Search

Background Treatment for parameningeal rhabdomyosarcoma (PM-RMS) has been a challenge since local control is difficult. The goal of this study was to analyse the impact of different local treatment approaches on childhood PM-RMS patients and help dispel the doubt that whether secondary radical surgery (SRS) should be encouraged in the management of PM-RMS. Methods A total of 17 children with PM-RMS who received unified systemic chemotherapy and individualized local therapy such as radiotherapy (RT) and/or SRS were included in this retrospective study. The overall survival (OS) and event free survival (EFS) were compared between groups adopting different local strategies. Results The 3-year OS and EFS of our PM-RMS patients was 75.5% and 56.5% respectively. The OS and EFS of patients who received SRS were both significantly lower than that of the non-SRS group (3-year OS: 50.0% vs 90.0%, P = .031; 3-year EFS: 33.3% vs 60.6%, P = .020). The OS and EFS of the patients who received RT was higher than that of the patients of the non-RT group (3-year OS: 85.6% vs 0%, P = .001; 3-year EFS: 64.0% vs 0%, P = .011). Conclusion This study illustrates that SRS was associated with poor prognosis of PM-RMS and should not be routinely performed. Optimized RT strategies along with more intensive chemotherapy may be alternative options to improve the survival of patients with PM-RMS. Multi-center, large sample and prospective studies are needed to further validate these findings.

Objective: The apoptotic and cytotoxic effects of arsenic trioxide (ATO) makes it a potentially suitable agent for the treatment of patients with neuroblastoma with poor prognosis; therefore, we try to evaluate the effectiveness and safety of ATO combined with reinduction/induction chemotherapy in children with recurrent/refractory or newly diagnosed stage 4 neuroblastoma. Methods: Retrospective analysis was performed on seven pediatric patients with recurrent /refractory or newly diagnosed stage 4 neuroblastoma treated with traditional reinduction/induction chemotherapy combined with ATO. Results: A total of 7 patients were treated synchronously with ATO and chemotherapy for up to nine courses; all patients received conventional chemotherapy plus a 0.16 mg/kg/day dose of intravenous ATO during reinduction/induction chemotherapy. Treatment was effective in five patients and ineffective in the other two patients. The overall response rate was 71.43% (5 of 7). The side effects of the ATO combination were minor, whereby only treatment in one patient was terminated at the sixth course due to a prolonged QT interval (0.51 s), which returned to normal after symptomatic treatment. Conclusions: ATO can be safely and effectively combined with chemotherapy drugs as a potential alternative means of treatment for high-risk stage 4 neuroblastoma, and we have observed that ATO can restore the sensitivity of chemotherapy in some patients who were resistant to previous chemotherapy. Further investigations and clinical data are required to confirm these observations.