Abstract
Over the last 60 years, the management of retinoblastoma has been revolutionized with the advent of novel therapeutic modalities and a multi-disciplinary approach to children. Greater rates of eye salvage with reduced mortality have and are being achieved. There is now a shift towards rehabilitating vision and improving care throughout the world, not just high resource countries.
Access provided by Autonomous University of Puebla. Download chapter PDF
Similar content being viewed by others
Keywords
Retinoblastoma is a malignant tumour of the retina that is diagnosed in approximately 8000 children worldwide each year and although it is the most common primary eye cancer to affect children, it is considered rare in high resource countries with low birth rates [1,2,3].
19.1 Reducing Paediatric Mortality
In the 1950s retinoblastoma was associated with high mortality throughout the world. It is a paediatric cancer and so has a higher incidence in countries with high birth rates. As high resource countries have less children, the burden of retinoblastoma now falls upon low and middle resource countries e.g. in Nigeria it is the most common paediatric cancer in under 5 s [4]. Whilst there have been many medical advances in high resource countries noted over the last 6 decades, the high survival rate of greater than 95% stems from increased awareness of signs by the parents and guardians and the development of specialized centres for the treatment of the condition. It is no surprise that in countries without universal screening strategies, mortality rates have been documented of up to 60% [5, 6].
19.1.1 Lag Time
Delay in diagnosis is a pejorative term to describe the time interval between the onset of symptoms/signs and presentation to a service that can diagnose and treat the condition in a timely manner [7]. It has been demonstrated that increased lag time is associated with increased mortality for retinoblastoma [8]. This is the case in low/medium resource countries. However, in the UK it has been shown that increased lag time is no longer associated with a poorer outcomes [9] compared to three decades beforehand [10]. This is a similar finding to the US [11]. It is becoming more apparent that individual tumour biology is relevant in countries where the median lag time is around 1 month [9] and mortality is rare [11].
There have been concerted efforts to universally screen for retinoblastoma often at the same time as congenital cataracts. This is effective in reducing mortality but not avoiding enucleation as early RB (Groups A, B and C) can only be detected by ophthalmologists with children under anaesthesia and this is not cost effective for the general population [12]. Kaliki et al. [13] found that only 21% of Indian patients with high-risk Rb (adverse histopathology) presented after 6 months of signs being noted which is surprising, as one would expect the vast majority to be presenting at such a late time. This suggests other factors are at play for the majority who are presenting relatively early to the service. For countries with established primary care systems, a linear relationship does not exist between lag time and retinoblastoma and individual tumour biology has become more relevant to invasiveness (Fig. 19.1).
19.1.2 Communication
In addition to presenting in a timely manner, the parents and guardians need to accept the advice given for treatment. As enucleation remains the mainstay of treatment in groups C, D and E in low/middle resource countries, refusal for enucleation is a cause of increased mortality. However, in specialised centres there is an opportunity for the families to speak to non-health care professional patient support groups (e.g.: The Childhood Eye Cancer Trust in the UK). These support workers often have relatives affected with retinoblastoma and can be instrumental in persuading families that enucleation can save a child’s life with good cosmesis.
Conversely, poor communication between health care professionals will increase the risk of poor outcomes. In avoiding enucleation or systemic chemotherapy, units may use innovative treatments and this may increase the risk of metastases and therefore mortality [14]. Such decisions need to be discussed within a multidisciplinary environment including an open discussion with the families.
19.1.3 Orbital Disease
Until recently, orbital retinoblastoma was considered fatal with very little that could be done to prolong the child’s life. However, a concerted multidisciplinary approach involving systemic chemotherapy, external beam radiation and enucleation can improve survival to 90% (18 of 20 cases) [15]. These are cases without intracranial involvement on MRI scanning nor metastases at presentation, but can still provide hope to clinicians and patients in countries that often see patients presenting in this manner.
19.1.4 Pinealoblastoma
In high resource countries death from retinoblastoma is rare, but mortality may be seen with children who have pinealoblastoma in addition to retinoblastoma. The survival for children who develop pinealoblastoma due to being RB1 carriers is poor compared to those with sporadic pinealoblastoma [16].
