Treatment outcomes in patients with Ewing sarcoma of the spine in a resource-challenged setting: 17-year experience from a single center in India.

Ewing sarcoma (ES) of the spine is a rare childhood cancer with sparse literature on treatment outcomes. We aimed to describe survival outcomes and prognostic factors in patients with spinal ES treated at a single institute in a resource-challenged setting. We conducted a retrospective analysis of patients with spinal ES registered at a tertiary care oncology center between 2003-2019. Clinical patient data was retrieved from hospital records. Cox regression analysis was used to identify the association of baseline clinical parameters with event free survival (EFS) and overall survival (OS). A cohort of 85 patients was analyzed including 38 (45%) patients with metastatic disease. The median age was 15 years with 73% being male. Local therapy was administered in 62 (72.9%) patients with surgery alone in 8 (9.4%), radiotherapy alone in 36 (42.4%) and both in 18 (21.2%) patients. A higher proportion of males received local therapy than females (80.3% versus 59.1%; p = 0.049). The median EFS and OS were 20.1 and 28.6 months, respectively. On univariable analysis, age ≤ 15 years, female sex, serum albumin ≤3.5 g/dL and hemoglobin ≤11 g/dL were associated with inferior EFS while younger age, female sex, hypoalbuminemia and metastatic disease were associated with inferior OS. On multivariable analysis, only hypoalbuminemia was predictive for inferior EFS (HR:2.41; p = 0.005) while hypoalbuminemia (HR:2.06;p = 0.033) and female sex (HR:1.83; p = 0.046) were associated with inferior OS. We concluded that hypoalbuminemia confers poor prognosis in ES spine. Survival outcomes are poorer in females treated in our setting, possibly due to prevailing sex-based biases.

Sex disparity in childhood cancer in India: a multi-centre, individual patient data analysis.

BACKGROUND: Sex disparity and its determinants in childhood cancer in India remain unexplored, with scarce information available through summary statistics of cancer registries. This study analysed the degree of sex bias in childhood cancer in India and its clinical and demographical associations. METHODS: In this retrospective, multicentre cohort study, we collected individual data of children (aged 0-19 years) with cancer extracted from the hospital-based records of three cancer centres in India between Jan 1, 2005, and Dec 31, 2019, and two population-based cancer registries (PBCRs; Delhi [between Jan 1, 2005, and Dec 31, 2014] and Madras Metropolitan Tumour Registry [between Jan 1, 2005, and Dec 31, 2017]). We extracted data on age, sex, and confirmed diagnosis of malignancy (according to the International Classification of Diseases-10 coding),and excluded participants if they were without a recorded diagnosis, had a benign diagnosis, had missing sex information, resided outside of India, or were a donor for haematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT). The primary outcome was the male-to-female incidence rate ratio (MF-IRR) in the two PBCRs and the male-to-female ratios (MFR) from the hospital-based and the HSCT data. For PBCR data, MF-IRR was estimated by dividing the MFR by the total population at risk. MFR was analysed for patients seeking treatment at the cancer centres and for those undergoing HSCT. Logistic regression analyses were done to explore the association of clinical and demographical variables with sex of the patients seeking treatment and those undergoing HSCT in hospital-based data and multivariable analyses were done to determine independent sociodemographic predictors of sex bias. Annual time trends of MFR and MF-IRR during the 15-year study period were ascertained by time series regression analyses. FINDINGS: We included 11 375 children from PBCRs in the study. 26 891 children from hospital-based records were screened, and data from 22 893 (85·1%) were included (including 514 who underwent HSCT). Residence details were missing for 257 (1·1%) of 22 893 patients from hospital-based records. The crude MFR of children at diagnosis was in favour of boys: 2·00 (95% CI 1·92-2·09) in the Delhi PBCR and 1·44 (1·32-1·57) in Madras Metropolitan Tumour Registry. The MF-IRRs for cancer diagnosis were also skewed in favour of boys in both PBCRs (Delhi 1·69 [95% CI 1·61-1·76]; Madras Metropolitan Tumour Registry 1·37 [1·26-1·49]). The MFR for children seeking treatment from hospital-based records was 2·06 (95% CI 2·00-2·12) in favour of boys. In subgroup analyses, the proportion of boys seeking treatment was higher in northern India than southern India (p<0·0001); in private centres than in centres providing subsidised treatment (p<0·0001); in patients with haematological malignancies than those with solid malignancies (p<0·0001); in those residing 100 km or further from the hospital than those within 100 km of a hospital (p<0·0001); and those living in rural areas than those living in urban areas (p=0·0006). The MFR of 514 children who underwent HSCT was 2·81 (95% CI 2·32-3·43) in favour of boys. Time trend analysis showed that MFR did not show any significant annual change in either the overall cohort or in any of the individual centres for hospital-based data; however, the analysis did show a declining MF-IRR in the Delhi PBCR from 2005 to 2014 (p=0·031). INTERPRETATION: The sex ratio for childhood cancer in India has a bias towards boys at the level of diagnosis, which is more pronounced in northern India and in situations demanding greater financial commitment. Addressing societal sex bias and enhancing affordable health care for girls should be pursued simultaneously in India. FUNDING: None. TRANSLATION: For the Hindi translation of the abstract see Supplementary Materials section.

