Radical radiotherapy for paediatric solid tumour metastases:An overview of current European protocols and outcomes of a SIOPE multicenter survey

Purpose/objective: About 20% of children with solid tumours (ST) present with distant metastases (DM). Evidence regarding the use of radical radiotherapy of these DM is sparse and open for personal interpretation. The aim of this survey was to review European protocols and to map current practice regarding the irradiation of DM across SIOPE-affiliated countries. Materials/methods: Radiotherapy guidelines for metastatic sites (bone, brain, distant lymph nodes, lung and liver) in eight European protocols for rhabdomyosarcoma, non-rhabdomyosarcoma soft-tissue sarcoma, Ewing sarcoma, neuroblastoma and renal tumours were reviewed. SIOPE centres irradiating >= 50 children annually were invited to participate in an online survey. Results: Radiotherapy to at least one metastatic site was recommended in all protocols, except for high-risk neuroblastoma. Per protocol, dose prescription varied per site, and information on delineation and treatment planning/delivery was generally missing. Between July and September 2019, 20/27 centres completed the survey. Around 14% of patients were deemed to have DM from ST at diagnosis, of which half were treated with curative intent. A clear cut-off for a maximum number of DM was not used in half of the centres. Regardless of the tumour type and site, conventional radiotherapy regimens were most commonly used to treat DM. When stereotactic radiotherapy was used, a wide range of fractionation regimens were applied. Conclusion: Current radiotherapy guidelines for DM do not allow a consistent approach in a multicentre setting. Prospective (randomised) trials are needed to define the role of radical irradiation of DM from paediatric ST. (C) 2020 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd

Development of the SIOPE DIPG network, registry and imaging repository : a collaborative effort to optimize research into a rare and lethal disease

Diffuse intrinsic pontine glioma (DIPG) is a rare and deadly childhood malignancy. After 40 years of mostly single-center, often non-randomized trials with variable patient inclusions, there has been no improvement in survival. It is therefore time for international collaboration in DIPG research, to provide new hope for children, parents and medical professionals fighting DIPG. In a first step towards collaboration, in 2011, a network of biologists and clinicians working in the field of DIPG was established within the European Society for Paediatric Oncology (SIOPE) Brain Tumour Group: the SIOPE DIPG Network. By bringing together biomedical professionals and parents as patient representatives, several collaborative DIPG-related projects have been realized. With help from experts in the fields of information technology, and legal advisors, an international, web-based comprehensive database was developed, The SIOPE DIPG Registry and Imaging Repository, to centrally collect data of DIPG patients. As for April 2016, clinical data as well as MR-scans of 694 patients have been entered into the SIOPE DIPG Registry/Imaging Repository. The median progression free survival is 6.0 months (95% Confidence Interval (CI) 5.6-6.4 months) and the median overall survival is 11.0 months (95% CI 10.5-11.5 months). At two and five years post-diagnosis, 10 and 2% of patients are alive, respectively. The establishment of the SIOPE DIPG Network and SIOPE DIPG Registry means a paradigm shift towards collaborative research into DIPG. This is seen as an essential first step towards understanding the disease, improving care and (ultimately) cure for children with DIPG.Peer reviewe

A922 Sequential measurement of 1 hour creatinine clearance (1-CRCL) in critically ill patients at risk of acute kidney injury (AKI)

Meeting abstrac

Age-appropriate multidisciplinary approach to young children with cancer undergoing radiotherapy : the SIESTA procedure

A standardized multidisciplinary step-by-step approach to improve the compliance of young (or difficult) children having to undergo radiotherapy was described and applied. The procedure is called SIESTA, which stands for show-imagination-evaluation-support-treatment-anesthesia. Preliminary assessments suggest that the SIESTA approach was effective: the rate of young patients ( 646 years) requiring anesthesia decreased from 27% (14/52 cases) in 2011-2012 (before the procedure was adopted) to 13% (6/46) in 2018

A rapid review of evidence and recommendations from the SIOPE radiation oncology working group to help mitigate for reduced paediatric radiotherapy capacity during the COVID-19 pandemic or other crises