19.2 Shift from Radiation
The first attempt to treat retinoblastoma with X-ray occurred in 1903 and was carried out by H.l. Hilgartner in Austin, Texas [17]. In 1919, Schoenberg described the use of radiation therapy in a 2-year-old girl with bilateral retinoblastoma. The eye with the larger tumour was enucleated and the less involved eye was treated by radium therapy. The tumour in the latter eye regressed and 3 years after first commencing treatment, the child was healthy with good vision [18]. Enucleation of the worse eye and radiation of the least affected eye represented standard treatment of retinoblastoma for the next 70 years. If diagnosed early enough, both eyes could be cured by X-ray irradiation [18]. Foster Moore in 1929 in London and Martin & Reese in 1936 [17] in New York confirmed that ionizing radiation could treat this type of tumour and also identified patterns of regression. Although success with externally applied radiation became apparent, ophthalmic complications were frequent. They began working with radiologists to progressively reduce the dose from 20,000 rads (cGy) to present day 3500–4500 cGy levels in order to attempt to preserve useful vision [19].
Kupfer in 1953 was the first ophthalmologist to combine chemotherapy, using a nitrogen mustard agent intravenously, with radiation therapy [20]. He believed that this would result in a reduction in the overall dose of radiation required to treat intraocular retinoblastoma. This technique was later abandoned due to the recorded immediate side effects of this chemotherapeutic agent; in some cases children died.
Forrest first wrote about the observations of second cancers in patients previously treated with irradiation for retinoblastoma in 1961 [21]. More evidence emerged confirming these finding in the years and decades that followed. Abramson wrote of similar findings in 1976 [22] and later wrote of the incidences of sarcomas and other cancers in these patients in 1997 [23].
19.2.1 Recognition of Oncology Risks to Adult Survivors
Much attention for retinoblastoma care was dedicated to saving the lives of children. However, there is increasing awareness of the risk to survivors of retinoblastoma.
It became widely recognized that patients with constitutional mutation of the RB1 gene are at increased life-long risk of developing other specific second cancers. This risk is increased with exposure to radiation (a 50% risk of developing cancer by the age of 50 years of age if they received EBRT compared to 27% risk if they did not). These include osteosarcoma, leiomyosarcoma, malignant melanoma, lung cancer and bladder cancer [24]. Lifestyle counselling can educate survivors on ways to reduce their risk of developing a second cancer by avoiding unnecessary radiation (such as UV light) and carcinogens (such as smoking and alcohol) and obesity. They should also promptly report any suspicious unexplained lesions [25] and there have been awareness campaigns to make doctors aware of the risk to retinoblastoma survivors (Case Study).
Case Study
Caroline Aherne was a famous comedian in the UK. She had familial retinoblastoma and after treatment for retinoblastoma including External Beam Radiotherapy at St Bartholomew’s Hospital in London, she was left partially sighted in one eye. Unfortunately, she suffered from bladder cancer as an adult, and later in 2014 she embarked on a programme of treatment for lung cancer. She died aged 52.
The risk of second primary cancers within the radiation field in children with germline RB1 mutation is significant when the infant is irradiated under the age of 1 year [26]. Therefore, radiation is no longer a primary therapy for retinoblastoma.
19.3 A More Relevant Classification System
In the late 1950s Ellsworth and Reese developed a classification system for retinoblastoma. This was devised to predict prognosis and outcomes when intraocular retinoblastoma was treated with external beam radiotherapy (EBRT). It did allow international investigators and clinicians to compare results to treatment of tumour based on size for the first time.
With the advent of new therapies and the shift from radiotherapy to intravenous chemotherapy as a primary treatment for retinoblastoma, several classification systems [27, 28] developed to reflect prognosis with chemotherapy [29]. Unfortunately, they use the same nomenclature (Groups A–E) with variations of diagnostic features and therefore make comparison of publications and consensus regarding treatment difficult [30].
The TNM cancer classification system is another system used for retinoblastoma staging and was published in 2010 [31]. A revised system was published in 2016 and incorporates heritability into the classification [32]. According to this classification Group D retinoblastoma is cT2a (>5 mm subretinal fluid from the base of the tumour) and cT2b (tumours with any vitreous or subretinal seeding). It remains to be seen if this system will be used consistently by units in the future.
19.4 Increased Understanding of Genetics
The empiric risk for relatives of retinoblastoma was all that was known in the 1970s and 1980s. Offspring of patients with a family history of retinoblastoma or bilateral tumours have a 50% risk of inheriting the mutant allele and a 45% risk of developing retinoblastoma, due to incomplete penetrance. It was first reported by Knudson and later shown conclusively that 15% of patients with unilateral retinoblastoma have a germline mutation [33].
However the most accurate way to predict who will develop retinoblastoma in a family is to test them for the precise RB1 mutant allele found in the proband. In many countries genetic testing began on retinoblastoma patients in the mid-1990s. This was gradually expanded and genetic testing offered to retinoblastoma patients in high-income and middle-income countries from the late 1990s and the turn of the century. This has been a huge advancement for patients and families.
