G4型髓母细胞瘤患儿预后影响因素及生存状况分析
Analysis of prognostic factors and survival status of group 4 medulloblastoma in children
Received date: 2022-12-06
Online published: 2023-09-05
目的 探讨儿童G4型髓母细胞瘤(MB)患者的生存状况及其预后影响因素。方法 回顾性分析2016年5月至2020年8月儿科收治的G4型MB患儿(随访至2022年8月)的临床资料,采用Kaplan-Meier法计算总体生存(OS)率和无进展生存(PFS)率,采用Log-rank检验比较组间生存率差异,采用Cox回归模型分析影响预后的因素。结果 纳入145例G4型MB患儿,男106例、女39例,中位确诊年龄7.5(5.7~9.6)岁。M0期91例,M+期54例(M1期1例、M2期12例、M3期41例);病理分型为经典型127例、促纤维增生/结节型(DN)8例、大细胞/间变型(LC/A)8例、广泛结节型(EN)1例、未分型1例。中位随访时间为47.9(36.5~59.3)月,复发37例。患儿5年OS率和PFS率分别为(80.8±3.4)%和(55.4±4.7)%。Cox回归分析结果提示M+期、MYCN扩增、Chr12 p+变异是影响预后的独立危险因素(P<0.05)。结论 M+期、MYCN扩增的G4型MB患儿预后相对较差。Chr12 p+可能与患儿预后相关,但仍有待更大样本的临床研究进行证实。
武跃芳 , 孙艳玲 , 武万水 , 杜淑旭 , 李苗 , 孙黎明 . G4型髓母细胞瘤患儿预后影响因素及生存状况分析[J]. 临床儿科杂志, 2023 , 41(9) : 686 -691 . DOI: 10.12372/jcp.2023.22e1634
Objective To investigate the survival status and prognostic factors of group 4 medulloblastoma (MB) in children. Methods The clinical data of children with group 4 MB admitted to the Department of Pediatrics from May 2016 to August 2020 (follow-up until August 2022) were retrospectively analyzed. The Kaplan-Meier method was used to calculate the overall survival (OS) rate and progression-free survival (PFS) rate. Log-rank test was used to compare the difference in survival rate between groups, and Cox regression model was used to analyze the factors affecting prognosis. Results A total of 145 children (106 boys and 39 girls) with group 4 MB were included, and the median age of diagnosis was 7.5 (5.7-9.6) years old. There were 91 children in M0 stage and 54 children in M+ stage (1 in M1 stage, 12 in M2 stage and 41 in M3 stage). The pathologic types were classic in 127 cases, desmoplastic/nodular (DN) in 8 cases, anaplastic/large cell (LC/A) in 8 cases, extensive nodularity (EN) in 1 case, and none of somatotype (NOS) in 1 case. The median follow-up time was 47.9 (36.5-59.3) months, and 37 children had tumor recurrence. The 5-year OS and PFS rates were (80.8±3.4) % and (55.4±4.7) %, respectively. Cox regression analysis indicated that M+ stage, MYCN amplification and Chr12p+ variation were independent risk factors for prognosis (P<0.05). Conclusions Group 4 MB children with M+ stage or MYCN amplification have a relatively poor prognosis. Chr12p + may be related to the prognosis of children, but it needs to be confirmed by clinical studies with larger samples.
