Prognostic Factors for Wilms Tumor Recurrence: A Review of the Literature

In high-income countries, the overall survival of children with Wilms tumors (WT) is ~90%. However, overall, 15% of patients experience tumor recurrence. The adverse prognostic factors currently used for risk stratification (advanced stage, high risk histology, and combined loss of heterozygosity at 1p and 16q in chemotherapy-naïve WTs) are present in only one third of these cases, and the significance of these factors is prone to change with advancing knowledge and improved treatment regimens. Therefore, we present a comprehensive, updated overview of the published prognostic variables for WT recurrence, ranging from patient-, tumor- and treatment-related characteristics to geographic and socioeconomic factors. Improved first-line treatment regimens based on clinicopathological characteristics and advancing knowledge on copy number variations unveil the importance of further investigating the significance of biological markers for WT recurrence in international collaborations

Molecular Characterization Reveals Subclasses of 1q Gain in Intermediate Risk Wilms Tumors

Chromosomal alterations have recurrently been identified in Wilms tumors (WTs) and some are associated with poor prognosis. Gain of 1q (1q+) is of special interest given its high prevalence and is currently actively studied for its prognostic value. However, the underlying mutational mechanisms and functional effects remain unknown. In a national unbiased cohort of 30 primary WTs, we integrated somatic SNVs, CNs and SVs with expression data and distinguished four clusters characterized by affected biological processes: muscle differentiation, immune system, kidney development and proliferation. Combined genome-wide CN and SV profiles showed that tumors profoundly differ in both their types of 1q+ and genomic stability and can be grouped into WTs with co-occurring 1p−/1q+, multiple chromosomal gains or CN neutral tumors. We identified 1q+ in eight tumors that differ in mutational mechanisms, subsequent rearrangements and genomic contexts. Moreover, 1q+ tumors were present in all four expression clusters reflecting activation of various biological processes, and individual tumors overexpress different genes on 1q. In conclusion, by integrating CNs, SVs and gene expression, we identified subgroups of 1q+ tumors reflecting differences in the functional effect of 1q gain, indicating that expression data is likely needed for further risk stratification of 1q+ WTs

Outcome of SIOP patients with low- or intermediate-risk Wilms tumour relapsing after initial vincristine and actinomycin-D therapy only - the SIOP 93-01 and 2001 protocols.

Society of International Pediatric Oncology - Renal Tumor Study Group (SIOP-RTSG) treatment recommendations for relapsed Wilms tumour (WT) are stratified by the intensity of first-line treatment. To explore the evidence for the treatment of patients relapsing after vincristine and actinomycin-D (VA) treatment for primary WT, we retrospectively evaluated rescue treatment and survival of this patient group. We included 109 patients with relapse after VA therapy (no radiotherapy) for stage I-II primary low- or intermediate-risk WT from the SIOP 93-01 and SIOP 2001 studies. Univariate Cox regression analysis was performed to study the effect of relapse treatment intensity on event-free survival (EFS) and overall survival (OS). Relapse treatment intensity was classified into vincristine, actinomycin-D, and either doxorubicin or epirubicin (VAD), and more intensive therapies (ifosfamide/carboplatin/etoposide [ICE]/≥ 4 drugs/high-dose chemotherapy with haematopoietic stem cell transplantation [HD HSCT]). Relapse treatment regimens included either VAD, or cyclophosphamide/carboplatin/etoposide/doxorubicin (CyCED), or ICE backbones. Radiotherapy was administered in 62 patients and HD HSCT in 15 patients. Overall, 5-year EFS and OS after relapse were 72.3% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 64.0-81.6%) and 79.3% (95% CI: 71.5-88.0%), respectively. Patients treated with VAD did not fare worse when compared with patients treated with more intensive therapies (hazard ratio EFS: 0.611 [95% CI: 0.228-1.638] [p-value = 0.327] and hazard ratio OS: 0.438 [95% CI: 0.126-1.700] [p-value = 0.193]). Patients with relapsed WT after initial VA-only treatment showed no inferior EFS and OS when treated with VAD regimens compared with more intensive rescue regimens. A subset of patients relapsing after VA may benefit from less intensive rescue treatment than ICE/CyCED-based regimens and deserve to be pinpointed by identifying additional (molecular) prognostic factors in future studies