Genetic testing of infants born at risk of retinoblastoma can be performed on DNA from amniotic fluid or from cord blood samples taken at birth. These at risk infants are examined regularly to detect early tumours. Examination without anaesthesia may be performed initially (as tumours often are within the posterior pole and mid-equatorial region) but after 2–3 months of age anesthesia is required to detect small tumours with visualization of the ora serrata essential. All children at risk should undergo multiple examinations under anaesthesia in the first 3 years life in accordance with agreed protocols. Each unit should stratify risks according to the sensitivity of screening for the RB1 gene and previous audits of tumour detection [34]. Tables 19.1 and 19.2 demonstrate the screening strategy for offspring and siblings in the UK. Recently, it has been shown that survivors of retinoblastoma (particularly women) have fewer children if the risk is unknown or they do not understand the implications of the genetic testing. This emphasizes the importance of providing information to families in a manner that they can understand [35].
19.5 The Role of Enucleation
All eyes with features suggestive of imminent extraocular extension (IIRC Group E) still require immediate enucleation. The reason for this is that there is an increased chance of high-risk retinoblastoma on histopathology with secondary glaucoma and iris neovascularization, which are deemed Group E retinoblastoma in all classification systems [13]. Kaliki et al. compared 145 cases with high risk features and compared with 258 cases without high risk features. As expected secondary glaucoma increased the risk, but only 63% developed high risk features so that 37% did not have high risk features and therefore had no increase in the risk of metastases. Similarly only 53% with iris neovascularization had concomitant high-risk features on histopathology so almost half did not. As retinoblastoma surgeons are unsure as to which eyes harbor the adverse histopathology at present, it is safer to enucleate these eyes.
Historically, many children were not fitted with an orbital implant following enucleation, as it was felt that it would interfere with the detection of tumour recurrence by not allowing for palpation of the orbit [36]. However the emergence of MRI allowed for the imaging of the orbit despite the presence of an implant. In addition, a good cosmetic outcome is achieved by replacement of the volume of the eye with an implant deep in the orbit and has also been proven to be beneficial for orbital growth [37].
Changes in the techniques of enucleation and the types of implants used have changed over the last few decades. Expensive porous implants that become vascularized with the muscles sutured to the implant had been used extensively in the past. However, they were noted to be susceptible to infection and extrusion over the years. Equal artificial eye motility has been shown with the use of the cheaper polymethyl methacrylate (PMMA) implants and muscles sutured to the conjunctival fornices (myoconjunctival technique) rather than on front of the implant [38, 39]. The role of the prosthetist is very important in achieving the motility in the studies and it has been difficult to achieve the results in children of other ethnicities who do not have the well-formed posterior tenon’s that Indian children possess. Additionally, the use of a prosthetic eye conformer at the time of the enucleation results in a positive psychological benefit to the parents and child and these conformers have been adopted internationally more recently. This is particularly relevant in countries with high mortality such that compliance with this treatment becomes acceptable.
As discussed below, some units may enucleate more children for valid reasons taking into account risk factors for metastasis. The role of child play specialists cannot be understated for these children and, if possible, it is important that long term follow-up is provided so that psychosocial concerns are addressed in a timely manner. An excellent way of providing this includes children teaching younger children about prosthesis management (http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/p05d4m8d).
19.6 Systemic Chemotherapy
The use of the nitrogen mustard group of chemotherapeutic agents, particularly triethylenemelamine was largely abandoned in the late 1960s [19]. However, systemic chemotherapy became important again for primary treatment of intraocular disease in the 1970s when drugs that had been shown to be effective in metastatic disease (cyclophosphamide, vincristine and doxorubicin) were also noted to have a dramatic effect on reducing the size of the intraocular lesions. It was noted though that the lesions regrew after stopping the chemotherapy treatment. However, alternatives to external beam irradiation were sought in the 1990s [40].
From 1996 [41], the first-line treatment to control Murphree IIRC Groups B, C and D retinoblastoma has been intravenous chemotherapy with different combinations, doses, schedules and durations of carboplatin, etoposide and vincristine (CEV) followed by focal therapy with cryotherapy or laser, applied to consolidate chemotherapy responses [42] and to destroy any recurrent tumour [41, 43]. CEV is generally given every 3 weeks through a central venous line. Intravenous chemotherapy alone eradicates the retinoblastoma completely and regular, frequent examinations under anaesthesia are necessary to observe for relapses or recurrences following completion of chemotherapy treatment [44, 45].
