated satisfaction with analgesia as 90 (i.q.r. 80-100) of 100. After adjustment for confounders, opioid analgesia on discharge was independently associated with increased pain severity (risk ratio 1.52, 95% c.i. 1.31 to 1.76; P < 0.001) and re-presentation to healthcare providers owing to side-effects of medication (OR 2.38, 95% c.i. 1.36 to 4.17; P = 0.004), but not with satisfaction with analgesia (beta coefficient 0.92, 95% c.i. -1.52 to 3.36; P = 0.468) compared with opioid-free analgesia. Although opioid prescribing varied greatly between high-income and low- and middle-income countries, patient-reported outcomes did not.Conclusion: Opioid analgesia prescription on surgical discharge is associated with a higher risk of re-presentation owing to side-effects of medication and increased patient-reported pain, but not with changes in patient-reported satisfaction. Opioid-free discharge analgesia should be adopted routinely

Malignant Peripheral Nerve Sheath Tumors—A Comprehensive Review of Pathophysiology, Diagnosis, and Multidisciplinary Management

Malignant peripheral nerve sheath tumors (MPNSTs) are aggressive soft tissue sarcomas (STS) with nerve sheath differentiation and a tendency to metastasize. Although occurring at an incidence of 0.001% in the general population, they are relatively common in individuals with neurofibromatosis type 1 (NF1), for whom the lifetime risk approaches 10%. The staging of MPNSTs is complicated and requires close multi-disciplinary collaboration. Their primary management is most often surgical in nature, with non-surgical modalities playing a supportive, necessary role, particularly in metastatic, invasive, or widespread disease. We, therefore, sought to provide a comprehensive review of the relevant literature describing the characteristics of these tumors, their pathophysiology and risk factors, their diagnosis, and their multi-disciplinary treatment. A close partnership between surgical and medical oncologists is therefore necessary. Advances in the molecular characterization of these tumors have also begun to allow the integration of targeted RAS/RAF/MEK/ERK pathway inhibitors into MPNST management

Sentinel lymph node mapping with Indocyanine green fluorescence (ICG) for pediatric and adolescent tumors: a prospective observational study

Abstract Sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNB) is an important technique in the staging of pediatric melanomas, sarcomas, and potentially useful for other solid tumors. Precise visual localization of the sentinel lymph node (SLN) during the operation is a key challenge of this procedure. Presently, the gold standard method employing Technetium 99 (99mTc) for localization carries a notable false-negative rate. In this context, we propose evaluating the use of Indocyanine Green near-infrared (ICG-NIR) as a supplementary tool to enhance the identification of SLN. A prospective observational study focused on pediatric and adolescent patients undergoing SLNB using ICG-NIR at a single institution from 2019 to 2022. Lymphoscintigraphy with 99mTc was performed before surgery and 99mTc was detected intraoperatively using a handheld gamma probe. ICG was administered intraoperatively and assessed using transcutaneous NIR. The study collected demographic data, intra-operative findings (Technetium 99 m, ICG fluorescence), and histopathological data. Eight patients with a median age of 16 years (range: 8–19 years) underwent fluorescence-guided sentinel lymph node harvesting with 100% sensitivity. Sentinel lymph node fluorescence was verified with a positive radiosignal in all patients. No adverse events were recorded. Fluorescence-guided assessment of the lymphatic system is both feasible and effective for sentinel lymph node identification. Nevertheless, larger-scale studies are essential to establish indocyanine green as a viable alternative rather than a complementary technique alongside the gold-standard radioisotope-guided method for sentinel lymph node assessment in children

Malignant Peripheral Nerve Sheath Tumors—A Comprehensive Review of Pathophysiology, Diagnosis, and Multidisciplinary Management

Malignant peripheral nerve sheath tumors (MPNSTs) are aggressive soft tissue sarcomas (STS) with nerve sheath differentiation and a tendency to metastasize. Although occurring at an incidence of 0.001% in the general population, they are relatively common in individuals with neurofibromatosis type 1 (NF1), for whom the lifetime risk approaches 10%. The staging of MPNSTs is complicated and requires close multi-disciplinary collaboration. Their primary management is most often surgical in nature, with non-surgical modalities playing a supportive, necessary role, particularly in metastatic, invasive, or widespread disease. We, therefore, sought to provide a comprehensive review of the relevant literature describing the characteristics of these tumors, their pathophysiology and risk factors, their diagnosis, and their multi-disciplinary treatment. A close partnership between surgical and medical oncologists is therefore necessary. Advances in the molecular characterization of these tumors have also begun to allow the integration of targeted RAS/RAF/MEK/ERK pathway inhibitors into MPNST management

Clinical CVVH model removes endothelium-derived microparticles from circulation

Background: Endothelium-derived microparticles (EMPs) are submicron vesicles released from the plasma membrane of endothelial cells in response to injury, apoptosis or activation. We have previously demonstrated EMP-induced acute lung injury (ALI) in animal models and endothelial barrier dysfunction in vitro. Current treatment options for ALI are limited and consist of supportive therapies. We hypothesize that standard clinical continuous venovenous hemofiltration (CVVH) reduces serum EMP levels and may be adapted as a potential therapeutic intervention. Materials and methods: EMPs were generated from plasminogen activation inhibitor-1 (PAI-1)-stimulated human umbilical vein endothelial cells (HUVECs). Flow cytometric analysis was used to characterize EMPs as CD31- and annexin V-positive events in a submicron size gate. Enumeration was completed against a known concentration of latex beads. Ultimately, a concentration of ~650,000 EMP/mL perfusate fluid (total 470 mL) was circulated through a standard CVVH filter (pore size 200 μm, flow rate 250 mL/hr) for a period of 70 minutes. 0.5 mL aliquots were removed at 5- to 10-minute intervals for flow cytometric analysis. EMP concentration in the dialysate was measured at the end of 4 hours to better understand the fate of EMPs. Results: A progressive decrease in circulating EMP concentration was noted using standard CVVH at 250 mL/hr (a clinical standard rate) from a 470 mL volume modelling a patient's circulation. A 50% reduction was noted within the first 30 minutes. EMPs entering the dialysate after 4 hours were 5.7% of the EMP original concentration. Conclusion: These data demonstrate that standard CVVH can remove EMPs from circulation in a circuit modelling a patient. An animal model of hemofiltration with induction of EMP release is required to test the therapeutic potential of this finding and potential of application in early treatment of ALI