Survival from cancer in young people: An overview of late effects focusing on reproductive health.

This paper provides a summary of the areas of survival from childhood, teenage and young adult cancers and the significant late effects that can arise from treatment; with particular focus on the area of reproductive health and the impact on both fertility and pregnancy. To complete this review, Web of Science and MEDLINE were used. Search terms included: ""survival AND childhood OR teenage OR young adult cancer", "late effects", "childhood cancer", "teenage AND/OR young adult cancer", AND "fertility after cancer" OR "pregnancy AND cancer" OR "fertility preservation". Additionally, the clinical expertise of the authors was drawn upon. Childhood cancer is a thankfully rare occurrence; however, the incidence is increasing. Survival rates remain high and this means that a growing population of childhood and young adult cancer survivors are reaching adulthood. For some of these adults, although cured of their cancer, they are now facing a future with lasting effects on their health from their treatments. These effects, commonly referred to as late effects, are defined as health problems related either directly to the underlying cancer or to its treatment and which occur months or years after treatment has finished. Reproductive health is an important consideration for these patients, and although many will be able to conceive naturally, some will exhibit impaired fertility after their treatments. This can include difficulties at all points along the path from conception to delivery of a live, healthy offspring. High-quality, large-population evidence is sparse in many areas relating to fertility risk from treatment and the maternal and fetal health of childhood cancer survivors. Yet given the potential for complications, the authors advocate consideration of fertility at the time of diagnosis and before potentially gonadotoxic treatment.

Mental health of long-term survivors of childhood and young adult cancer: A systematic review.

Childhood cancer is increasing in prevalence whilst survival rates are improving. The prevalence of adult survivors of childhood cancer is consequently increasing. Many survivors suffer long-term consequences of their cancer treatment. Whilst many of these are well documented, relatively little is known about the mental health of survivors of childhood cancer. This article aimed to describe the prevalence and spectrum of mental health problems found in adult survivors of childhood cancer using a systematic review methodology. Our review included 67 articles, describing a number of problems, including depression, anxiety, behavioural problems and drug misuse. Factors increasing the likelihood of mental health problems included treatment with high-dose anthracyclines, cranial irradiation, diagnoses of sarcoma or central nervous system tumours and ongoing physical ill health. There were numerous limitations to the studies we found, including use of siblings of survivors as a control group, self-report methodology and lack of indications for prescriptions when prescribing data were used. This review has identified many mental health problems experienced by survivors of childhood cancer; however, the exact incidence, prevalence and risk-factors for their development remain unclear. Further work to identify childhood cancer patients who are at risk of developing late mental health morbidity is essential.

Including children and young people in assessments: a practical guide.

The ability to interact with children and young people (CYP), appropriately examine and competently interpret signs is an essential skill for many medical practitioners and allied healthcare professionals; yet, how do we ensure competence in our students and trainees? One method is to include CYP in both formative and summative assessments; this provides an invaluable opportunity for examiners not only to evaluate the clinical interaction but also to gain an understanding of the CYP experience and what characteristics they value in a 'good children's doctor'. This paper explores the benefits and challenges of involving CYP in assessments and provides practical advice for course organisers, assessors and students when encountering CYP in assessment.

Antiemetic medication for prevention and treatment of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting in childhood.

BACKGROUND: Nausea and vomiting remain a problem for children undergoing treatment for malignancies despite new antiemetic therapies. Optimising antiemetic regimens could improve quality of life by reducing nausea, vomiting, and associated clinical problems. This is an update of the original systematic review. OBJECTIVES: To assess the effectiveness and adverse events of pharmacological interventions in controlling anticipatory, acute, and delayed nausea and vomiting in children and young people (aged less than 18 years) about to receive or receiving chemotherapy. SEARCH METHODS: Searches included the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, EMBASE, LILACS, PsycINFO, conference proceedings of the American Society of Clinical Oncology, International Society of Paediatric Oncology, Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer, and ISI Science and Technology Proceedings Index from incept to December 16, 2014, and trial registries from their earliest records to December 2014. We examined references of systematic reviews and contacted trialists for information on further studies. We also screened the reference lists of included studies. SELECTION CRITERIA: Two review authors independently screened abstracts in order to identify randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that compared a pharmacological antiemetic, cannabinoid, or benzodiazepine with placebo or any alternative active intervention in children and young people (less than 18 years) with a diagnosis of cancer who were to receive chemotherapy. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently extracted outcome and quality data from each RCT. When appropriate, we undertook meta-analysis. MAIN RESULTS: We included 34 studies that examined a range of different antiemetics, used different doses and comparators, and reported a variety of outcomes. The quality and quantity of included studies limited the exploration of heterogeneity to narrative approaches only.The majority of quantitative data related to the complete control of acute vomiting (27 studies). Adverse events were reported in 29 studies and nausea outcomes in 16 studies.Two studies assessed the addition of dexamethasone to 5-HT3 antagonists for complete control of vomiting (pooled risk ratio (RR) 2.03; 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.35 to 3.04). Three studies compared granisetron 20 mcg/kg with 40 mcg/kg for complete control of vomiting (pooled RR 0.93; 95% CI 0.80 to 1.07). Three studies compared granisetron with ondansetron for complete control of acute nausea (pooled RR 1.05; 95% CI 0.94 to 1.17; 2 studies), acute vomiting (pooled RR 2.26; 95% CI 2.04 to 2.51; 3 studies), delayed nausea (pooled RR 1.13; 95% CI 0.93 to 1.38; 2 studies), and delayed vomiting (pooled RR 1.13; 95% CI 0.98 to 1.29; 2 studies). No other pooled analyses were possible.Narrative synthesis suggests that 5-HT3 antagonists are more effective than older antiemetic agents, even when these agents are combined with a steroid. Cannabinoids are probably effective but produce frequent side effects. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Our overall knowledge of the most effective antiemetics to prevent chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting in childhood is incomplete. Future research should be undertaken in consultation with children, young people, and families that have experienced chemotherapy and should make use of validated, age-appropriate measures. This review suggests that 5-HT3 antagonists are effective in patients who are to receive emetogenic chemotherapy, with granisetron or palonosetron possibly better than ondansetron. Adding dexamethasone improves control of vomiting, although the risk-benefit profile of adjunctive steroid remains uncertain.