19.7 Focal Therapy
Focal therapy is the local application of treatment to the eye under direct visualization i.e.: laser, cryotherapy or plaque. It has become the primary treatment for IIRC Group A eyes and is also used to consolidate responses of IIRC Group B, C and D eyes following intravenous or intra-ophthalmic arterial chemotherapy.
19.7.1 Laser
In Germany in the 1950s, Gerd Meyer-Schwickerath developed photocoagulation using a xenon arc beam [17]. It was noted that this could be used for small retinoblastoma tumours (1–4 mm in diameter) and it was called light coagulation. It was also used to treat recurrences following plaque or EBRT during this time [17].
Its use continued through the following decades and currently still plays an important role in treatment of IIRC Group A and B eyes and to those tumours that have been initially shrunk by chemotherapy. As with many treatments for retinoblastoma, the evidence for laser in patients having chemotherapy is not robust [42] yet it is standard treatment for many centres. Transpupillary thermotherapy involves directing 810 nm diode laser through the dilated pupil to heat the tumour for 3–5 min per spot. Photocoagulation therapies with 532 nm, 810 nm or continuous-wave 1064 nm laser beams are directly applied by multiple short burns. The power is gradually increased until the tumour is coagulated and grey to white.
19.7.2 Cryotherapy
Cryotherapy was introduced by Harvey Lincoff et al. in the 1960s [18] and became an important adjunct in the treatment of peripheral or anteriorly-located small retinoblastomas [17]. It can be used for more posterior tumours where central visual damage will not result. Cryotherapy involves freezing the tumour through the sclera with a nitrous oxide probe. The tumour cells die during the thawing stage and therefore a full 1 min interval between each freeze cycle is important. A triple-freeze thaw technique is used.
In general, focal therapies are repeated 2–3 weekly until the tumour is completely atrophic.
Whilst a flat scar can be easily achieved using cryotherapy, repetitive laser sessions are necessary to create a scar after chemotherapy and laser (dependent on the size of the original tumour). As a result it has been advocated that certain phenotypes that do not flatten with post chemotherapy laser (e.g. cavitary retinoblastoma) do not require repetitive laser after chemotherapy [46].
19.7.3 Radioactive Plaque Therapy
Stallards’ collaboration with Innes in 1964 led to the development of Cobalt-60 applications of varying size which could deliver a dose of 4000 rads to the apex of the tumour in 7 days at St Bartholomew’s Hospital, London [19]. This was the beginning of modern-day brachytherapy and plaque therapy later began in the United States in 1969.
Episcleral radioactive plaques such as the iodine or the ruthenium plaque have become another form of focal therapy option. Plaque focal radiation is effective at treating single recurrences after chemotherapy or EBRT had failed. In some instances, where a single tumour of less than 13 mm in diameter exists, not adjacent to the optic disk or macula, it may be treated with a plaque as a primary treatment. Its use has recently declined as it is recognized that it may result in haemorrhages and retinal detachment if used prior to intra-ophthalmic arterial chemotherapy [47].
19.8 Intra-Ophthalmic Artery Catheterization (IAC)
Intra-arterial catheterization has been used for eye salvage therapy in Japan since the 1990s using a balloon to block the carotid artery and direct chemotherapy flow to the ophthalmic artery. In 2006, Abramson and colleagues modified this technique to achieve a more selective delivery to the eye via catheterization of the ophthalmic artery (intra-ophthalmic artery chemotherapy). Reported results were encouraging with high eye salvage rates [47,48,50]. Indications for IAC use soon expanded to include primary treatment. One study demonstrated overall globe salvage was 74% when IAC was used as first-line treatment and 67% when used as second-line treatment [50]. Additional chemotherapeutic agents were added later including topotecan and carboplatin.
The early adopters of this treatment may have given this treatment to group E eyes with a 50% risk of high risk features and as a result children may have died. Therefore, it is not universally adopted [51]. Another concern is vision (see below) when used for non-macula tumours.
19.9 Widespread Use of Intravitreal Chemotherapy
Historically, one of the most difficult features to control in the treatment of retinoblastoma was that of vitreous seeding, and it was one of the main causes of failure of primary treatment [52]. Again intravitreal chemotherapy was performed for decades in Japan before a safety enhanced method was introduced by Munier et al. in 2012 [53]. Following the use of this methodology, it has been acceptable to virtual all units.
Encouraging results have been emerging over the last 3 years [53, 54]. Vitreous seed median time regression has been reported at 0.6, 1.7 and 7.7 months for dust, spheres and cloud seeds respectively. The median number of injections required to reach regression was 3, 5 and 8 injections for the respective seed groups [55, 56]. Metastatic spread has been shown in a systematic review to be a rare occurrence [57]. Topotecan is another agent recently being used for recurrent seeds [58].
