Journals / Turkish archives of pediatrics (Online) / 2021 / Cilt: 56 - Sayı: 2

Role of surveillance screening in detecting tumor recurrence after treatment of childhood cancers

Pages
147–151
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

The 5-year survival rate of 23 patients with symptomatic recurrence was 12.2%; this rate was 49.5% in asymptomatic patients (p<0.05).Conclusions: It should be considered that surveillance testing offers the benefit of prolonging post recurrence survival.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:Objective: As the survival rates in children with cancer reach up to 80%, this improvement in survival increases the number of patients under follow-up.
📊
Key Findings & Data:Material and methods: The files of 533 children who were diagnosed as having cancer at our pediatric oncology clinic between 2004 and 2013 were retrospectively evaluated.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:The 5-year survival rate of 23 patients with symptomatic recurrence was 12.2%; this rate was 49.5% in asymptomatic patients (p<0.05).Conclusions: It should be considered that surveillance testing offers the benefit of prolonging post recurrence survival.
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:2004 Verileri
⚙️Variables:Domain Parameters

Özet

Objective: As the survival rates in children with cancer reach up to 80%, this improvement in survival increases the number of patients under follow-up. After cancer treatment is completed, patients are taken to follow-up surveillance to ensure the early detection of recurrence and the late effects of treatments. The frequency and necessity of surveillance screening tests are controversial. This study aimed to assess the efficacy of surveillance screening in the detection of recurrence. Material and methods: The files of 533 children who were diagnosed as having cancer at our pediatric oncology clinic between 2004 and 2013 were retrospectively evaluated. We looked at outcomes after recurrence, the timing and pattern of recurrence, the presence of symptoms during recurrence, physical examination findings, tumor marker levels, laboratory findings, and radiologic tests. Results: Of the 63 patients with recurrence, 23 were symptomatic and 40 were asymptomatic at the time of the recurrence. Tumor location and time of the recurrence did not affect the post recurrence survival. The median post-recurrence survival for patients was 13 (range, 1-98) months. The median post-relapse survival was 10 (range, 1-73) months in patients with symp-tomatic recurrence, and 16 (range, 1-98) months in patients with asymptomatic recurrence. It was determined that patients in whom recurrence was identified with surveillance tests had longer post-relapse survival time. The 5-year survival rate of 23 patients with symptomatic recurrence was 12.2%; this rate was 49.5% in asymptomatic patients (p<0.05).Conclusions: It should be considered that surveillance testing offers the benefit of prolonging post recurrence survival.

🔖

Cite This Article

KISA, P. T., EMİR, S. (2021). Role of surveillance screening in detecting tumor recurrence after treatment of childhood cancers. Turkish archives of pediatrics (Online), Cilt: 56 - Sayı: 2, 147–151. https://ajindex.com/articles/369993

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (2)

  1. SEER Cancer Statistics Review [https://seer.cancer.gov/csr/1975_2015/] Bethesda, MD:National Cancer Institute;1975-2015, Updated April 16, 2018
  2. Gatta G, Zigon G, Capocaccia R, et al. Survival of European children and young adults with cancer diagnosed 1995-2002. Eur J Cancer 2009; 45: 992-1005. [Crossref] 3. Oeffinger KC, Mertens AC, Sklar CA, et al. Chronic health conditions in adult survivors of childhood cancer. N Engl J Med 2006; 355: 1572-82. [Crossref] 4. Geenen MM, Cardous-Ubbink MC, Kremer LC, et al. Medical assessment of adverse health outcomes in long-term survivors of childhood cancer. JAMA 2007; 297: 2705-15. [Crossref] 5. Nord C, Ganz PA, Aziz N, Fossa SD. Follow-up of long-term cancer survivors in the Nordic countries. Acta Oncol 2007; 46: 433-40. [Crossref] 6. Howell D, Hack TF, Oliver TK, et al. Models of care for post-treatment follow-up of adult cancer survivors: a systematic review and quality appraisal of the evidence. J Cancer Surviv 2012; 6: 359-71. [Crossref] 7. Hudson MM, Mulrooney DA, Bowers DC, et al. High-risk populations identified in Childhood Cancer Survivor Study investigations: implications for risk-based surveillance. J Clin Oncol 2009; 27: 2405-14. [Crossref] 8. Kaste SC. Oncological imaging: Tumor surveillance in children. Pediatr Radiol 2011; 41: 505-8. [Crossref] 9. Goldsby RE, Ablin AR. Surviving childhood cancer; now what? Controversies regarding long-term follow-up. Pediatr Blood Cancer 2004; 43: 211-4. [Crossref] 10. Weiser DA, Kaste SC, Siegel MJ, Adamson PC. Imaging in childhood cancer: a Society for Pediatric Radiology and Children’s Oncology Group Joint Task Force report. Pediatr Blood Cancer 2013; 60: 1253-60. [Crossref] 11. Minn AY, Pollock BH, Garzarella L, et al. Surveillance neuroimaging to detect relapse in childhood brain tumors: a Pediatric Oncology Group study. J Clin Oncol 2001; 19: 4135-40. [Crossref] 12. Biasotti S, Garaventa A, Padovani P, et al. Role of active follow-up for early diagnosis of relapse after elective end of therapies. Pediatr Blood Cancer 2005; 45:781-6. [Crossref] 13. Chong AL, Grant RM, Ahmed BA, Thomas KE, ConnoIly BL, Greenberg M. Imaging in Pediatric Patients: Time to Think Again About Surveillance. Pediatric Blood Cancer 2010; 55: 407-13. [Crossref] 14. Rathore N, Eissa HM, Margolin JF, et al. Pediatric Hodgkin Lymphoma: Are We Over-Scanning Our Patients? Pediatr Hematol Oncol 2012; 29: 415-23. [Crossref] 15. Friedmann AM, Wolfson JA, Hudson MM, et al. Relapse After Trea