ABSTRACT: Central nervous system (CNS) cancers are the second most frequent malignancy (and the most common solid tumor) in childhood. In recent years, significant advances in surgery, radiotherapy, and chemotherapy have improved survival in children with these tumors. However, a significant proportion of patients with CNS tumors suffer progressive disease despite such treatment. Advances in the understanding of the nature of the blood-brain/tumor barrier, chemotherapy resistance, tumor biology, and the role of angiogenesis in tumor progression and metastases have led to the advent of newer therapeutic strategies that circumvent these obstacles or target specific receptors that control signal transduction and/or angiogenesis in tumor cells. Ongoing clinical trials will determine whether these novel treatment modalities will improve outcomes for children with brain tumors.
Each year in the United States, an estimated 11,000 children between the ages of 0 and 15 years are diagnosed with cancer, of which 2,200 suffer from invasive central nervous system (CNS) tumors.[ 1,2] Brain tumors are second only in frequency to acute lymphoblastic leukemia in children. The incidence of CNS tumors in children under age 20 years in this country is 3 to 4 cases per 100,000/year. Just over half of all pediatric brain tumors (52%) are low-grade cerebellar astrocytomas, followed by primitive neuroectodermal tumors (PNETs), other gliomas (21%), and ependymomas (9%), as illustrated in Figure 1. The incidence of low-grade astrocytomas, PNETs, and ependymomas is inversely proportional to age, whereas that of malignant glioma is relatively constant between birth and age 20 years. The incidence of CNS tumors in children has been increasing in recent years, which is partlyattributed to the advent of better imaging technology including magnetic resonance imaging (MRI).
The risk factors for the development of brain tumors in children are mostly unknown. Less than 10% of CNS malignancies are related to distinct genetic syndromes (Table 1). While radiation exposure is a recognized risk factor for brain tumors, the role of other environmental toxins is relatively unclear. Although the annual mortality rate of pediatric cancers has steadily decreased over the past 2 decades, the proportion of deaths from CNS tumors in the same population has increased from 18% to 30%. These figures clearly highlight the less than optimal outcomes in children with CNS malignancies, compared to other pediatric tumors.
Factors That Contribute to Treatment Failure
While surgery and radiotherapy have long been established as treatment modalities for patients with brain tumors, the role of chemotherapy in this population is far from clear. Nevertheless, chemotherapy has continued to play a significant part in the therapeutic armamentarium against these tumors and may contribute to disease stabilization and cure in some patients. Concurrently, it has also become obvious that a significant proportion of patients with brain tumors suffer progressive disease during or following chemotherapy. The causes for such therapeutic failure have been extensively explored and reported. Lack of response to chemotherapy has invariably been due to the presence of the blood-brain barrier and drug resistance.[5-7]
The refractoriness of brain tumors to chemotherapy stems from a multitude of factors that can be broadly classified as those caused by apparent or inherent cellular resistance.[5,8] Apparent drug resistance to a chemotherapeutic agent is usually due to the presence of the blood-brain barrier,[6,7] or the cell kinetics of a large tumor that has a smaller growth fraction (larger number of cells in the G0 fraction of the cell cycle) and hypoxic areas that limit the effect of chemotherapy. Inherent drug resistance can be either de novo or acquired. Mechanisms of resistance to chemotherapeutic agents that are typically used in brain tumors are listed in Table 2.
Blood-Brain Barrier and Its Disruption
The blood-brain barrier is composed of endothelium and covers almost the entire capillary network supplying the brain. The endothelium in the blood-brain barrier is nonfenestrated and has high-resistance tight junctions. Additional components of the blood-brain barrier include the astroglial processes, basement membrane, and pericytes (Figure 2).[4,5]
The proliferation and invasion of tumor cells in the brain generally results in disruption of the brain microvasculature, breach of the blood-brain barrier, and development of vasogenic edema, even in small tumors. The interstitial edema resulting from this increased capillary permeability can in turn influence cerebral blood flow, brain metabolism, and intracranial pressure. Tumor cells also secrete proangiogenic factors including basic fibroblast growth factor (b-FGF) and vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF), resulting in the influx of new blood vessels into the tumor-a process called tumor angiogenesis.[9,10] These tumor capillaries are differentfrom the capillaries of the normal brain in that they are hyperplastic, have frequent fenestrations, lax intercellular junctions, and less well-developed glial processes abutting on the abluminal surface of the endothelium.