19.10 The Battle for Group D Eyes
Virtually all units will salvage Groups A, B and C eyes and enucleate Group E eyes with certain phenotypic characteristics. Controversies arise for Group D eyes with some advocating enucleation in all unilateral cases and some advising salvage at all times. Unfortunately, there is no consensus on the definition of a Group D eye (as discussed above) and this makes comparison between different centres difficult.
19.10.1 Discussion with Parents
The discussion with parents is essential. Generally, parents would like to save the eye if it is safe to do so. Uncommonly parents may be keen for enucleation, e.g. a recent relative has died from chemotherapy for a non-retinoblastoma cancer and they would like to minimize the use of chemotherapy. Parents need to be aware of the risk of enucleation after the attempt to salvage, visual potential and the treatment burden in terms of number of examinations under anaesthesia.
In London, the success rate for salvage for Group D eyes is 63% with 55 months median follow-up and no children receiving first line IAC nor suffering metastases [59]. Children who undergo enucleation have three times fewer EUAs compared to those who have salvage treatment [60]. This is important information as parents are concerned about the risk of multiple anaesthetics on their children particularly neurodevelopment [61]. Unfortunately, even if enucleation was to take place and adverse histopathology identified with appropriate adjuvant chemotherapy, there is still a risk of metastases of up to 4% [13, 62].
19.10.2 Type of Treatment: Systemic vs Intra-Ophthalmic Arterial Chemotherapy
13% of Group D eyes [27] are associated with high risk features [63]. Interestingly vitreous seeding appears to be a good sign for the avoidance of high risk features in the 10 of 62 eyes exhibiting this feature. All patients were treated with systemic chemotherapy and none developed metastases. IAC may also be used to treat Group D eyes but metastases have been noted in 3% (3/103) [64]. None of the children who had metastases died.
Our approach is to advocate first line IAC for children with group D eyes and vitreous seeding and to use systemic chemotherapy for Group D eyes without vitreous seeding.
19.11 The Role of Vision
With more eyes being saved, the retinoblastoma specialist must now also consider long-term visual acuity when choosing therapies and counselling families. It has been shown that up to 58% of eyes maintain vision of better than 6/12 (20/40) [65, 66] when they are old enough to perform Snellen visual acuities. However, the reports relate to eyes independently and it is important to be aware that early support for visually impaired infants from any cause will provide life-long benefits [67]. As a result a delay in assessing vision in infants and sending to the appropriate visual rehabilitative service can have far reaching effects. Therefore, it is essential that vision is assessed in pre-verbal children using appropriate paediatric ophthalmological tests.
Visual potential is an important consideration in the discussion with the family regarding enucleation of an eye or attempts at salvage. With particular relevance for Group D eyes, half had better vision than 6/60 (20/200) and 7 of 32 (22%) had better than 6/12 (20/40) vision [68].
It is also relevant for new treatments. Rather than wait until young children being treated are old enough to perform tests suited for adults, it is important to identify complications early and address the causes. This means the assessment of pre-verbal children by appropriate tests and the use of visual evoked potentials. Retinoblastoma units were initially tentative in their use of IAC due to complications including choroidal ischaemia and visual loss [47]. Vision in previously seeing eyes was initially lost in 42% of patients [69] which was thought to be due to the learning curve for interventional neuro-radiologists. However, Reddy et al. [70] showed that patients with similar catheterization complications yet a reduced dose of melphalan did not lose vision.
19.11.1 Patient Centred Approach
The vast majority of patients are under 5 years of age and therefore a patient centred approach needs to consider that these are children not adults. Until recently there was little consideration of the non-medical concerns of children with retinoblastoma. However, there is now a desire to address psychological issues, particularly regarding the parents [71] and make the multiple EUAs that they have to endure as painless as possible. Families benefit from the presence of a patient support group representative (e.g. The Childhood Eye Cancer Trust in the UK) at diagnosis and subsequent visits to address non-medical concerns but also to raise questions that they feel they cannot ask the health care professionals. As a result, it is important for the psychologist and patient support group representative to be part of the multi-disciplinary meeting so that psychosocial concerns can be addressed. This integrated team approach can optimize patient care.