Determinants and impact of diagnostic interval in bone sarcomas: A retrospective cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Diagnostic delays in cancers are frequent in developing countries due to poor health infrastructure. Existing literature from developed countries suggests that diagnostic interval in bone sarcomas is primarily dictated by tumour biology with no impact on survival. This study evaluates the social and biological determinants of the diagnostic interval in bone sarcomas in a resource-challenged setting and assesses its impact on treatment outcomes. METHODS: A retrospective single-institutional study was conducted on patients with high-grade bone sarcomas recorded in the sarcoma clinic database between 2003 and 2018. Baseline clinical characteristics and treatment outcomes were recorded. Logistic regression was performed to assess the impact of baseline clinical and social characteristics (distance from treating centre and rural vs. urban residence) on the diagnostic interval. Further, the impact of diagnostic interval on histologic response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy, amputation requirement in extremity sarcomas and survival was evaluated. RESULTS: A total of 1227 patients were included for analysis. The median diagnostic interval was 4 months (3-7 months). Age above 18 years, Ewing sarcoma (ES) diagnosis, absence of fever at presentation and tumour size above 7.5 cm were predictors of a longer diagnostic interval (>4 months). The length of the diagnostic interval did not impact amputation requirement or survival outcomes. However, the proportion of patients with good necrosis post-neoadjuvant chemotherapy was lower among patients with longer diagnostic intervals (25% vs. 34·16%; p-value = .04). CONCLUSION: Tumour characteristics rather than social factors determined the diagnostic interval. Diagnostic interval did not impact survival outcomes even in a resource-constrained setting.

Adaptation of the Patient Reported Outcome Measurement Information System (PROMIS) tool for childhood cancer in India: A qualitative study.

BACKGROUND: To fill the gap in patient-reported outcome (PRO) assessment in children with cancer in India, we planned to adapt domains from the HealthMeasures Patient Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) tool. This study attempted to identify and pool outcomes relevant to children with cancer and their caregivers in Northern India. METHODS: The study was qualitative and conducted through focussed group discussions (FGDs) and in-depth interviews of children with cancer and their caregivers. Content analysis of transcripts from the sessions was done. The collected themes were collated with existing item banks of the PROMIS tool and new concepts unique to our population were compiled. RESULTS: A set of three FGDs and 14 interviews each for children and their caregivers were conducted. Following content analysis, 121 themes were identified including 10 new concepts. Themes pertaining to the physical domain were cited most. The theme distribution across the three domains was similar among children and caregivers. In the survivor cohort, the relative frequency of mention of psychological and social themes was higher compared to the whole cohort. Themes pertaining to mobility, cognitive dysfunction and peer relationships were more common among survivors. CONCLUSIONS: This qualitative study in children with cancer and their caregivers in India has facilitated a better understanding of the issues pertaining to cancer care that are of most importance to its stake holders. The themes collected may be used to formulate a PRO tool uniquely tailored for use in this population.

Cost-effectiveness analysis of aprepitant-based anti-emetic regimen for children receiving highly emetogenic chemotherapy: Individual patient data analysis of a randomized trial.

BACKGROUND: Aprepitant has been shown to reduce chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting in children receiving highly emetogenic chemotherapy (HEC). In this study, we assessed the cost-effectiveness of aprepitant for children receiving HEC in India, United Kingdom, and the United States. PROCEDURE: We utilized individual patient-level outcome data from a pediatric randomized trial, which demonstrated the superiority of an aprepitant-based anti-emetic prophylaxis over standard ondansetron and dexamethasone for HEC. Health state for each day of follow-up was analyzed and quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) were estimated. The incremental cost-utility ratio (ICUR), incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER), and net monetary benefit (NMB) for each country were estimated. Sensitivity analyses by varying cost of aprepitant, hospitalization, and health state utility values by ±25% were conducted. RESULTS: Use of the aprepitant-based regimen resulted in gain of 0.0019 QALY per chemotherapy cycle along with cost savings of $22.25, $1335.52, and $6612.10 for India, United Kingdom, and the United States, respectively. The cost savings per QALY was estimated to be $12,355.84 for India, $734,282.90 for the United Kingdom, and $3,567,564.11 for the United States. The cost savings for 50% gain in the percentage of days without grade 3 vomiting was $124.18 for India, $7451.63 for the United Kingdom, and $36,892.76 for the United States. The NMB for gain in QALY was $33.62, $1418.60, and $6727.01 for India, United Kingdom, and the United States, respectively. The estimates remained cost-effective across all scenarios of the sensitivity analyses. CONCLUSION: Aprepitant-based anti-emetic regimen is cost-effective for children receiving HEC. It results in overall cost savings and reduced healthcare-resource utilization.