Thus, the continuing proliferation of tumor cells in the brain actually results in disruption of the blood-brain barrier. However, it is possible that such disruption can vary between tumors and even within a given tumor. Also, it is likely that small tumors (eg, the infiltrative edge of a malignant glioma) might have a relatively intact blood-brain barrier that may lead to chemotherapy failure.
Blood-Brain Barrier and Chemotherapeutic Efficacy
In the ongoing search for more effective chemotherapeutic agents for patients with brain tumors, there is a general bias toward choosing lipophilic agents with a high octanol-water partition coefficient (a measure of the lipidsolubility of the drug) to enable rapid transfer of these drugs from the blood to the tumor cells and overcome the blood-brain barrier. However, as indicated above, it appears that the bloodbrain barrier might be disrupted even in small tumors. In addition, studies have shown that the average concentration of chemotherapeutic agents in brain tumors does not significantly differ from their extracranial counterparts, although the homogeneity of drug distribution varies both within and between brain tumor deposits.[4,7]
While lipophilic drugs do penetrate the blood-brain barrier better, this does not necessarily translate into equal efficacy in all patients with brain tumors; there are clearly other reasons for chemotherapy failure in such patients.[4,6] Nevertheless, it is possible that disruption of the blood-brain barrier may not be uniform in brain tumors, and areas of the brain surrounding the main tumor may have a relatively intact blood-brain barrier. This concept has led to an increasing trend toward devising methods thatfurther disrupt the blood-tumor barrier to facilitate entry of chemotherapy into brain tumors. Such increased disruption could potentially increase drug concentration in areas where the barrier has not been completely disrupted by the tumor. Moreover, disrupting the blood-brain barrier might help chemotherapy reach areas of adjacent tumor invasion of the normal brain, wherein the barrier may be relatively intact.[7,11]
Angiogenesis and Brain Tumors
In 1971, Dr. Judah Folkman proposed that continued tumor growth after the initial tumor take (up to 2 mm3) is dependent on the growth of blood vessels into the tumor. The influx of new capillaries into the tumor was termed "angiogenesis." This hypothesis has since led to many studies that have resulted in the discovery of several proangiogenesis and antiangiogenesis molecules in the laboratory.[ 10,12,13] The principal proangiogenesis molecules include alpha and beta fibroblast growth factors (b-FGF), VEGF, and angiogenin.[ 10,13] The principal negative regulators of new capillary growth are thrombospondin and angiostatin.
Tumor growth is generally dependent on a balance of the positive and negative regulators of angiogenesis. These factors can be produced by tumor cells, mobilized from the extracellular matrix, or released by macrophages attracted to the tumor. The angiogenic process itself leads not only to further tumor growth, but also to tumor invasion and, ultimately, metastasis to other body sites.[9,10]
A feature of many brain tumors is the presence of neovascularization. Immunohistochemical studies have demonstrated the presence of angiogenic factors including b-FGF in high concentrations in brain tumors. This peptide stimulates vascular endothelial cell proliferation, and such cells either produce or possess receptors for b-FGF. Li et al have detected b-FGF in the cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) in 62% of children with brain tumors but in none of a group of controls. The CSF specimens with elevated b-FGF increased the DNA synthesis of capillary endothelial cells in vitro, and such activity was blocked by neutralizing antibody to b-FGF. The concentration of b-FGF in CSF was also correlated with density of microvessels in histologic sections of the brain tumors, and the microvessel density was negatively correlated with prognosis. Although b-FGF was the only proangiogenic factor studied in this report, it is possible that other angiogenic peptides could mediate the growth of brain tumors.
The demonstration of the role of angiogenesis in sustaining tumor growth has led to the exploration of inhibitors of angiogenesis as a means of curtailing tumor progression. Elegant preclinical studies in mouse tumor xenograft models have shown dramatic tumor regression and cure of animals bearing tumors. Currently, several phase I studies of novel angiogenesis inhibitors in patients with a wide variety of tumors are under way both in the United States and Europe, and should help our understanding of the toxicity, dose schedules, and possibly the usefulness of these agents in these malignancies.