19.12 Conclusion
Over the last 60 years, the management of retinoblastoma has been revolutionized with the advent of novel therapeutic modalities, diagnostic imaging, improved chemotherapeutic agents and approach to children. The gradual shift from EBRT to systemic chemotherapy has improved survival and also helped with greater rates of eye salvage. The survival rate of retinoblastoma in high resource countries was 90% in 1997 and that rate is now over 95% in 2017. The adaptation of intra-ophthalmic artery chemotherapy and intravitreal chemotherapy has also improved eye salvage rates and the retention of vision.
Significant challenges remain however. Retinoblastoma in low-income countries is associated with low patient survival of approximately 30–40%. This is a statistic that needs to be improved. The creation of toolkits (Fig. 19.2) and international collaborations can and will improve survival.
References
Seregard S, Lundell G, Svedberg H, Kivela T. Incidence of retinoblastoma from 1958 to 1998 in northern Europe: advantages of birth cohort analysis. Ophthalmology. 2004;11:1228–32.
Kivela T. The epidemiological challenge of the most frequent eye cancer: retinoblastoma, an issue of birth and death. Br J Ophthalmol. 2009;93:1129–31.
Broaddus E, Topham A, Singh AD. Incidence of retinoblastoma in the USA: 1975-2004. Br J Ophthalmol. 2009;93:21–3.
Ochicha O, et al. Pediatric malignancies in Kano, Northern Nigeria. World J Pediatr. 2012;8(3):215–9.
Waddell KM, et al. Improving survival of retinoblastoma in Uganada. Br J Ophthalmol. 2015;99:937–42.
Owoeye JF, et al. Retinoblastoma—a clinic-pathological study in Ilorin, Nigeria. Afr J Health Sci. 2006;13(1–2):117–23.
Barr RD. “Delays” in diagnosis: a misleading concept, yet providing opportunities for advancing clinical care. J Pediatr Hematol Oncol. 2014;36(3):169–72.
Ribeiro KC, Antoneli CB. Trends in eye cancer mortality among children in Brazil, 1980-2002. Pediatr Blood Cancer. 2007;48:296–305.
Posner, et al. Lag time for retinoblastoma in the UK revisited: a retrospective analysis. BMJ Open. 2017;7:e015625. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2016-015625.
Goddard AG, Kingston JE, Hungerford JL. Delay in diagnosis of retinoblastoma: risk factors and treatment outcome. Br J Ophthalmol. 1999;83:1320–3.
Butros LJ, et al. Delayed diagnosis of retinoblastoma: analysis of degree, cause and potential consequences. Pediatrics. 2002;109:E45.
Khan AO, Al-Mesfer S. Lack of efficacy of dilated screening for retinoblastoma. J Pediatr Ophthalmol Strabismus. 2005;42:205–10.
Kaliki S, Srinivasan V, Gupta A, et al. Clinical feature predictive of high-risk retinoblastoma in 403 Asian Indian patients: a case-control study. Ophthalmology. 2015;122:1165–72.
Abramson DH, et al. Intra-arterial chemotherapy (ophthalmic artery chemosurgery) for Group D retinoblastoma. PLoS One. 2016;11(1):e0146582.
Honavar SG, Singh AD. Management of advanced retinoblastoma. Ophthalmol Clin N Am. 2005;18:65–73.
Plowman PN, Pizer B, Kingston JE. Pineal parenchymal tumours: II. On the aggressive behavior of pinealoblastoma in patients with an inherited mutation of the RB1 gene. Clin Oncol (R Coll Radiol). 2004;16(4):244–7.
Bedford MA, Bedotto C, MacFaul PA. Retinoblastoma. A study of 139 cases. Br J Ophthalmol. 1971;55:19–27.
Albert DM. Historic review of retinoblastoma. Ophthalmology. 1987;94:654–62.
Abramson DH. Retinoblastoma in the 20th century: past success and future challenges. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2005;46:2684–91.
Kupfer C. Retinoblastoma treated with intravenous nitrogen mustard. Am J Ophthalmol. 1953;36:1721–3.
Forrest AW. Tumours following radiation about the eye. Trans Am Acad Ophthalmol Otolaryngol. 1961;65:694–717.
Abramson DH, Ellsworth RM, Zimmerman LE. Non-ocular cancer in retinoblastoma survivors. Trans Am Acad Ophthalmol Otolaryngol. 1976;81:454–7.
Wong FL, Boice JD, Abramson DH, et al. Cancer incidence after retinoblastoma radiation dose and sarcoma risk. JAMA. 1997;278:1262–7.
MacCarthy A, et al. Second and subsequent tumours among 1927 retinoblastoma patients diagnosed in Britain 1951-2004. Br J Cancer. 2013;108:2455–63.