Late effects in pediatric Hodgkin lymphoma survivors after uniform treatment with ABVD with or without radiotherapy.

PURPOSE: ABVD (doxorubicin, bleomycin,vinblastine, and dacarbazine) is not a standard regimen in children due to concerns regarding late effects. However, no studies have evaluated long-term toxicities of ABVD in children. METHODS: Total 154 pediatric Hodgkin lymphoma (HL) survivors uniformly treated with ABVD were clinically followed up as per institutional protocol. All participants were evaluated for cardiac, pulmonary, and thyroid function abnormalities by multigated acquisition scan (MUGA) scan, spirometry with diffusion capacity of lung for the uptake of carbon monoxide (DLCO), and thyroid profile test, respectively, at a single time point. Predictors of toxicity were also analyzed. RESULTS: The median duration of follow-up of the cohort was 10.3 years (6.04-16.8). No secondary malignant neoplasm (SMN) or symptomatic cardiac/pulmonary toxicities were detected. Nine patients (5.9%) had left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) <55%. Subclinical and overt hypothyroidism were observed in 78 (50.6%) and 16 (10.4%) survivors, respectively. Abnormal spirometry and reduced DLCO was observed in 43.2% and 42.0% survivors, respectively. Receiving neck radiation was significantly associated with thyroid dysfunction (odds ratio [OR] 16.04, p < .001); age ≥10 years predicted reduced DLCO (OR 4.12, p = .001). Sixty-three and 33 patients had one and two late adverse effects, respectively; receiving neck radiation predicted development of multiple late effects (proportional OR 4.72, p < 0.001). Cumulative dose of chemotherapy did not predict toxicity. CONCLUSIONS: Overall, ABVD appears safe in children at a relatively short follow-up. Long-term safety data are required before it can be adopted for treating pediatric HL patients. Children receiving neck radiation require close follow-up.

Outpatient ADE (cytarabine, daunorubicin, and etoposide) is feasible and effective for the first relapse of pediatric acute myeloid leukemia: A prospective, phase II study.

BACKGROUND: Approximately 40% children with acute myeloid leukemia (AML) invariably relapse, after attaining the first complete remission (CR), with dismal long-term outcome. There is little consensus regarding choice of optimal induction chemotherapy regimen for relapsed pediatric AML. PROCEDURE: A prospective single arm phase II study (CTRI/2017/02/007757) was carried out at our center to evaluate the safety and efficacy of outpatient cytarabine, daunorubicin, and etoposide (ADE) regimen in pediatric AML (≤18 years) at the first relapse. Response evaluation was done by bone marrow aspiration morphology along with minimal residual disease (MRD) assessment. All adverse events including need and duration of hospitalization, transfusion support, and antimicrobial use were recorded. RESULTS: Total 45 patients were included with median age of 12 years. The CR rate of the cohort was 66% and 54% of patients were MRD negative. The estimated 2-year event-free survival (EFS) and overall survival (OS) were 29% (±7%) and 34% (±7%), respectively. The presence of fever at relapse was associated with inferior CR rate (P = .001), positive MRD (P = .01), and inferior EFS (P = .02), while not achieving nadir absolute neutrophil count of zero during induction was associated with inferior CR rate (P = .03) and inferior OS (P = .04). Approximately all patients developed ≥Grade 3 cytopenia and febrile neutropenia. Twenty-six (59%) patients required hospitalization for management of toxicity and there were four (9%) deaths attributed to infection. CONCLUSION: ADE is an effective induction regimen for pediatric AML patients at the first relapse with reasonable toxicity profile. Outpatient administration of the regimen is feasible in the presence of proper support structure and rigorous follow up.

Philadelphia Chromosome Positive and Philadelphia-Like Acute Lymphoblastic Leukemia in Children and Adolescents: Current Management, Controversies and Emerging Concepts.