Objective: To derive evidence-based recommendations for the optimal utilisation of resources during unexpected shortage of radiotherapy capacity. Methods and materials: We have undertaken a rapid review of published literature on the role of radiotherapy in the multimodality treatment of paediatric cancers governing the European practise of paediatric radiotherapy. The derived data has been discussed with expert paediatric radiation oncologists to derive a hierarchy of recommendations. Results: The general recommendations to mitigate the potential detriment of an unexpected shortage of radiotherapy facilities include: (1) maintain current standards of care as long as possible (2) refer to another specialist paediatric radiotherapy department with similar level of expertise (3) prioritise use of existing radiotherapy resources to treat patients with tumours where radiotherapy has the most effect on clinical outcome (4) use chemotherapy to defer the start of radiotherapy where timing of radiotherapy is not expected to be detrimental (5) active surveillance for low-grade tumours if appropriate and (6) consider iso-effective hypofractionated radiotherapy regimens only for selected patients with predicted poor prognosis. The effectiveness of radiotherapy and recommendations for prioritisation of its use for common and challenging paediatric tumours are discussed. Conclusion: This review provides evidence-based treatment recommendations during unexpected shortage of paediatric radiotherapy facilities. It has wider applications for the optimal utilisation of facilities, to improve clinical outcome in low- and middle-income countries, where limited resources continue to be a challenge

Survival benefit for patients with diffuse intrinsic pontine glioma (DIPG) undergoing re-irradiation at first progression: A matched-cohort analysis on behalf of the SIOP-E-HGG/DIPG working group

Overall survival (OS) of patients with diffuse intrinsic pontine glioma (DIPG) is poor. The purpose of this study is to analyse benefit and toxicity of re-irradiation at first progression.publisher: Elsevier articletitle: Survival benefit for patients with diffuse intrinsic pontine glioma (DIPG) undergoing re-irradiation at first progression: A matched-cohort analysis on behalf of the SIOP-E-HGG/DIPG working group journaltitle: European Journal of Cancer articlelink: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ejca.2016.12.007 content_type: article copyright: © 2017 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.status: publishe

Survival benefit for patients with diffuse intrinsic pontine glioma (DIPG) undergoing re-irradiation at first progression : A matched-cohort analysis on behalf of the SIOP-E-HGG/DIPG working group

Background Overall survival (OS) of patients with diffuse intrinsic pontine glioma (DIPG) is poor. The purpose of this study is to analyse benefit and toxicity of re-irradiation at first progression. Methods At first progression, 31 children with DIPG, aged 2–16 years, underwent re-irradiation (dose 19.8–30.0 Gy) alone (n = 16) or combined with systemic therapy (n = 15). At initial presentation, all patients had typical symptoms and characteristic MRI features of DIPG, or biopsy-proven high-grade glioma. An interval of ≥3 months after upfront radiotherapy was required before re-irradiation. Thirty-nine patients fulfilling the same criteria receiving radiotherapy at diagnosis, followed by best supportive care (n = 20) or systemic therapy (n = 19) at progression but no re-irradiation, were eligible for a matched-cohort analysis. Results Median OS for patients undergoing re-irradiation was 13.7 months. For a similar median progression-free survival after upfront radiotherapy (8.2 versus 7.7 months; P = .58), a significant benefit in median OS (13.7 versus 10.3 months; P = .04) was observed in favour of patients undergoing re-irradiation. Survival benefit of re-irradiation increased with a longer interval between end-of-radiotherapy and first progression (3–6 months: 4.0 versus 2.7; P < .01; 6–12 months: 6.4 versus 3.3; P = .04). Clinical improvement with re-irradiation was observed in 24/31 (77%) patients. No grade 4–5 toxicity was recorded. On multivariable analysis, interval to progression (corrected hazard ratio = .27–.54; P < .01) and re-irradiation (corrected hazard ratio = .18–.22; P < .01) remained prognostic for survival. A risk score (RS), comprising 5 categories, was developed to predict survival from first progression (ROC: .79). Median survival ranges from 1.0 month (RS-1) to 6.7 months (RS-5). Conclusions The majority of patients with DIPG, responding to upfront radiotherapy, do benefit of re-irradiation with acceptable tolerability