Citations

AbstractBackgroundPediatric brain tumor survivors are at risk for poor social outcomes. It remains unknown whether cognitive sparing with proton radiotherapy (PRT) supports better social outcomes relative to photon radiotherapy (XRT). We hypothesized that survivors treated with PRT would outperform those treated with XRT on measures of cognitive and social outcomes. Further, we hypothesized that cognitive performance would predict survivor social outcomes.ProcedureSurvivors who underwent PRT (n = 38) or XRT (n = 20) participated in a neurocognitive evaluation >1 year post radiotherapy. Group differences in cognitive and social functioning were assessed using analysis of covariance (ANCOVA). Regression analyses examined predictors of peer relations and social skills.ResultsAge at evaluation, radiation dose, tumor diameter, and sex did not differ between groups (all p > .05). XRT participants were younger at diagnosis (XRT M = 5.0 years, PRT M = 7.6 years) and further out from radiotherapy (XRT M = 8.7 years, PRT M = 4.6 years). The XRT group performed worse than the PRT group on measures of processing speed (p = .01) and verbal memory (p < .01); however, social outcomes did not differ by radiation type. The proportion of survivors with impairment in peer relations and social skills exceeded expectation; χ2(1) = 38.67, p < .001; χ2(1) = 5.63, p < .05. Household poverty predicted peer relation difficulties (t = 2.18, p < .05), and verbal memory approached significance (t = −1.99, p = .05). Tumor diameter predicted social skills (t = −2.07, p < .05).ConclusionsRegardless of radiation modality, survivors are at risk for social challenges. Deficits in verbal memory may place survivors at particular risk. Results support monitoring of cognitive and social functioning throughout survivorship, as well as consideration of sociodemographic risk factors.

Background: Pediatric brain tumor survivors are at risk for poor social outcomes. It remains unknown whether cognitive sparing with proton radiotherapy (PRT) supports better social outcomes relative to photon radiotherapy (XRT). We hypothesized that survivors treated with PRT would outperform those treated with XRT on measures of cognitive and social outcomes. Further, we hypothesized that cognitive performance would predict survivor social outcomes. Procedure: Survivors who underwent PRT (n=38) or XRT (n=20) participated in a neurocognitive evaluation >1 year post-radiotherapy. Group differences in cognitive and social functioning were assessed using ANCOVA. Regression analyses examined predictors of peer relations and social skills. Results: Age at evaluation, radiation dose, tumor diameter, and sex did not differ between groups (all p>0.05). However, XRT participants were younger at diagnosis (XRT M=5.0 years, PRT M=7.6 years) and further out from radiotherapy (XRT M=8.7 years, PRT M=4.6 years). The XRT group performed worse than the PRT group on measures of processing speed (p=0.01) and verbal memory (p<0.01); however, social outcomes did not differ by radiation type. The proportion of survivors with impairment in peer relations and social skills exceeded expectation (2(1)=38.67, p<0.001; 2(1)=5.63, p<0.05), and verbal memory approached significance as a unique predictor of peer relations (t=-2.01, p=0.05). Total tumor RT dose significantly predicted social skills (t=-2.23, p<0.05). Conclusions: Regardless of radiation modality, survivors are at risk for social challenges, with one-quarter being socially excluded or undervalued. Deficits in verbal memory may place survivors at particular risk. Results support monitoring of cognitive and social functioning throughout survivorship.

Abstract Background Proton radiotherapy (PRT) may be associated with less neurocognitive risk than photon RT (XRT) for pediatric brain tumor survivors. We compared neurocognitive and academic outcomes in long‐term survivors treated with XRT versus PRT. Methods Survivors underwent neurocognitive evaluation >1 year after craniospinal (CSI) or focal PRT or XRT. Groups were compared using separate one‐way analyses of covariance for the CSI and focal groups. Results PRT ( n = 58) and XRT ( n = 30) subgroups were similar on gender (66% male), age at RT (median = 6.5 years), age at follow‐up (median = 14.6 years), and government assistance status (32%). PRT and XRT focal groups differed on follow‐up interval, shunt history, and total RT dose (all p < .05), whereas PRT and XRT CSI groups differed on follow‐up interval, baseline neurocognitive performance score, boost volume, and CSI dose (all p < .05). The PRT focal group outperformed the XRT focal group on inhibition/switching ( p = .04). The PRT CSI group outperformed the XRT CSI group on inattention/impulsivity (both p < .05). Several clinical variables (i.e., RT dose, boost field, baseline performance) predicted neurocognitive outcomes (all p < .05). The PRT focal group performed comparably to population means on most neurocognitive measures, while both CSI groups performed below expectation on multiple measures. The XRT CSI group was most impaired. All groups fell below expectation on processing speed, fine motor, and academic fluency (most p < .01). Conclusions Findings suggest generally favorable neurocognitive and academic long‐term outcomes following focal PRT. Impairment was greatest following CSI regardless of modality. Dosimetry and baseline characteristics are important determinants of outcome alone or in combination with modality.

