Defibrotide treatment but not prophylaxis is useful in hepatic sinusoidal obstruction syndrome in children undergoing autologous stem cell transplant following high-dose chemotherapy: A single-center experience from the Royal Marsden Hospital, UK.

BACKGROUND: Hepatic sinusoidal obstruction syndrome (SOS) is a serious complication of autologous stem cell transplant (ASCT) in children with historically high mortality rates. Defibrotide has shown proven benefit in its treatment and may have a modest role in prevention. We report our experience with SOS in children undergoing autologous transplant. METHODS: Case records of 82 consecutive patients undergoing ASCT following high-dose chemotherapy between 2010 and 2017 were reviewed. Defibrotide was used for treatment of all with SOS and prophylactically in patients receiving busulfan-based conditioning until 2014. RESULTS: Fourteen of the 82 children (17%) were diagnosed with SOS. The incidence was higher in those receiving busulfan-based conditioning (13/42 vs 1/40, P = 0.008). Mean (±SD) time to diagnosis of SOS was 19 (±5.6) days following stem cell rescue. Bilirubin levels and ultrasound were normal in 7/14 and 3/14 patients. Coagulopathy was noted in 10/14; one child developed multiorgan involvement. Nine children had mild SOS, whereas two and three had moderate and severe SOS, respectively. Intensive care was required for four of five non-mild cases. Patients with SOS had significantly delayed platelet recovery, higher transfusion requirement, and longer hospital stay. Unavailability of defibrotide prophylaxis for 17/42 receiving busulfan did not change the incidence of SOS (7/25 with defibrotide vs 6 /17 without defibrotide, P = 0.74). There was no significant difference in the severity of SOS between these groups. CONCLUSION: Hepatic SOS was more commonly seen in children receiving busulfan-based conditioning. Stopping the use of prophylactic defibrotide did not increase incidence or severity of SOS. Overall outcome was excellent with supportive care and timely treatment with defibrotide.

Craniospinal irradiation with concomitant and adjuvant temozolomide--a feasibility assessment of toxicity in patients with glioblastoma with a PNET component.

There is no standard treatment for glioblastoma with elements of PNET (GBM-PNET). Conventional treatment for glioblastoma is surgery followed by focal radiotherapy with concurrent temozolomide. Given the increased propensity for neuroaxial metastases seen with GBM-PNETs, craniospinal irradiation (CSI) with temozolomide (TMZ) could be a feasible treatment option but little is known regarding its toxicity. The clinical records of all patients treated at two UK neuro-oncology centres with concurrent CSI and TMZ were examined for details of surgery, radiotherapy, chemotherapy and toxicities related to the CSI-TMZ component of their treatment. Eight patients were treated with CSI-TMZ, the majority (6/8) for GBM-PNET. All patients completed radiotherapy to the craniospinal axis 35-40 Gy in 20-24 daily fractions with a focal boost to the tumour of 14-23.4 Gy in 8-13 daily fractions. Concurrent TMZ was administered at 75 mg/m(2) for seven of the cohort, with the other patient receiving 50 mg/m(2). The most commonly observed non-haematological toxicities were nausea and vomiting, with all patients experiencing at least grade 2 symptoms of either or both. All patients had at least grade 3 lymphopaenia. Two patients experience grade 4 neutropaenia and grade 3 thrombocytopaenia. Three of the eight patients required omission of TMZ for part of their chemoradiotherapy and 3/8 required hospital admission at some point during chemoradiotherapy. The addition of TMZ to CSI did not interrupt radiotherapy. Principal toxicities were neutropaenia, lymphopaenia, thrombocytopaenia, nausea and vomiting. Treatment with CSI-TMZ merits further investigation and may be suitable for patients with tumours at high-risk of metastatic spread throughout the CNS who have TMZ-sensitive pathologies.

Pharmacotherapy update in the management of paediatric cancer.

Great advances in the treatment of childhood cancer have been made over the last 30 years because of developments in supportive care, the increasing use of advanced technology to detect and diagnose disease, developments in the understanding and relevance of cell biology and by the successful recruitment of children into nationally co-coordinated clinical trials. For some childhood malignancies where the survival rate is high, trials are ongoing to see if treatment can be stratified and directed according to patient risk, with those that fall into a favourable risk category potentially being cured with less treatment and therefore less short term and long term toxicity.

Methotrexate rechallenge following delayed clearance and life-threatening toxicity.

Life-threatening toxicity is often a contraindication for cytotoxic treatment. Many childhood malignancies have good outcomes with appropriate aggressive chemotherapy. It is not easy to decide whether to subject a child with a good prognostic tumor to a drug that has previously caused significant toxicity. One such situation is documented in this report.

Efficacy and tolerability of high-dose methotrexate in central nervous system positive or relapsed lymphoproliferative disease following liver transplant in children.

Childhood post-transplant lymphoproliferative disease (PTLD) is a heterogeneous condition in which treatment varies, from the reduction of immunosuppression to moderately intensive chemotherapy. While low-dose chemotherapy/rituximab has been found to be effective, moderately intensive chemotherapy is required for patients who relapse, have classic non-Hodgkin lymphoma or have fulminant PTLD. Methotrexate (Mtx) is highly effective in lymphomas and crosses the blood-brain barrier. However, there are no data in the literature regarding its safety in post-liver transplant patients. We describe four cases of high-grade lymphomas (three diffuse large B cell and one T-cell lymphoblastic), post-liver transplant, for which chemotherapy including high-dose Mtx (HDMTX) was the treatment of choice. In total, 20 doses of HDMTX (1-5 g/m(2)) were given. The treatment was well tolerated and all four patients had a good response. One case of central nervous system (CNS) diffuse large B-cell lymphoma was treated with HDMTX alone. We conclude that, in the absence of significant organ damage, HDMTX can safely be given to liver transplant patients, but should only be administered in specialist oncology units. Proof of effectiveness as a single agent in CNS lymphoma needs further studies.