Population-based survival estimates for childhood cancer in Australia during the period 1997-2006

Background: This study provides the latest available relative survival data for Australian childhood cancer patients. Methods: Data from the population-based Australian Paediatric Cancer Registry were used to describe relative survival outcomes using the period method for 11 903 children diagnosed with cancer between 1983 and 2006 and prevalent at any time between 1997 and 2006. Results: The overall relative survival was 90.4% after 1 year, 79.5% after 5 years and 74.7% after 20 years. Where information onstage at diagnosis was available (lymphomas, neuroblastoma, renal tumours and rhabdomyosarcomas), survival was significantly poorer for more-advanced stage. Survival was lower among infants compared with other children for those diagnosed with leukaemia, tumours of the central nervous system and renal tumours but higher for neuroblastoma. Recent improvements in overall childhood cancer survival over time are mainly because of improvements among leukaemia patients. Conclusion: The high and improving survival prognosis for children diagnosed with cancer in Australia is consistent with various international estimates. However, a 5-year survival estimate of 79% still means that many children who are diagnosed with cancer will die within 5 years, whereas others have long-term health morbidities and complications associated with their treatments. It is hoped that continued developments in treatment protocols will result in further improvements in survival

Tumoral TP53 and/or CDKN2A alterations are not reliable prognostic biomarkers in patients with localized Ewing sarcoma: A report from the Children's Oncology Group

BackgroundA growing collection of retrospective studies have suggested that TP53 mutations and/or CDKN2A deletions have prognostic significance in Ewing sarcoma. We sought to evaluate these variables in patients with localized disease treated prospectively on a single Children's Oncology Group protocol.ProcedureOf the 568 patients enrolled on Children's Oncology Group protocol AEWS0031 (NCT00006734), 112 had tumor specimens of sufficient quality and quantity to allow for analysis of TP53 mutations status by DNA sequencing, and CDKN2A deletion by dual color fluorescent in situ hybridization.ResultsEight of 93 cases (8.6%) were found to have TP53 point mutations and 12 of 107 cases (11.2%) demonstrated homozygous CDKN2A deletion. Two cases were found to have an alteration in both genes. There was no significant difference in event-free survival of patients with TP53 mutations and/or CDKN2A deletions compared to patients with normal TP53/CDKN2A gene status, as demonstrated by log rank test (p = 0.58).ConclusionsAlthough previous retrospective studies suggest their significance, TP53 mutation and/or CDKN2A deletion are not reliable prognostic biomarkers in localized Ewing sarcoma

Alveolar rhabdomyosarcoma with regional nodal involvement: Results of a combined analysis from two cooperative groups.

BACKGROUND: Treatment of children and adolescents with alveolar rhabdomyosarcoma (ARMS) and regional nodal involvement (N1) have been approached differently by North American and European cooperative groups. In order to define a better therapeutic strategy, we analyzed two studies conducted between 2005 and 2016 by the European paediatric Soft tissue sarcoma Study Group (EpSSG) and Children's Oncology Group (COG). METHODS: We retrospectively identified patients with ARMS N1 enrolled in either EpSSG RMS2005 or in COG ARST0531. Chemotherapy in RMS2005 comprised ifosfamide + vincristine + dactinomycin + doxorubicin (IVADo), IVA and maintenance (vinorelbine, cyclophosphamide); in ARST0531, it consisted of either vincristine + dactinomycin + cyclophosphamide (VAC) or VAC alternating with vincristine + irinotecan (VI). Local treatment was similar in both protocols. RESULTS: The analysis of the clinical characteristics of 239 patients showed some differences between study groups: in RMS2005, advanced Intergroup Rhabdomyosarcoma Study Group (IRS) and large tumors predominated. There were no differences in outcomes between the two groups: 5-year event-free survival (EFS), 49% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 39-59) and 44% (95% CI: 30-58), and overall survival (OS), 51% (95% CI: 41-61) and 53.6% (95% CI: 40-68) in RMS2005 and ARST0531, respectively. In RMS2005, EFS of patients with FOXO1-positive tumors was significantly inferior to those with FOXO1-negative (49.3% vs 73%, P = .034). In contrast, in ARST0531, EFS of patients with FOXO1-positive tumors was 45% compared with 43.8% for those with FOXO1-negative. CONCLUSIONS: The outcome of patients with ARMS N1 was similar in both protocols. However, patients with FOXO1 fusion-negative tumors enrolled in RMS2005 showed a significantly better outcome, suggesting that different strategies of chemotherapy may have an impact in the outcome of this subgroup of patients