Intensive induction and consolidation chemotherapy for adults and children with acute myeloid leukaemia (AML) joint AML trial 1982-1985

Treatment including anthracyclines versus treatment not including anthracyclines for childhood cancer

BACKGROUND

One of the most important adverse effects of anthracyclines is cardiotoxicity. A well-informed decision on the use of anthracyclines in the treatment of childhood cancers should be based on evidence regarding both antitumour efficacy and cardiotoxicity. This review is the second update of a previously published Cochrane review.

OBJECTIVES

To compare antitumour efficacy (survival and tumour response) and cardiotoxicity of treatment including or not including anthracyclines in children with childhood cancer.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (The Cochrane Library 2013, Issue 6), MEDLINE (1966 to July 2013) and EMBASE (1980 to July 2013). In addition, we searched reference lists of relevant articles and conference proceedings, the International Society for Paediatric Oncology (SIOP) (from 2002 to 2012) and American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO) (from 2002 to 2013). We have searched for ongoing trials in the ISRCTN register and the National Institute of Health register (both screened August 2013) (http://www.controlled-trials.com).

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing treatment of any type of childhood cancer with and without anthracyclines and reporting outcomes concerning antitumour efficacy or cardiotoxicity.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently performed the study selection, risk of bias assessment and data extraction. Analyses were performed according to the guidelines of the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions.

MAIN RESULTS

We identified RCTs for seven types of tumour, acute lymphoblastic leukaemia (ALL) (three trials; 912 children), Wilms' tumour (one trial; 316 children), rhabdomyosarcoma and undifferentiated sarcoma (one trial; 413 children), Ewing's sarcoma (one trial; 94 children), non-Hodgkin lymphoma (one trial; 284 children), hepatoblastoma (one trial; 255 children) and acute myeloid leukaemia (AML) (one trial; 394 children). All studies had methodological limitations. For ALL no evidence of a significant difference in antitumour efficacy was identified in the meta-analyses, but in most individual studies there was a suggestion of better antitumour efficacy in patients treated with anthracyclines. For both Wilms' tumour and Ewing's sarcoma a significant difference in event-free and overall survival in favour of treatment with anthracyclines was identified, although for Wilms' tumour the significant difference in overall survival disappeared with long-term follow-up. For rhabdomyosarcoma and undifferentiated sarcoma, non-Hodgkin lymphoma and hepatoblastoma no difference in antitumour efficacy between the treatment groups was identified. The same was true for AML, with the exception of overall survival in a post hoc analysis in a subgroup of patients with relapsed core binding factor (CBF)-AML in which patients treated with anthracyclines did better. Clinical cardiotoxicity was evaluated in four RCTs; no significant difference between the treatment groups was identified, but in all individual studies there was a suggestion of a lower rate of clinical cardiotoxicity in patients who did not receive anthracyclines. None of the studies evaluated asymptomatic cardiac dysfunction. No RCTs were identified for other childhood cancers.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

At the moment no evidence from RCTs is available which underscores the use of anthracyclines in ALL. However, 'no evidence of effect', as identified in this review, is not the same as 'evidence of no effect'. For Wilms' tumour, rhabdomyosarcoma and undifferentiated sarcoma, Ewing's sarcoma, non-Hodgkin lymphoma, hepatoblastoma and AML only one RCT was available for each type and, therefore, no definitive conclusions can be made about the antitumour efficacy of treatment with or without anthracyclines in these tumours. For other childhood cancers no RCTs were identified and therefore no conclusions can be made about the antitumour efficacy of treatment with or without anthracyclines in these tumours.

Treatment including anthracyclines versus treatment not including anthracyclines for childhood cancer

BACKGROUND

One of the most important adverse effects of anthracyclines is cardiotoxicity. A well-informed decision on the use of anthracyclines in the treatment of childhood cancers should be based on evidence regarding both antitumour efficacy and cardiotoxicity.

OBJECTIVES

To compare antitumour efficacy of treatment including or not including anthracyclines in children with childhood cancer.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (The Cochrane Library 2010, Issue 2), MEDLINE (1966 to March 2010) and EMBASE (1980 to March 2010). In addition, we searched reference lists of relevant articles, conference proceedings and ongoing trials databases.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing treatment of any type of childhood cancer with and without anthracyclines and reporting outcomes concerning antitumour efficacy.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two reviewers independently performed the study selection, risk of bias assessment and data extraction.

MAIN RESULTS

We identified RCTs for six types of tumour: acute lymphoblastic leukaemia (ALL) (three trials; 912 children), Wilms' tumour (one trial; 316 children), rhabdomyosarcoma/undifferentiated sarcoma (one trial; 413 children), Ewing's sarcoma (one trial; 94 children), non-Hodgkin lymphoma (one trial; 284 children) and hepatoblastoma (one trial; 255 children). All studies had methodological limitations. For ALL no evidence of a significant difference in antitumour efficacy was identified in the meta-analyses, but in most individual studies there was a suggestion of better antitumour efficacy in patients treated with anthracyclines. For both Wilms' tumour and Ewing's sarcoma a significant difference in event-free and overall survival in favour of treatment with anthracyclines was identified, although for Wilms' tumour the significant difference in overall survival disappears with long-term follow-up. For rhabdomyosarcoma/undifferentiated sarcoma, non-Hodgkin lymphoma and hepatoblastoma no difference in antitumour efficacy between the treatment groups was identified. Clinical cardiotoxicity was evaluated in three RCTs: no significant difference between both treatment groups was identified, but in all individual studies there was a suggestion of a lower rate of clinical cardiotoxicity in patients who did not receive anthracyclines. None of the studies evaluated asymptomatic cardiac dysfunction. For other childhood cancers no RCTs were identified.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

At the moment no evidence from RCTs is available which underscores the use of anthracyclines in ALL. However, "no evidence of effect", as identified in this review, is not the same as "evidence of no effect". For Wilms' tumour, rhabdomyosarcoma/undifferentiated sarcoma, Ewing's sarcoma, non-Hodgkin lymphoma and hepatoblastoma only one RCT was available and, therefore, no definitive conclusions can be made about the antitumour efficacy of treatment with or without anthracyclines in these tumours. For other childhood cancers no RCTs were identified and therefore, no conclusions can be made about the antitumour efficacy of treatment with or without anthracyclines in these tumours.