Abstract PURPOSE By reducing dose to normal brain tissue, proton radiotherapy (PRT) may lessen neurocognitive risk traditionally associated with photon radiotherapy (XRT). We examined change in neurocognitive scores over time in pediatric medulloblastoma patients treated with PRT versus XRT. METHODS Neurocognitive scores from 79 patients (37 PRT, 42 XRT) were examined. Patients were treated between 2007–2018 on the same treatment protocols that differed only by craniospinal modality (PRT versus XRT). Change in scores over time since diagnosis were compared between groups. RESULTS Groups were similar on most demographic/clinical variables: sex (67.1% male), age at diagnosis (mean 8.6 years), CSI dose (median 23.4 Gy), length of follow-up (mean 4.3 years), and parental education (mean 14.3 years). Boost dose (p&lt;0.001) and margin (p=0.001) differed between groups. Adjusting for covariates, the PRT group exhibited superior outcomes in global IQ, perceptual reasoning, and working memory versus the XRT group (all p&lt;0.05). The XRT group exhibited significant decline in global IQ, working memory, and processing speed (all p&lt;0.05). The PRT group exhibited stable scores in all domains except processing speed (p=0.003). Posterior fossa syndrome imparted risk independent of modality. CONCLUSION This is the first study comparing neurocognitive trajectories between pediatric patients treated for medulloblastoma with PRT versus XRT on comparable, contemporary protocols. PRT was associated with more favorable neurocognitive outcomes in most domains compared to XRT, although processing speed emerged as vulnerable in both groups. This is the strongest evidence to date of an intellectual sparing advantage with PRT in the treatment of pediatric medulloblastoma.

PURPOSE Proton radiotherapy (PRT) may lessen the neuropsychological risk traditionally associated with cranial radiotherapy for the treatment of pediatric brain tumors by reducing the dose to normal tissue compared with that of photon radiotherapy (XRT). We examined the change in intellectual scores over time in patients with pediatric medulloblastoma treated with craniospinal PRT versus XRT. METHODS Intelligence test scores were obtained for a sample of pediatric patients treated between 2007 and 2018 on the same medulloblastoma protocols that differed only in radiotherapy modality (PRT v XRT). Growth curve analyses compared change in scores over time since diagnosis between groups. RESULTS Longitudinal intelligence data from 79 patients (37 PRT, 42 XRT) were examined. Groups were similar on most demographic/clinical variables, including sex (67.1% male), age at diagnosis (mean, 8.6 years), craniospinal irradiation dose (median, 23.4 Gy), length of follow-up (mean, 4.3 years), and parental education (mean, 14.3 years). Boost dose ( P < .001) and boost margin ( P = .001) differed between groups. Adjusting for covariates, the PRT group exhibited superior long-term outcomes in global intelligence quotient (IQ), perceptual reasoning, and working memory compared with the XRT group (all P < .05). The XRT group exhibited a significant decline in global IQ, working memory, and processing speed (all P < .05). The PRT group exhibited stable scores over time in all domains with the exception of processing speed ( P = .003). CONCLUSION To our knowledge, this is the first study to compare intellectual trajectories between pediatric patients treated for medulloblastoma with PRT versus those treated with XRT on comparable, contemporary protocols. PRT was associated with more favorable intellectual outcomes in most domains compared with XRT, although processing speed emerged as a vulnerable domain for both groups. This study provides the strongest evidence to date of an intellectual sparing advantage with PRT in the treatment of pediatric medulloblastoma.

Abstract Background Cranial radiotherapy (RT) is associated with risk for cognitive and adaptive dysfunction. Proton RT (PRT) is a technique hypothesized to spare cognition by reducing exposure to nontarget brain tissue. However, little is known regarding functional outcomes in survivors of pediatric brain tumor (BT) treated with PRT. The present study examined the relationship between cognitive and adaptive outcomes in pediatric BT survivors post‐PRT. Methods Survivors treated with either focal (n = 33) or craniospinal irradiation (CSI; n = 37) PRT completed neurocognitive evaluations approximately 5 years post‐treatment. Results of intelligence testing and ratings of adaptive functioning are reported. Mediation models examined the relationship among radiation field, cognition, and adaptive functioning. Results The PRT CSI group demonstrated worse cognitive outcomes than the PRT Focal group across each cognitive index (Cohen's d = 0.56–0.70). Parent ratings of adaptive functioning were also worse in the PRT CSI group than the PRT Focal group (Global Adaptive Composite, d = 0.53; conceptual skills, d = 0.67). Cognitive performance fully mediated the relationship between radiation field and adaptive outcomes, while controlling for group differences in tumor histology and RT dose. Conclusions Focal PRT survivors demonstrated generally positive outcomes with weaknesses in processing speed and aspects of adaptive functioning. CSI exposure was associated with more consistently poor cognitive and adaptive outcomes. The increased risk for adaptive dysfunction in the PRT CSI group appeared due to the effects of CSI on cognition. Efforts to reduce the volume of tissue exposure to RT remain important.