Key words: group 4 medulloblastoma; prognosis; influencing factor; child
[1] | Northcott PA, Robinson GW, Kratz CP, et al. Medulloblastoma[J]. Nat Rev Dis Primers, 2019, 5(1): 11. |
[2] | Vladoiu MC, El-Hamamy I, Donovan LK, et al. Childhood cerebellar tumours mirror conserved fetal transcriptional programs[J]. Nature, 2019, 572(7767): 67-73. |
[3] | Orr BA. Pathology, diagnostics, and classification of medulloblastoma[J]. Brain Pathol, 2020, 30(3): 664-678. |
[4] | Ostrom QT, Gittleman H, Truitt G, et al. CBTRUS statistical report: primary brain and other central nervous system tumors diagnosed in the United States in 2011-2015[J]. Neuro Oncol, 2018, 20(suppl 4): 1-86. |
[5] | Cotter JA, Hawkins C. Medulloblastoma: WHO 2021 and beyond[J]. Pediatr Dev Pathol, 2022, 25(1): 23-33. |
[6] | Suk Y, Gwynne WD, Burns I, et al. Childhood medullo-blastoma: an overview[J]. Methods Mol Biol, 2022, 2423: 1-12. |
[7] | Ellison DW, Dalton J, Kocak M, et al. Medulloblastoma: clinicopathological correlates of SHH, WNT, and non-SHH/WNT molecular subgroups[J]. Acta Neuropathol, 2011, 121(3):381-396. |
[8] | Miranda Kuzan-Fischer C, Juraschka K, Taylor MD. Medulloblastoma in the molecular era[J]. J Korean Neurosurg Soc, 2018, 61(3): 292-301. |
[9] | Lafay-Cousin L, Baroni L, Ramaswamy V, et al. How do we approach the management of medulloblastoma in young children?[J]. Pediatr Blood Cancer, 2022, 69(10): e29838. |
[10] | Beccaria K, Padovani L, Bouchoucha Y, et al. Current treatments of medulloblastoma[J]. Curr Opin Oncol, 2021, 33(6): 615-620. |
[11] | Baliga S, Gandola L, Timmermann B, et al. Brain tumors: medulloblastoma, ATRT, ependymoma[J]. Pediatr Blood Cancer, 2021, 68 Suppl 2: e28395. |
[12] | Chang CH, Housepian EM, Herbert C Jr. An operative staging system and a megavoltage radiotherapeutic technique for cerebelar medulloblastomas[J]. Radiology, 1969, 93(6):1351-1359. |
[13] | Khatua S, Song A, Citla Sridhar D, et al. Childhood medulloblastoma: current therapies, emerging molecular landscape and newer therapeutic insights[J]. Curr Neuropharmacol, 2018, 16(7): 1045-1058. |
[14] | von Bueren AO, von Hoff K, Pietsch T, et al. Treatment of young children with localized medulloblastoma by chemotherapy alone: results of the prospective, multicenter trial HIT 2000 confirming the prognostic impact of histology[J]. Neuro Oncol, 2011, 13(6): 669-679. |
[15] | Fuller CE, Jones DTW, Kieran MW. New classification for central nervous system tumors: implications for diagnosis and therapy[J]. Am Soc Clin Oncol Educ Book, 2017, 37: 753-763. |
[16] | Hay JL, Atkinson TM, Reeve BB, et al. Cognitive interviewing of the US national cancer institute's patient-reported outcomes version of the common terminology criteria for adverse events (PRO-CTCAE)[J]. Qual Life Res, 2014, 23(1): 257-269. |
[17] | Shih DJ, Northcott PA, Remke M, et al. Cytogenetic prognostication within medulloblastoma subgroups[J]. J Clin Oncol, 2014, 32(9): 886-896. |
[18] | Northcott PA, Korshunov A, Witt H, et al. Medulloblastoma comprises four distinct molecular variants[J]. J Clin Oncol, 2011, 29(11): 1408-1414. |
[19] | Pietsch T, Schmidt R, Remke M, et al. Prognostic significance of clinical, histopathological, and molecular characteristics of medulloblastomas in the prospective HIT2000 multicenter clinical trial cohort[J]. Acta Neuropathol, 2014, 128(1): 137-149. |
[20] | Robinson GW, Rudneva VA, Buchhalter I, et al. Risk-adapted therapy for young children with medulloblastoma (SJYC07): therapeutic and molecular outcomes from a multicentre, phase 2 trial[J]. Lancet Oncol, 2018, 19(6): 768-784. |
[21] | Schwalbe EC, Lindsey JC, Nakjang S, et al. Novel molecular subgroups for clinical classification and outcome prediction in childhood medulloblastoma: a cohort study[J]. Lancet Oncol, 2017, 18(7): 958-971. |
/
〈 |
|
〉 |