The detection of minimal circulating and micrometastatic disease by real-time RT-PCR, based on the expression of multiple genes, yields highly reproducible results. Patients with positive PB after treatment show poorer survival than patients without microcirculating disease.
Introduction
Advanced intraocular retinoblastoma can be cured by enucleation, but spread of retinoblastoma cells beyond the natural limits of the eye is related to a high mortality. Adjuvant therapy after enucleation has been shown to prevent metastasis in children with risk factors for extraocular retinoblastoma. However, histological criteria and adjuvant treatment regimens vary and there is no unifying consensus on the optimal choice of treatment.
Method
Data on guidelines for adjuvant treatment in European retinoblastoma referral centres were collected in an online survey among all members of the European Retinoblastoma Group (EURbG) network. Extended information was gathered via personal email communication.
Results
Data were collected from 26 centres in 17 countries. Guidelines for adjuvant treatment were in place at 92.3% of retinoblastoma centres. There was a consensus on indication for and intensity of adjuvant treatment among more than 80% of all centres. The majority of centres use no adjuvant treatment for isolated focal choroidal invasion or prelaminar optic nerve invasion. Patients with massive choroidal invasion or postlaminar optic nerve invasion receive adjuvant chemotherapy, while microscopic invasion of the resection margin of the optic nerve or extension through the sclera are treated with combined chemo‐ and radiotherapy.
Conclusion
Indications and adjuvant treatment regimens in European retinoblastoma referral centres are similar but not uniform. Further biomarkers in addition to histopathological risk factors could improve treatment stratification. The high consensus in European centres is an excellent foundation for a common European study with prospective validation of new biomarkers.
Background
T‐cell lymphoblastic lymphoma (T‐LBL) is an aggressive neoplasm closely related to T‐cell acute lymphoblastic leukaemia (T‐ALL). Despite their similarities, and contrary to T‐ALL, studies on paediatric T‐LBL are scarce and, therefore, its molecular landscape has not yet been fully elucidated. Thus, the aims of this study were to characterize the genetic and molecular heterogeneity of paediatric T‐LBL and to evaluate novel molecular markers differentiating this entity from T‐ALL.
Procedure
Thirty‐three paediatric T‐LBL patients were analyzed using an integrated approach, including targeted next‐generation sequencing, RNA‐sequencing transcriptome analysis and copy‐number arrays.
Results
Copy number and mutational analyses allowed the detection of recurrent homozygous deletions of 9p/CDKN2A (78%), trisomy 20 (19%) and gains of 17q24‐q25 (16%), as well as frequent mutations of NOTCH1 (62%), followed by the BCL11B (23%), WT1 (19%) and FBXW7, PHF6 and RPL10 genes (15%, respectively). This genetic profile did not differ from that described in T‐ALL in terms of mutation incidence and global genomic complexity level, but unveiled virtually exclusive 17q25 gains and trisomy 20 in T‐LBL. Additionally, we identified novel gene fusions in paediatric T‐LBL, including NOTCH1–IKZF2, RNGTT–SNAP91 and DDX3X–MLLT10, the last being the only one previously described in T‐ALL. Moreover, clinical correlations highlighted the presence of Notch pathway alterations as a factor related to favourable outcome.
Conclusions
In summary, the genomic landscape of paediatric T‐LBL is similar to that observed in T‐ALL, and Notch signaling pathway deregulation remains the cornerstone in its pathogenesis, including not only mutations but fusion genes targeting NOTCH1.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.