Long-term Follow Up of Patients with Hepatoblastoma

Malignant neoplasms of the liver comprise 1.3 % in the structure of malignant neoplasms of children at the age of 0 to 14 y. o. The most frequently met malignant neoplasms of the liver of children are hepatoblastomas. The morbidity rate of hepatoblastomas comprises 0.1 per 100 thousand of children's population at the age of 0 to 14 years old. The basis of therapeutic strategy of patients with hepatoblastomas is the riskadapted approach that includes the assessment of such factors, such as the stage of disease under the PRETEXT (Pre-Treatment Extent of Disease) system and the level of alpha-fenoprotein (AFP). We use protocols of the International Childhood Liver Tumors Strategy Group (SIOPEL) in our practice. In accordance with recommendations of the SIOPEL group, patients with hepatoblastomas are stratified into the low risk group and high risk group. Patients in the low risk group receive therapy with the use of cisplatin (totally, 6 injections). Patients with hepatoblastomas in the high risk group receive therapy with the use of cisplatin, carboplatin, and doxorubicin. It must be noted that hepatoblastomas, unlike many types of malignant neoplasms of children, produce AFP and is attributed to “secreting” tumors. Increasing of the AFP level with hepatoblastomas during the onset of the disease is marked in 90 % of cases. AFP is both a diagnostics marker with hepatoblastomas and a marker of response to the therapy performed. Assessment of the AFP level is used for revealing of disease recurrences with dynamic observation of the patients that have completed the specific therapy. The possibility of using AFP level for early revealing of disease recurrences allows significantly decreasing of the number of imaging studies used in programs of follow-up observation, unlike other, "nonsecreting" types of malignant neoplasms of childhood. A whole number of performed international studies demonstrated increasing of the risk of development of malignant neoplasms associated with the radiation received in the course of X-ray diagnostics and computed tomography. Thus, in the course of making up the protocols of observation (imaging) of the patients that have completed the treatment associated with malignant neoplasms, it is necessary to take into consideration all possible risks that include both risks of development of tumor recurrences and the risk of development of severe late consequences including those caused with excessive imaging studies. In our article, we have provided the protocol of observation of patients with hepatoblastomas that have completed the specific therapy including the patients that have undergone transplantation of the liver. This protocol is based upon recommendations of the SIOPEL group. Determination of the AFP level in blood of patients with hepatoblastomas, X-ray diagnostics of the chest organs, and ultrasonic study of the abdominal organs are the major imaging methods used for controlling of disease recurrences. Besides, monitoring and early revealing of late effects of treatment are important in the course of clinical examination of children and adolescents after malignant neoplasms. The article reviews the problems of organ toxicity caused with chemotherapy included into the schemes of treatment of patients with hepatoblastomas. Taking into consideration the specter of these chemical drugs, an important factor is monitoring of such side effects as nephrotoxicity, ototoxicity, and cardiac toxicity that require long-term observation. The volume of examination and resolution of examination is represented in the form of tables for patients of groups of low and high risk, and separately for the patients after the liver transplantation.

1. Bulterys M., Goodman M. T., Smith M. A. et al. Hepatic tumors. In: Ries L. A.G., Smith M. A., Gurney J. G. et al.(eds.). Cancer Incidence and Survival among Children and Adolescents: United States SEER Program 1975–1995, National Cancer Institute, SEER Program. NIH Pub. No. 99–4649. Bethesda, MD, 1999.

2. Czauderna P. Hepatoblastoma throughout SIOPEL trials – clinical lessons learnt. Front Biosci(Elite Ed) 2012;4:470–9.

3. http://www.siopel.org / Access 04.11.2014 /.

4. Roebuck D. J., Aronson D., Clapuyt P. et al.; International Childrhood Liver Tumor Strategy Group. 2005 PRETEXT: a revised staging system for primary malignant liver tumours of childhood developed by the SIOPEL group. Pediatr Radiol 2007;37(2):123–32.

5. Perilongo G., Maibach R., Shafford E. et al. Cisplatin versus cisplatin plus doxorubicin for standard-risk hepatoblastoma. N Engl J Med 2009;361(17):1662–70.

6. Zsíros J., Maibach R., Shafford E. et al. Successful treatment of childhood high-risk hepatoblastoma with dose-intensive multiagent chemotherapy and surgery: final results of the SIOPEL-3HR study. J Clin Oncol 2010;28(15):2584–90.

7. Zsiros J., Brugieres L., Brock P. et al.; International Childhood Liver Tumours Strategy Group (SIOPEL). Dose-dense cisplatin-based chemotherapy and surgery for children with high-risk hepatoblastoma (SIOPEL-4): a prospective, single-arm, feasibility study. Lancet Oncol 2013;14(9):834–42.

8. Semeraro M., Branchereau S., Maibach R. et al. Relapses in hepatoblastoma patients: clinical characteristics and outcome – experience of the International Childhood Liver tumour Strategy Group SIOPEL). Eur J Cancer 2013;49(9):915–22.

9. Meyers R. L. Tumors of the liver in children. Surg Oncol 2007;16(3):195–203.

10. Rathore N., Eissa H. M., Margolin J. F. et al. Pediatric Hodgkin lymphoma: are we over-scanning our patients? Pediatr Hematol Oncol 2012;29(5):415–23.

11. Dauer L. T., St Germain J., Meyers P. A. Let’s image gently: reducing excessive reliance on CT scans. Pediatr Blood Cancer 2008;51(6):838; author reply 839–40.

12. McCarville M.B., Kao S. C. Imaging recommendations for malignant liver neoplasms in children. Pediatr Blood Cancer 2006;46(1):2–7.

13. Pierce D. A., Preston D. L. Radiationrelated cancer risks at low doses among atomic bomb survivors. Radiat Res 2000;154(2):178–86.

14. Matanoski G. M., Boice JD. Jr., Brown S. L. et al. Radiation exposure and cancer: case study. Am J Epidemiol 2001;154(12 Suppl):S91–8.

15. Brenner D. J., Hall E. J. Computed tomography- an increasing source of radiation exposure. N Engl J Med 2007;357(22):2277–84.

16. Rojas Y., Guillerman R. P., Zhang W. et al. Relapse surveillance in AFP-positive hepatoblastoma: re-evaluating the role of imaging. Pediatr Radiol 2014;44(10):1275–80.

17. Kurt B. A., Armstrong G. T., Cash D. K. et al. Primary care management of the childhood cancer survivor. J Pediatr 2008;152(4):458–66.

18. Kadan-Lottick N. S., Robison L. L., Gurney J. G. et al. Childhood cancer survivors’knowledge about their past diagnosis and treatment: Childhood Cancer Survivor Study. JAMA 2002;287(14):1832–9.

19. Children’s Oncology Group. Long-term follow-up guidelines for survivors of childhood, adolescent and young adult cancers, Version 3.0. Arcadia, CA: Children’s Oncology Group, 2008. Available on-line: www.survivorshipguidelines.org.