Philadelphia chromosome positive (Ph+) acute lymphoblastic lymphoma (ALL) is an uncommon subtype of ALL in children, seen in 2-5% cases. Diagnostic evaluation includes conventional karyotyping and detection of BCR-ABL1 translocation by fluorescence in-situ hybridization (FISH) or reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR). For children, the frontline management includes combination of intensive chemotherapy along with imatinib (300-340 mg/m2/d) or dasatinib (60-80 mg/m2/d). Imatinib/dasatinib should be introduced in induction as soon as results for BCR-ABL are available. Minimal residual disease (MRD) monitoring is essential; multi-parametric flowcytometry and immunoglobulin/T-cell receptor rearrangement PCR are the preferred methods. Intrathecal therapy with at least 12 doses of methotrexate is adequate for central nervous system (CNS) prophylaxis, but cranial radiation is necessary for CNS3 involvement. Allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT) in first remission may be considered in high-risk cases (persistent MRD positivity/induction failure). Maintenance therapy with tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKI) in children is debatable, with potential concerns for long term adverse effects. At relapse, the choice of TKI is guided by the presence of BCR-ABL tyrosine kinase domain resistance mutations, although the frequency of resistance mutations in children are lower. Allogeneic HSCT is essential for consolidation in second remission, if not done. Ph-like ALL is a newly recognized molecular entity, with gene expression profile similar to Ph+ALL and poor survival outcomes. In resource-constrained settings, a stepwise cost-effective diagnostic evaluation should be considered among high-risk patients without recurrent genetic abnormalities. Current treatment strategies remain similar to Ph-negative ALL. Enrolment in clinical trials is encouraged for such children to evaluate potential targeted agents in this subtype.

Anti-Emetics in Children Receiving Chemotherapy for Solid Tumors and Leukemia: Pharmacology and Optimization of Therapy for Nausea and Vomiting.

The management of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV) in children remains challenging due to differences in the chemotherapy regimens, their relative emetogenicity compared to that in adults and differences in drug metabolism and the available formulations. The common four classes of anti-emetics used for the treatment and prophylaxis of CINV in children include dexamethasone, neurokinin-1 receptor antagonists, 5-hydroxytryptamine-3 receptor antagonists (5HT3RAs), and olanzapine. The appropriate dose of dexamethasone for CINV prophylaxis in children is unknown, with a significant variability in dosage ranging between 6 and 32 mg/m2/day. The dose of dexamethasone is decreased by 30% when this drug is combined with (fos)aprepitant in children, in contrast to a decrease of 50% required in adults. The use of aprepitant in younger children (<12 years) is often hampered by the non-availability of oral suspension formulations in many countries; alternatively, 80 mg capsules are administered for 1-3 days in certain institutes to children weighing between 15 and 40 kg. Among the different 5HT3RAs, palonosetron is comparatively metabolized faster in children than in adults, requiring a higher dosage for similar efficacy to that achieved in adults. Olanzapine is a newer agent, used in doses between 0.1 and 0.14 mg/kg/day in children, with good anti-emetic efficacy, but has sedation and hyperglycemia as concerning adverse effects. Drug interactions between anti-emetics and between anti-emetics and chemotherapy/supportive agents (azole antifungals, cyclosporine, arsenic trioxide), especially QTc prolongation, should be considered during prescription.

Cost-Effectiveness of Adjuvant Abemaciclib and Ribociclib in High-Risk Hormone Receptor-Positive Early Breast Cancer: An Indian Perspective.

PURPOSE: Incorporating adjuvant cyclin-dependent kinase (CDK) 4/6 inhibitors abemaciclib and ribociclib along with endocrine therapy has been shown to improve invasive disease-free survival (iDFS) for hormone receptor-positive (HR+) human epidermal receptor 2-negative (HER2-) early breast cancer (EBC). This study assesses the cost-effectiveness of this strategy, along with adjuvant aromatase inhibitors from an Indian perspective. METHODS: A Markov chain model evaluated the cost-effectiveness of abemaciclib and ribociclib with letrozole compared with letrozole alone for HR+/HER2- EBC from a payer perspective in India. Key measures included lifetime quality-adjusted life-years (QALY), life-years (LY), and total costs. This study explores two scenarios for effectiveness: a best-case (BC) scenario, where the benefit of CDK4/6 inhibitors in improving iDFS lasts a lifetime, and a worst-case (WC) scenario, where benefits disappear after 5 years. Probabilistic sensitivity analyses (PSA) were used to account for simulation uncertainty. RESULTS: In the BC scenario, abemaciclib added 2.17 QALY and 4.96 LY, incurring ₹2,317,957.7 ($27,756.65 in US dollars [USD]) in additional costs. However, the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) for abemaciclib exceeded India's willingness-to-pay threshold in the BC and WC scenarios. In the BC scenario, ribociclib added 0.98 QALY and 2.58 LY with added costs of ₹1,711,504.32 ($20,494.6 USD). The ICER for ribociclib also surpassed India's threshold in both scenarios. PSA showed that neither drug was cost-effective at the current market prices in either BC/WC scenario. The cost of abemaciclib and ribociclib needs to be reduced by at least 78.61% and 87.19%, respectively, to be cost-effective in the BC scenario. CONCLUSION: The combination of adjuvant abemaciclib or ribociclib with letrozole is not cost-effective for HR+/HER2- EBC in India in either the BC or WC scenario.

