Linked Life Data

3558027

Source:http://linkedlifedata.com/resource/pubmed/id/3558027

Statements in which the resource exists as a subject.
PredicateObject
rdf:type
lifeskim:mentions
pubmed:issue
3
pubmed:dateCreated
1987-4-30
pubmed:abstractText
The records of 95 consecutive children less than or equal to 21 years of age with previously untreated diffuse histology NHL registered in our protocols from 1978 to 1983 were reviewed. Seventy-nine patients were considered eligible for analysis. The histologic subtypes represented included lymphoblastic (LB) 37%; histiocytic (DHL) 29%; undifferentiated (DU) 19%; poorly differentiated (DPDL) 9%; and unclassified (UNHL) 6%. Distribution of the patients according to stage showed Stage I, 0%; Stage II, 11%; Stage III, 53%; Stage IV, 36%. Four different Memorial Hospital protocols for systemic chemotherapy were used (LSA2L2 73%; L10 9%; L17 10%; L17M 8%); however, the IT (intrathecal) chemotherapy was uniform (Methotrexate: 6.0-6.25 mg/M2 per treatment course) and was included in the induction, consolidation, and maintenance phases of all treatment protocols. Cranial radiation was included in the induction, consolidation, and maintenance phases of all treatment protocols. Cranial radiation was not included in the CNS prophylaxis program. The overall median time of follow-up was 43 months. The overall CNS relapse rate was 6.3%, however, the incidence of CNS lymphoma presenting as the first isolated site of relapse in patients in otherwise complete remission (minimum follow-up of 19 months with 97% of patients off treatment) was only 1/58 (1.7%). Our data suggests that IT chemotherapy when given in combination with modern aggressive systemic combination chemotherapy, and without cranial radiation appears to be a highly effective modality for CNS prophylaxis regardless of stage, histology, or bone marrow or mediastinal involvement. Therefore, with the commonly used aggressive combination chemotherapy for the management of all stage diffuse pediatric NHL, and the known increased risk of leukoencephalopathy with combination of cranial radiation and intensive systemic and intrathecal chemotherapy, we believe that cranial radiation may not be indicated for CNS prophylaxis in pediatric NHL.
pubmed:language
eng
pubmed:journal
pubmed:citationSubset
IM
pubmed:chemical
pubmed:status
MEDLINE
pubmed:month
Mar
pubmed:issn
0360-3016
pubmed:author
pubmed:issnType
Print
pubmed:volume
13
pubmed:owner
NLM
pubmed:authorsComplete
Y
pubmed:pagination
359-63
pubmed:dateRevised
2006-4-24
pubmed:meshHeading
pubmed:year
1987
pubmed:articleTitle
Is cranial radiation necessary for CNS prophylaxis in pediatric NHL?
pubmed:publicationType
Journal Article