Parents' preferences for the organisation of long-term follow-up of childhood cancer survivors.

Parents take an important role in follow-up of young cancer survivors. We aimed to investigate (1) parents' preferences for organisation of follow-up (including content, specialists involved and models of care), and (2) parents' and children's characteristics predicting preference for generalist vs. specialist-led follow-up. We sent a questionnaire to parents of childhood cancer survivors aged 11-17 years. We assessed on a 4-point Likert scale (1-4), parents' preferences for organisation of long-term follow-up. Proposed models were: telephone/questionnaire, general practitioner (GP) (both categorised as generalist for regression analysis); and paediatric oncologist, medical oncologist or multidisciplinary team (MDT) (categorised as specialists). Of 284 contacted parents, 189 responded (67%). Parents welcomed if visits included checking for cancer recurrence (mean = 3.89), late effects screening (mean = 3.79), taking patients seriously (mean = 3.86) and competent staff (mean = 3.85). The preferred specialists were paediatric oncologists (mean = 3.73). Parents valued the paediatric oncologist model of care (mean = 3.49) and the MDT model (mean = 3.14) highest. Parents of children not attending clinic-based follow-up (OR = 2.97, p = .009) and those visiting a generalist (OR = 4.23, p = .007) favoured the generalist-led model. Many parents preferred a clinic-based model of follow-up by paediatric oncologists or a MDT. However, parents also valued the follow-up care model according to which their child is followed up.

Preferences for long-term follow-up care in childhood cancer survivors.

Follow-up care is important for childhood cancer survivors to facilitate early detection and treatment of late effects. We aimed to describe preferences for different organisational aspects and models of follow-up care among Swiss childhood cancer survivors, and characteristics associated with preferences for different models. We contacted 720 survivors aged 18+ years, diagnosed with cancer after 1990 (age 0-16 years), registered in the Swiss Childhood Cancer Registry (SCCR), and Swiss resident, who previously participated in a baseline survey. They received questionnaires to assess attendance and preferences for follow-up (rated on 4-point scales, 0-3). Clinical information was available from the SCCR. Survivors (n = 314: response rate 43.6%; 47.8% still attended follow-up) rated clinical reasons for follow-up higher than supportive reasons (p < .001). They rated checking for cancer recurrence (mean = 2.78, SD = 0.53) and knowing about risks for my children most important (mean = 2.22, SD = 0.83). They preferred to attend a children's hospital (mean = 1.94, SD = 1.11), adult hospital (mean = 1.86, SD = 0.98) or general practitioner (mean = 1.86, SD = 1.01) rather than a central specialised late effects clinic (mean = 1.25, SD = 1.06, p < .001), and be seen by paediatric (mean = 2.24, SD = 0.72) or medical oncologist (mean = 2.17, SD = 0.69). Survivors preferred decentralised clinic-based follow-up, rather than one central specialised late effects clinic. Survivors' preferences should be considered to ensure future attendance.

Health-related quality of life in young survivors of childhood cancer.

PURPOSE: Childhood cancer and its treatment may affect health-related quality of life (HRQoL) in childhood cancer survivors, but population-based studies in young survivors are scarce. We aimed to: (1) compare HRQoL between young survivors and population norms and (2) find factors that influence parent-reported HRQoL in survivors. METHODS: As part of the Swiss Childhood Cancer Survivor Study, a questionnaire was mailed to parents of survivors aged 8-16 years, registered in the Swiss Childhood Cancer Registry, ≥5 years after diagnosis. We used the KIDSCREEN-27 instrument to compare self- and parent-reported HRQoL between survivors (N = 425) and standardized norms in the five dimensions of physical well-being, psychological well-being, autonomy, peers and school environment (mean = 50, SD = 10). We then used multivariable linear regressions to test the influence of socio-demographic and cancer-related factors on HRQoL. RESULTS: Self-reported physical well-being was comparable to norms. Other HRQoL dimensions were higher than norms, with the highest mean = 52.2 (p < 0.001) for school environment. Parent-reported HRQoL in survivors was comparable to population norms; only physical well-being was lower (mean = 47.1, p < 0.001), and school environment was higher (mean = 51.1, p = 0.035). Parent-reported HRQoL was lower for survivors of CNS tumors (physical well-being: ß = -5.27, p = 0.007; psychological well-being: ß = -4.39, p = 0.044; peers ß = -5.17, p = 0.028), survivors of neuroblastoma (psychological well-being ß = -5.20, p = 0.047), and survivors who had had a relapse (physical well-being ß = -5.41, p = 0.005). CONCLUSIONS: Assessing HRQoL during follow-up care, with a focus on physical well-being, specific diagnoses (e.g., CNS tumor) and late complications (e.g., relapse) might help to early identify problems and offer support to survivors with reduced HRQoL.

