2001
DOI: 10.1080/13638490110064806
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Learning difficulties in children treated for acute lymphoblastic leukaemia (ALL)

Abstract: Concern about the adverse affects of brain irradiation used in treatment for childhood leukaemia on children's learning have been put forward since the 1960s. Early work based on assessment of IQ suggested considerable problems associated with CNS irradiation of 2400cGy, and that children who were younger on diagnosis (below 5 years) were particularly at risk. Consequently, new protocols were introduced in which the amount of irradiation was reduced, or children were treated by chemotherapy alone. There is som… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1

Citation Types

0
6
0

Year Published

2006
2006
2019
2019

Publication Types

Select...
5
1
1

Relationship

0
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 10 publications
(6 citation statements)
references
References 69 publications
0
6
0
Order By: Relevance
“…The mean age at inclusion of the 855 participants was 16.2 ± 7.0 years, and the mean follow-up from diagnosis to evaluation was 10.2 ± 6.2 years. After disease onset, 244 patients (28.5%) repeated a grade, with a median interval of four years [interquartile range [2][3][4][5][6][7][8]. Independent factors associated with repeating a grade were to be a boy (OR = 1,78 [1.21-2.60]), to be adolescent (OR = 2,70 [1.63-4,48]), having an educational support during the treatment period (OR = 3,79 [2,45 -5,88]), low level of parents' education (OR = 2,493 [1,657 -3,750]), and household financial difficulties (OR=2,62 [1,607 -4,28]).…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…The mean age at inclusion of the 855 participants was 16.2 ± 7.0 years, and the mean follow-up from diagnosis to evaluation was 10.2 ± 6.2 years. After disease onset, 244 patients (28.5%) repeated a grade, with a median interval of four years [interquartile range [2][3][4][5][6][7][8]. Independent factors associated with repeating a grade were to be a boy (OR = 1,78 [1.21-2.60]), to be adolescent (OR = 2,70 [1.63-4,48]), having an educational support during the treatment period (OR = 3,79 [2,45 -5,88]), low level of parents' education (OR = 2,493 [1,657 -3,750]), and household financial difficulties (OR=2,62 [1,607 -4,28]).…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Several studies have addressed cognitive and learning impairment and their risk factors in children following cancer (1,2). As a result, treatment has been adapted to age and relapse risk to minimize neurocognitive toxicity by, for example, less use of cranial irradiation (3,4). Page 4 of 30 Most studies have been based on neurocognitive tests, but scholastic achievement may be a better measure of long-term effects.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Several factors can influence cognitive disorders and school difficulties after leukemia, including especially cerebral radiotherapy dose of 24 grays (Gy) and more [1,2]. Other factors include associated meningeal localization, allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (a-HSCT), conditioning of a-HSCT with total body irradiation (TBI) [3], and socioeconomic status.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Cognitive deficits documented by neuropsychological (NP) testing involve attention and concentration, processing speed, memory, general intelligence, language, and academic achievement [29,26,13]. Risk factors identified from studies of patients with acute lymphoblastic leukemia and brain tumors include young age at treatment [13,23,3,1], dose and type of treatment, particularly cranial irradiation and high-dose chemotherapy [13,15,25], increased time since treatment [26,23], and female gender [3]. Structural changes, including subacute leukoencephalopathy, mineralizing microangiopathy, and cortical atrophy, have been observed on CT or MRI during and after treatment [5], but associations between NP deficits and structural abnormalities are inconsistent and yield mixed results [18,28].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%