Treatment including anthracyclines versus treatment not including anthracyclines for childhood cancer

BACKGROUND

One of the most important adverse effects of anthracyclines is cardiotoxicity. A well-informed decision on the use of anthracyclines in the treatment of different types of childhood cancer should be based on the available evidence on both antitumour efficacy and cardiotoxicity.

OBJECTIVES

To compare antitumour efficacy of treatment including or not including anthracyclines in children with childhood cancer.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (The Cochrane Library 2006, issue 4), MEDLINE (1966 to January 2007) and EMBASE (1980 to January 2007). In addition, we searched reference lists of relevant articles, conference proceedings and ongoing trials databases.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing treatment of any type of childhood cancer with and without anthracyclines and reporting outcomes concerning antitumour efficacy.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two reviewers independently performed the study selection, quality assessment and data-extraction.

MAIN RESULTS

We identified RCTs for 5 types of tumour: acute lymphoblastic leukaemia (ALL) (n=3; 912 children), Wilms' tumour (n=1; 316 children), rhabdomyosarcoma/undifferentiated sarcoma (n=1; 413 children), Ewing's sarcoma (n=1; 94 children), and non-Hodgkin lymphoma (n=1; 284 children). All studies had methodological limitations. For ALL no evidence of a significant difference in antitumour efficacy was identified in the meta-analyses, but in most individual studies there was a suggestion of better antitumour efficacy in patients treated with anthracyclines. For both Wilms' tumour and Ewing's sarcoma a significant difference in survival in favour of treatment with anthracyclines was identified. The hazard ratios for overall and event-free survival in Wilms' tumour were 1.85 (95% CI 1.09 to 3.15) and 2.21 (95% CI 1.44 to 3.40), respectively. For patients with Ewing's sarcoma only descriptive results were available (P = 0.02 for overall survival and P = 0.01 for event-free survival). For both rhabdomyosarcoma/undifferentiated sarcoma and non-Hodgkin lymphoma no difference in antitumour efficacy between the treatment groups was identified. Clinical cardiotoxicity was evaluated in 3 RCTs. No significant difference between both treatment groups was identified, but in all individual studies there was a suggestion of a lower rate of clinical cardiotoxicity in patients who did not receive anthracyclines. None of the studies evaluated asymptomatic cardiac dysfunction. For other childhood cancers no RCTs were identified.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

At the moment no evidence from RCTs is available which underscores the use of anthracyclines in ALL. However, it should be noted that "no evidence of effect", as identified in this review, is not the same as "evidence of no effect". For Wilms' tumour, rhabdomyosarcoma/undifferentiated sarcoma, Ewing's sarcoma, and non-Hodgkin lymphoma only 1 RCT was available and therefore, no definitive conclusions can be made about the antitumour efficacy of treatment with or without anthracyclines in these tumours. For other childhood cancers no RCTs were identified and therefore, no conclusions can be made about the antitumour efficacy of treatment with or without anthracyclines in these tumours. More high quality research is needed.

Patterns of care and survival for adolescents and young adults with acute leukaemia--a population-based study

We report a population-based study of patterns of care and survival for people with acute leukaemia diagnosed at age 15-29 years during 1984-94 in regions of England and Wales covered by specialist leukaemia registries. There were 879 patients: 417 with acute lymphoblastic leukaemia (ALL) and 462 with acute myeloid leukaemia (AML). For ALL, actuarial survival rates were 43% at 5 years after diagnosis and 37% at 10 years. Survival improved significantly between 1984-88 and 1989-94 for those aged 15-19 at diagnosis. Patients entered in national clinical trials and those not entered had similar survival rates. Survival rates were similar at teaching and non-teaching hospitals and at hospitals treating different numbers of study patients per year. For AML, survival rates were 42% at 5 years after diagnosis and 39% at 10 years. Survival improved significantly between 1984-88 and 1989-94. Patients entered in the Medical Research Council AML10 trial had a higher survival rate than those who were in the earlier AML9 trial. Survival did not vary with category of hospital. We conclude that survival has improved for adolescents and young adults with acute leukaemia but that there is at present no evidence that centralized treatment results in a survival benefit for patients in this age group.

Survival from acute non-lymphocytic leukaemia, 1971-88: a population based study

Survival rates were studied among 1258 children with acute non-lymphocytic leukaemia diagnosed in 1971-88 and included in the population based National Registry of Childhood Tumours. Of the total, 147 (12%) died without receiving treatment. Among the remaining treated children, actuarial five year survival rates were 6% in 1971-4, 15% in 1975-9, 23% in 1980-3, and 40% in 1984-8. Infants aged less than 1 year had a significantly worse prognosis and there was a significant trend towards lower survival rates with increasing white cell count. No independent significant effects on survival were found with sex, French-American-British (FAB) subtype, or the presence or absence of Down's syndrome. Children entered in national trials had a higher survival rate than those who were not entered, and children treated at teaching hospitals had a higher survival rate than those who were treated elsewhere. Among the 535 (43%) children who survived at least one year from diagnosis no factor studied had a significant effect on survival, emphasising the importance of achieving first remission as a determinant of long term survival.