Life partnerships in childhood cancer survivors, their siblings, and the general population.

BACKGROUND: Life partnerships other than marriage are rarely studied in childhood cancer survivors (CCS). We aimed (1) to describe life partnership and marriage in CCS and compare them to life partnerships in siblings and the general population; and (2) to identify socio-demographic and cancer-related factors associated with life partnership and marriage. METHODS: As part of the Swiss Childhood Cancer Survivor Study (SCCSS), a questionnaire was sent to all CCS (aged 20-40 years) registered in the Swiss Childhood Cancer Registry (SCCR), aged <16 years at diagnosis, who had survived ≥ 5 years. The proportion with life partner or married was compared between CSS and siblings and participants in the Swiss Health Survey (SHS). Multivariable logistic regression was used to identify factors associated with life partnership or marriage. RESULTS: We included 1,096 CCS of the SCCSS, 500 siblings and 5,593 participants of the SHS. Fewer CCS (47%) than siblings (61%, P < 0.001) had life partners, and fewer CCS were married (16%) than among the SHS population (26%, P > 0.001). Older (OR = 1.14, P < 0.001) and female CCS (OR = 1.85, <0.001) were more likely to have life partners. CCS who had undergone radiotherapy, bone marrow transplants (global P Treatment = 0.018) or who had a CNS diagnosis (global P Diagnosis < 0.001) were less likely to have life partners. CONCLUSION: CCS are less likely to have life partners than their peers. Most CCS with a life partner were not married. Future research should focus on the effect of these disparities on the quality of life of CCS.

Hematopoietic stem cell transplantation for advanced myelodysplastic syndrome in children: results of the EWOG-MDS 98 study.

We report on the outcome of children with advanced primary myelodysplastic syndrome (MDS) transplanted from an HLA-matched sibling (MSD) or an unrelated donor (UD) following a preparative regimen with busulfan, cyclophosphamide and melphalan. Ninety-seven patients with refractory anemia with excess blasts (RAEB, n=53), RAEB in transformation (RAEB-T, n=29) and myelodysplasia-related acute myeloid leukemia (MDR-AML, n=15) enrolled in the European Working Group of MDS in Childhood (EWOG-MDS) 98 study and given hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT) were analyzed. Median age at HSCT was 11.1 years (range 1.4-19.0). Thirty-nine children were transplanted from an MSD, whereas 58 were given the allograft from a UD (n=57) or alternative family donor (n=1). Stem cell source was bone marrow (n=69) or peripheral blood (n=28). With a median follow-up of 3.9 years (range 0.1-10.9), the 5-year probability of overall survival is 63%, while the 5-year cumulative incidence of transplantation-related mortality (TRM) and relapse is 21% each. Age at HSCT greater than 12 years, interval between diagnosis and HSCT longer than 4 months, and occurrence of acute or extensive chronic graft-versus-host disease were associated with increased TRM. The risk of relapse increased with more advanced disease. This study indicates that HSCT following a myeloablative preparative regimen offers a high probability of survival for children with advanced MDS.