Translation and Psychometric Evaluation of the Hindi Language Version of the Pediatric Nausea Assessment Tool (PeNAT) in the Indian Population.

OBJECTIVES: To translate the Pediatric Nausea Assessment Tool (PeNAT) into Hindi and validate it in Indian pediatric cancer patients and survivors. METHODS: The PeNAT-Hindi was finalized by forward and backward translations, and pilot testing. The PeNAT-Hindi was administered to 200 Hindi-speaking pediatric (4-18 y) cancer patients/survivors, in three groups. These included pediatric cancer patients who had recently received chemotherapy (n = 150); who received no chemotherapy within 5 d (n = 25) and survivors (n = 25). Construct validity was tested by comparing scores among the three groups. Test-retest reliability and criterion validity were estimated by the correlation of the first PeNAT score with the second (taken 1 h later) PeNAT score and the number of vomiting/retching episodes, respectively. Convergent validity and discriminant validity were estimated by correlating PeNAT scores with parent-assessed nausea severity, and pain, respectively. The responsiveness was tested by comparing second PeNAT scores with subsequent divergent PeNAT scores among patients reporting subjective change (improvement and worsening, respectively) in nausea severity. RESULTS: Test-retest reliability of PeNAT-Hindi was good (intraclass correlation = 0.791). The initial PeNAT score had moderate correlation with the number of vomiting/retching episodes (Spearman ρ = 0.401). Median PeNAT scores in group 1 versus groups 2 and 3 were significantly different (p < 0.001). Initial PeNAT scores showed a moderate correlation with parent-assessed nausea (Spearman ρ = 0.657) and a weak correlation with parent-assessed pain (Spearman ρ = 0.319). The responsiveness (standardized response mean) of PeNAT-Hindi to the change in nausea severity was -1.79 (improvement) and 2.19 (worsening), respectively. CONCLUSION: PeNAT-Hindi showed good reliability and acceptable validity. It may be used among Hindi-speaking children for measuring nausea. The responsiveness of PeNAT-Hindi needs further evaluation.

Olanzapine cost-effectiveness in vomiting and nausea from highly emetogenic chemotherapy in children and adolescents.

OBJECTIVES: To assess the cost-effectiveness of addition of olanzapine to a prophylactic antiemetic regimen containing aprepitant, dexamethasone and ondansetron among children receiving highly emetogenic chemotherapy (HEC) in India, Bangladesh, Indonesia, the UK and the USA. METHODS: Health states were estimated using individual patient-level outcome data from a randomised trial. The incremental cost-utility ratio (ICUR), incremental cost-effectiveness ratio and net monetary benefit (NMB) were calculated from the patient perspective for India, Bangladesh, Indonesia, the UK and the USA. One-way sensitivity analysis was done by varying the cost of olanzapine, cost of hospitalisation and utility values by ±25%. RESULTS: The olanzapine arm had an increment of 0.0018 quality-adjusted life-years (QALY) over the control arm. The mean total expenditure in the olanzapine arm was greater by US$0.51, US$0.43, US$6.73, US$11.05 and US$12.35 in India, Bangladesh, Indonesia, the UK and the USA, respectively. The ICUR($/QALY) was US$282.60 in India, US$241.42 in Bangladesh, US$3755.93 in Indonesia, US$6161.83 in the UK and US$6887.41 in the USA. The NMB was US$9.86, US$10.12, US$14.08, US$44.74 and US$98.79 for India, Bangladesh, Indonesia, the UK and the USA, respectively. The ICUR estimates of the base case and sensitivity analysis were below the willingness-to-pay threshold in all scenarios. CONCLUSION: The addition of olanzapine as a fourth agent for antiemetic prophylaxis is cost-effective despite an increase in overall expenditure. Olanzapine should be uniformly considered for children receiving HEC.