Skip Navigation

This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow E-letters: Submit a response
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when E-letters are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow Search for citing articles in:
ISI Web of Science (10)
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Disclaimer
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Iacoangeli, M.
Right arrow Articles by Scerrati, M.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Iacoangeli, M.
Right arrow Articles by Scerrati, M.
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

Annals of Oncology 6:377-382, 1995
© 1995 European Society for Medical Oncology

research-article

Intrathecal chemotherapy for treatment of overt meningeal leukemia: Comparison between intraventricular and traditional intralumbar route

M. Iacoangeli1,, R. Roselli1, L. Pagano2, G. Leone2, R. Marra2, A. Pompucci1, R. Trignani1 and M. Scerrati1

1Institute of Neurosurgery, Institute of Internal Medicine, Catholic University School of Medicine Rome, Italy
2Division of Hematology, Institute of Internal Medicine, Catholic University School of Medicine Rome, Italy

Correspondence to: Dr. Maurizio Iacoangeli, Istituto di Neurochirurgia, Universita Cattolica del Sacro Cuore, Policlinico Gemelli, Largo A. Gemelli, 8, 00168 Roma, Italy

BACKGROUND: Despite advances in the treatment of acute lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL), overt meningeal leukemia remains a dire condition. The role of intraventricular chemotherapy (FVC) in its treatment is still a matter for debate. Data suggesting benefit from it have been countered by statements of concern regarding the potential complications associated with its use. This report details our results from using IVC.

PATIENTS AND METHODS: We compared two groups of adult patients with ALL at their first meningeal involvement. Twelve of them were submitted to ILC and 9 to IVC.

RESULTS: Our data showed that IVC yielded a higher rate of complete response (88% vs. 33%) and a lower incidence of second CNS relapse than did ILC (none vs. 50%). Even though there were more long-term disease-free survivors (33% vs. 8%) among the IVC patients, the difference in median event-free survival was not significant (120 vs. 80 weeks; p boxh 0.66). IVC was associated with a longer overall survival (p boxh 0.005) and CNS remission time (p boxh 0.046). Two cases refractory to ILC were later fully responsive to IVC. There were 22% device-related and 11% drug-related complications.

CONCLUSIONS: The results are promising, but the small series does not allow for any definite conclusion. In our opinion, the hazards inherent in the placement and operation of the device do not outweigh the benefits of IVC for the treatment of overt meningeal leukemia and should not preclude its use. Accurate neurosurgical technique, meticulous care in drug administration and experience with this form of therapy can all contribute to minimizing complications so that full advantage can be taken of IVC's potential.

acute lymphoblastic leukemia, blood-brain barrier, intrathecal chemotherapy, intraventricular chemotherapy, subcutaneous reservoir


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?




Disclaimer: Please note that abstracts for content published before 1996 were created through digital scanning and may therefore not exactly replicate the text of the original print issues. All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, but the Publisher will not be held responsible for any remaining inaccuracies. If you require any further clarification, please contact our Customer Services Department.