ConclusionThus, even children receiving anti-cancer chemotherapy may have a mild or asymptomatic course of COVID-19. While we should not underestimate the risk of developing a more severe course of COVID-19 than observed here, the intensity of preventive measures should not cause delays or obstructions in oncological treatment.

We reviewed the clinical features, treatment, and outcome of 100 children with myelodysplastic syndrome (MDS), juvenile myelomonocytic leukemia (JMML), and acute myeloid leukemia (AML) associated with complete monosomy 7 (−7) or deletion of the long arm of chromosome 7 (7q−). Patients with therapyinduced disease were excluded. The morphologic diagnoses according to modified FAB criteria were: MDS in 72 (refractory anemia (RA) in 11, RA with excess of blasts (RAEB) in eight, RAEB in transformation (RAEB-T) in 10, JMML in 43), and AML in 28. The median age at presentation was 2.8 years (range 2 months to 15 years), being lowest in JMML (1.1 year). Loss of chromosome 7 as the sole cytogenetic abnormality was observed in 75% of those with MDS compared with 32% of those with AML. Predisposing conditions (including familial MDS/AML) were found in 20%. Three-year survival was 82% in RA, 63% in RAEB, 45% in JMML, 34% in AML, and 8% in RAEB-T. Children with −7 alone had a superior survival than those with other cytogenetic abnormalities: this was solely due to a better survival in MDS (3-year survival 56 vs 24%). The reverse was found in AML (3-year survival 13% in −7 alone vs 44% in other cytogenetic groups). Stable disease for several years was documented in more than half the patients with RA or RAEB. Patients with RA, RAEB or JMML treated with bone marrow transplantation (BMT) without prior chemotherapy had a 3-year survival of 73%. The morphologic diagnosis was the strongest prognostic factor. Only patients with a diagnosis of JMML fitted what has previously been referred to as the monosomy 7 syndrome. Our data give no support to the concept of monosomy 7 as a distinct syndrome.

Asparaginases are important agents used in the treatment of children with acute lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL). Three types of asparaginase are currently available: two are derived from Escherichia coli [native asparaginase and pegylated asparaginase (PEG-asparaginase)] and one from Erwinia chrysanthemi (crisantaspase). All three products share the same mechanism of action but have different pharmacokinetic properties, which do not make them easily interchangeable. Among the known toxicities and side-effects, allergic reactions and silent inactivation represent the most important limitations to the prolonged use of any asparaginase product, with associated reduced therapeutic effects and poorer outcomes. Routine real time monitoring can help to identify patients with silent inactivation and facilitate a switch to a different product to ensure continued depletion of asparagine, completion of the treatment schedule and maintenance of outcomes. However, the most appropriate second-line treatment is still a matter of debate. PEG-asparaginase has lower immunogenicity and a longer half-life than native Escherichia coli (E. coli) asparaginase, which makes it useful for both first-line and second-line use with a reduced number of doses. However, PEG-asparaginase displays cross-reactivity with native E. coli asparaginase that may harm its therapeutic effects. Crisantaspase does not display cross-reactivity to either of the E. coli-derived products, which has made crisantaspase the second-line treatment option in a number of recent protocols. As crisantaspase has a much shorter biological half-life than the E. coli-derived products, the appropriate dosage and administration schedule are of paramount importance in delivering treatment with this product. In the ongoing trial AIEOP-BFM ALL 2009 (Associazione Italiana Ematologia Oncologia Pediatrica - Berlin-Franklin-Munster), in which PEG-asparaginase is used first-line, one dose of PEG-asparaginase is substituted by seven doses of crisantaspase given intravenously at 20,000 IU/m2 on alternate days when clinical allergy or silent inactivation is present. Based on the indications of different protocols, lack of cross-reactivity to the E. coli-derived products and taking into consideration regulatory factors and availability, crisantaspase may be considered a viable second-line therapy.

OBJECTIVEMetastatic dissemination is a major treatment challenge and cause of death in patients with medulloblastoma. However, the influence of molecular biology on the pattern of metastatic dissemination at diagnosis is not known. In this study, the authors sought to define the location, pattern, and imaging characteristics of medulloblastoma metastases across subgroups at diagnosis.METHODSA consecutive cohort of patients with metastatic medulloblastoma at The Hospital for Sick Children and the University Hospital Motol, who underwent up-front MRI of the craniospinal axis, was assembled and allocated to subgroups using NanoString limited gene–expression profiling. Radiological characteristics (including location, morphology, size, diffusion restriction, and contrast enhancement) were discerned through a retrospective review.RESULTSForty metastatic medulloblastomas were identified with up-front neuroimaging of the craniospinal axis: 5 sonic hedgehog (SHH), 16 Group 3, and 19 Group 4 metastases. Significant subgroup-specific differences were observed, particularly with respect to tumor location, size, and morphology. Group 3 metastases were most frequently laminar compared with a more nodular pattern in Group 4 (14 of 16 in Group 3 vs 8 of 19 in Group 4; p = 0.0004). Laminar metastases were not observed in patients with SHH medulloblastoma. Suprasellar metastases are highly specific to Group 4 (p = 0.016). Two of the 5 SHH cases had multifocal lesions in the cerebellum, raising the possibility that these were in fact synchronous primary tumors and not true metastases. A minority of patients with Group 4 metastases harbored metastatic deposits that did not enhance on MRI after contrast administration, often in patients whose primary tumor did not enhance.CONCLUSIONSThe location, morphology, and imaging characteristics of metastatic medulloblastoma differ across molecular subgroups, with implications for diagnosis and management. This suggests that the biology of leptomeningeal dissemination differs among medulloblastoma subgroups.