A phase II JN-I-10 efficacy study of IDRF-based surgical decisions and stepwise treatment intensification for patients with intermediate-risk neuroblastoma: a study protocol

Role of surgery in neuroblastoma

Neuroblastoma is the most common malignant solid tumor handled by pediatric surgeons. It is well-known that neuroblastoma shows variable biological and clinical behaviors. In this review article, surgical strategy in neuroblastoma was described by risk stratification. Also, strategy of biopsy and clinical conditions that require special considerations such as neuroblastoma detected by mass screening, relapsed neuroblastoma, patients with stage MS and dumbbell type tumors was mentioned. As multimodal systemic treatments have been expanding, the role of surgery in neuroblastoma has become relatively less significant but requisite. We surgeons should decide therapeutic strategy based on the correct understanding of biology of neuroblastoma thinking of the better future of children.

Association of Image-Defined Risk Factors with Clinical, Biological Features and Outcome in Neuroblastoma

Background: Neuroblastoma (NB) is the most common pediatric extracranial solid tumor and the most common cancer encountered in children younger than 12 months of age. Localized tumors have a good prognosis, but some cases undergo treatment failure and recurrence. The aim of the study was to analyze the link between the neuroblastoma risk factors and the prognosis for patients diagnosed with NB. Method: All patients admitted to the department of Pediatric Surgery, “Grigore Alexandrescu” Clinical Emergency Hospital for Children, between 1 January 2010 and 1 July 2022 were included in this analysis when diagnosed with neuroblastoma. Results: Thirty-one patients with NB were admitted to the surgical department, 20 boys and 11 girls. We observed an association between large tumors and positive imaging-defined risk factor (IDRF) status; The Fisher test showed an association between the tumor’s diameter when bigger than 8 cm and a positive IDRF status, with p < 0.001. We supposed that positive IDRF status at diagnosis may be linked to other prognostic factors. We discovered that an NSE value over 300 was associated with IDRF status (p < 0.001, phi = 0.692) and death. Conclusions: This study confirms the impact of IDRF status at diagnosis as it can be clearly correlated with other risk factors, such as a high level of NSE, MYCN amplification status, large tumor size, incomplete tumor resection, and an unfavorable outcome.