Fletcher O, et al. Lifetime risks of common cancers among retinoblastoma survivors. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2004;96:357–63.
Abramson DH, Frank CM. Second non-ocular tumors in survivors of bilateral retinoblastoma: a possible age effect on radiation-related risk. Ophthalmology. 1998;105:573–9.
Murphree AL. Intraocular retinoblastoma: the case for a new group classification. Ophthalmol Clin N Am. 2005;18:41–53.
Shields CL, et al. The international classification of retinoblastoma predicts chemoreduction success. Ophthalmology. 2006;113:2276–80.
Just diagnosed: staging. Children’s Oncology Group Website. 2011. https://www.childrensoncologygroup.org/index.php/newlydiagnosedwithretinoblastoma.
Scelfo C, et al. An international survey of classification and treatment choices for Group D retinoblastoma. Int J Ophthalmol. 2017;10(6):961–7.
Finger PT, et al. AJCC cancer staging manual. New York: Springer; 2010. p. 561–8.
Mallipatna AC, Gallie BL, Che’vez-Barrios P, et al. Retinoblastoma. In: Amin MB, Edge SB, Greene F, et al., editors. AJCC cancer staging manual. 8th ed. New York: Springer; 2017. p. 819–31.
Knudson AG. Mutation and cancer: statistical study of retinoblastoma. Proc Natl Acad Sci. 1971;68:820–3.
Price EA, Price K, Kolkiewicz K, et al. Spectrum of RB1 mutations identified in 403 retinoblastoma petients. J Med Genet. 2014;51:208–14.
Munier FL, Balmer A, Van Melle G, Gailloud C. Radial asymmetry in the topography of retinoblastoma. Clues to the cell of origin. Ophthalmic Genet. 1994;15:101–6.
De Potter P, Shields CL, Shields JA, et al. Use of the hydroxyapatite ocular implant in the pediatric population. Arch Ophthalmol. 1994;112:208–12.
Kaste SC, Chang G, Fontanesi J, et al. Orbital development in the long-term survivors of retinoblastoma. J Clin Oncol. 1997;15:1183–9.
Yadava U, Sachdeva P, Arora V. Myoconjunctival enucleation for enhanced implant motility. Result of a randomized prospective study. Indian J Ophthalmol. 2004;52:221–6.
Shome D, Honavar SG, Raizada K, Raizada D. Implant and prosthesis movement after enucleation: a randomized controlled trial. Ophthalmology. 2010;117:1638–44.
Ferris FL 3rd, Chew EY. A new era for the treatment of retinoblastoma. Arch Ophthalmol. 1996;114:1412.
Kingston JE, Hungerford JL, Madreperla JA, Plowman PN. Results of combined chemotherapy and radiotherapy for advanced intraocular retinoblastoma. Arch Ophthalmol. 1996;114(11):1339–43.
Fabian ID, et al. Focal laser treatment in addition to chemotherapy for retinoblastoma. Cochrane Database of Syst Rev. 2017;6:CD012366.
Gallie BL, et al. Chemotherapy with focal therapy can cure intraocular retinoblastoma without radiotherapy. Arch Ophthalmol. 1996;114:1321–8.
Gombos DS, Kelly A, Coen PG, Kingston JE, Hungerford JL. Retinoblastoma treated with primary chemotherapy alone: the significance of tumour size, location and age. Br J Ophthalmol. 2002;86:80–3.
Lee V, et al. Globe conserving treatment of the only eye in bilateral retinoblastoma. Br J Ophthalmol. 2003;87:1374–80.
Chaudhry S, Onadin Z, Sagoo MS, Reddy MA. The recognition of cavitary retinoblastoma tumours: Implications for management and genetic analysis. Retina. 2018;38:782–7. https://doi.org/10.1097/IAE.0000000000001597.
Muen WJ, et al. Efficacy and complications of super-selective intra-ophthalmic artery melphalan for the treatment of refractory retinoblastoma. Ophthalmology. 2012;119(3):611–6.
Berry JL, et al. Long-term outcomes of Group D eyes in bilateral retinoblastoma patients treated with chemoreduction and low-dose IMRT salvage. Pediatr Blood Cancer. 2013;60:688–93.
Gobin YP, Dunkel IJ, Marr BP, Brodie SE, Abramson DH. Intra-arterial chemotherapy for the management of retinoblastoma: four-year experience. Arch Ophthalmol. 2011;129:732–7.
Susuki S, Yamane T, Mohri M, Kaneko A. Selective ophthalmic arterial injection therapy for intraocular retinoblastoma: the long-term prognosis. Ophthalmology. 2011;118:2081–7.