Nutritional support in children and young people with cancer undergoing chemotherapy.

BACKGROUND: It is well documented that malnutrition is a common complication of paediatric malignancy and its treatment. Malnutrition can often be a consequence of cancer itself or a result of chemotherapy. Nutritional support aims to reverse malnutrition seen at diagnosis, prevent malnutrition associated with treatment and promote weight gain and growth. The most effective and safe forms of nutritional support in children and young people with cancer are not known. OBJECTIVES: To determine the effects of any form of parenteral (PN) or enteral (EN) nutritional support, excluding vitamin supplementation and micronutrient supplementation, in children and young people with cancer undergoing chemotherapy and to determine the effect of the nutritional content of PN and EN. This is an update of a previous Cochrane review. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the following databases for the initial review: CENTRAL (The Cochrane Library, Issue 2, 2009), MEDLINE (1950 to 2006), EMBASE (1974 to 2006), CINAHL (1982 to 2006), the National Research Register (2007) and Dissertations & Theses (2007). Experts in the field were also contacted for information on relevant trials. For this update, we searched the same electronic databases from 2006 to September 2013. We also scrutinised the reference lists of included articles to identify additional trials. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised or quasi-randomised controlled trials comparing any form of nutritional support with another, or control, in children or young people with cancer undergoing chemotherapy. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two authors independently selected trials. At least two authors independently assessed quality and extracted data. We contacted trialists for missing information. MAIN RESULTS: The current review included the eight trials from the initial review and six new trials which randomised 595 participants (< 21 years of age) with leukaemias or solid tumours undergoing chemotherapy. The trials were all of low quality with the exception of two of the trials looking at glutamine supplementation. One small trial found that compared to EN, PN significantly increased weight (mean difference (MD) 4.12, 95% CI 1.91 to 6.33), serum albumin levels (MD 0.70, 95% CI 0.14 to 1.26), calorie intake (MD 22.00, 95% CI 5.12 to 38.88) and protein intake (MD 0.80, 95% CI 0.45 to 1.15). One trial comparing peripheral PN and EN with central PN found that mean daily weight gain (MD -27.00, 95% CI -43.32 to -10.68) and energy intake (MD -15.00, 95% CI -26.81 to -3.19) were significantly less for the peripheral PN and EN group, whereas mean change in serum albumin was significantly greater for that group (MD 0.47, 95% CI 0.13 to 0.81, P = 0.008). Another trial with few participants found an increase in mean energy intake (% recommended daily amount) in children fed an energy dense feed compared to a standard calorie feed (MD +28%, 95% CI 17% to 39%). Three studies looked at glutamine supplementation. The evidence suggesting that glutamine reduces severity of mucositis was not statistically significant in two studies (RR 0.64, 95% CI 0.19 to 2.2 and RR 0.85, 95% CI 0.66 to 1.1) and differences in reduction of infection rates were also not significant in two studies (RR 1.0, 95% CI 0.72 to 1.4 and RR 0.98, 95% CI 0.63 to 1.51). Only one study compared olive oil based PN to standard lipid containing PN. Despite similar calorie contents in both feeds, the standard lipid formula lead to greater weight gain (MD -0.34 z-scores, 95% CI -0.68 to 0.00). A single study compared standard EN with fructooligosaccharide containing EN. There was no difference in weight gain between groups (mean difference -0.12, 95% CI -0.57 to 0.33), with adverse effects (nausea) occurring equally between the groups (RR 0.92, 95% CI 0.48 to 1.74). AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: There is limited evidence from individual trials to suggest that PN is more effective than EN in well-nourished children and young people with cancer undergoing chemotherapy. The evidence for other methods of nutritional support remains unclear. Limited evidence suggests an energy dense feed increases mean daily energy intake and has a positive effect on weight gain. Evidence suggesting glutamine supplementation reduces incidence and severity of mucositis, infection rates and length of hospital stay is not statistically significant. Further research, incorporating larger sample sizes and rigorous methodology utilising valid and reliable outcome measures, is essential.