Yousef YA, Soliman SE, Astudillo PP, et al. Intra-arterial chemotherapy for retinoblastoma: a systemic review. JAMA Ophthalmol. 2016;134:584–91. https://doi.org/10.1001/jamaophthalmol.2016.0244.
Manjandavida FP, Honavar SG, Reddy VA, Khanna R. Management and outcome of retinoblastoma with vitreous seeds. Ophthalmology. 2014;121:517–24.
Munier FL, et al. Intravitreal chemotherapy for vitreous disease in retinoblastoma revisited: from prohibition to conditional indications. Br J Ophthalmol. 2012;96:1078–83.
Shields CL, et al. Intravitreal melphalan for persistent or recurrent retinoblastoma vitreous seeds: preliminary results. JAMA Ophthalmol. 2014;132:319–25.
Francis JH, et al. The classification of vitreous seeds in retinoblastoma and response to intravitreal melphalan. Ophthalmology. 2015;122:1173–9.
Munier FL. Classification and management of seeds in retinoblastoma. Ellsworth Lecture Ghent August 24th 2013. Ophthalmic Genet. 2014;35:193–207.
Smith SJ, Smith BD. Evaluating the risk of extraocular tumour spread following intravitreal injection therapy for retinoblastoma: a systematic review. Br J Ophthalmol. 2013;97(10):1231–6.
Rao R, Honavar SG, Sharma V, Reddy VA. Intravitreal toptecan in the management of refractory and recurrent vitreous seeds in retinoblastoma. Br J Ophthalmol. 2017;102:490–5. https://doi.org/10.1136/bjophthalmol-2017-310641.
Fabian ID, et al. Primary intravenous chemotherapy for Group D retinoblastoma: a 13 year retrospective analysis. Br J Ophthalmol. 2017;101:82–8.
Fabian ID, et al. Primary Enucleation for Group D retinoblastoma in the era of systemic and targeted chemotherapy: the price of retaining and eye. Br J Ophthalmol. 2017;0:1–5. https://doi.org/10.1136/bjophthalmol-2017-310624.
Loepke AW, Soriano SG. An assessment of the effects of general anesthetics on developing brain structure and neurocognitive function. Anesth Analg. 2008;106:1681–707.
Honavar SG, Singh AD, Shields CL, et al. Postenucleation adjuvant therapy in high-risk retinoblastoma. Arch Ophthalmol. 2002;120(7):923–31.
Fabian ID, et al. High-risk histopathology features in primary and secondary enucleated international intraocular retinoblastoma classification Group D eyes. Ophthalmology. 2017;124:851–8.
Abramson DH, Daniels AB, Marr BP, Francis JH, Brodie SE, Dunkel IJ, et al. Intra-arterial chemotherapy (ophthalmic artery chemosurgery) for Group D retinoblastoma. PLoS One. 2016;11(1):e0146582.
Narang, et al. Predictors of long-term visual outcome after chemoreduction for management of intraocular retinoblastoma. Clin Exp Ophthalmol. 2012;40(7):736–42.
Hall LS, Ceisler E, Abramson DH. Visual outcomes in children with bilateral retinoblastoma. J AAPOS. 1999;3(3):138–42.
Dale N, et al. Developmental outcome, including setback, in young children with severe visual impairment. Dev Med Child Neurol. 2002;44(9):613–22.
Fabian ID, et al. Long-term visual acuity, strabismus and nystagmus outcomes following multimodality treatment in Group D retinoblastoma eyes. Am J Ophthalmol. 2017;179:137–44.
Tsimpida M, et al. Visual outcomes following intra-ophthalmic artery melphalan for patients with refractory retinoblastoma and age appropriate vision. Br J Ophthalmol. 2013;97:1464–70.
Reddy MA, et al. Reduction of severe visual loss and complications following intra-arterial chemotherapy (IAC) for refractory retinoblastoma. BJO. 2017;101(12):1704–8. https://doi.org/10.1136/bjophthalmol-2017-310294.
Hamama-Raz Y, Rot I, Buchbinder E. The coping experience of parents of a child with retinoblastoma- malignant eye cancer. J Psychosoc Oncol. 2012;30(1):21–40.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2020 Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd.
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Hartnett, C., Reddy, M.A. (2020). Retinoblastoma: A Journey of 60 Years. In: Khetan, V. (eds) Intraocular Tumors. Springer, Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-15-0395-5_19
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-15-0395-5_19
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Singapore
Print ISBN: 978-981-15-0394-8
Online ISBN: 978-981-15-0395-5
eBook Packages: MedicineMedicine (R0)