1. Gurney JG, Smith MA, Bunin GR: CNS
and miscellaneous intracranial and intraspinal
neoplasms, in Ries LAG, Sith MA, Gurne yJG,
et al (eds): Cancer Incidence and Survival
among Children and Adolescents: United States
SEER Program 1975-1995, National Cancer
Institute, SEER Program, pp 51-63. Bethesda,
Md, NIH Pub No. 99-4649, 1999.
2. Bleyer WA: Epidemiologic impact of children
with brain tumors. Childs Nerv Syst
3. Smith MA, Freidlin B, Ries LA, et al:
Trends in reported incidence of primary malignant
brain tumors in children in the United
States. J Natl Cancer Inst 90:1269-1277, 1998.
4. Gururangan S, Friedman HS: Innovations
in design and delivery of chemotherapy for
brain tumors. Neuroimaging Clin N Am 12:583-
5. Bredel M: Anticancer drug resistance in
primary human brain tumors. Brain Res Brain
Res Rev 35:161-204, 2001.
6. Groothuis DR: The blood-brain and bloodtumor
barriers: A review of strategies for increasing
drug delivery. Neurooncol 2:45-59, 2000.
7. Stewart DJ: A critique of the role of the
blood-brain barrier in the chemotherapy of human
brain tumors. J Neurooncol 20:121-139,
8. Scotto KW, Bertino JR: Chemotherapy
susceptibility and resistance, in Mendelsohn J,
Howley PM, Israel MA, et al (eds): The Molecular
Basis of Cancer, pp 387-400. Philadelphia,
WB Saunders Co, 2001.
9. Folkman J: Angiogenesis in cancer, vascular,
rheumatoid and other disease. Nat Med
10. Pluda JM: Tumor-associated angiogenesis:
mechanisms, clinical implications, and therapeutic
strategies. Semin Oncol 24:203-218, 1997.
11. Englehard HH, Groothuis DG: The
blood-brain barrier: Structure, function, and
response to neoplasia, in Berger MS, Wilson
CB (eds): The Gliomas, pp 115-120. Philadelphia,
WB Saunders Co, 1999.
12. Folkman J: Tumor angiogenesis: Therapeutic
implications. N Engl J Med 285:1182-
13. Kerbel R, Folkman J: Clinical translation
of angiogenesis inhibitors. Nat Rev Cancer
14. Folkman J: Angiogenesis in cancer, vascular,
rheumatoid and other disease. Nat Med
15. Li VW, Folkerth RD, Watanabe H, et al:
Microvessel count and cerebrospinal fluid basic
fibroblast growth factor in children with
brain tumours. Lancet 344:82-86, 1994.
16. Kerbel RS, Viloria-Petit A, Klement G,
et al: “Accidental” anti-angiogenic drugs, antioncogene
directed signal transduction inhibitors
and conventional chemotherapeutic agents as
examples. Eur J Cancer 36:1248-1257, 2000.
17. Watson GA, Kadota RP, Wisoff JH:
Multidisciplinary management of pediatric
low-grade gliomas. Semin Radiat Oncol
18. Reed N, Gutmann DH: Tumorigenesis
in neurofibromatosis: New insights and potential
therapies. Trends Mol Med 7:157-162, 2001.
19. Gururangan S, Cavazos CM, Ashley D,
et al: Phase II study of carboplatin in children
with progressive low-grade gliomas. J Clin
Oncol 20:2951-2958, 2002.
20. Friedman HS, Krischer JP, Burger P, et
al: Treatment of children with progressive or
recurrent brain tumors with carboplatin or
iproplatin: A Pediatric Oncology Group randomized
phase II study. J Clin Oncol 10:249-
21. Packer RJ, Ater J, Allen J, et al:
Carboplatin and vincristine chemotherapy for
children with newly diagnosed progressive lowgrade
gliomas. J Neurosurg 86:747-754, 1997.
22. Prados MD, Edwards MS, Rabbitt J, et al:
Treatment of pediatric low-grade gliomas with
a nitrosourea-based multiagent chemotherapy
regimen. J Neurooncol 32:235-241, 1997.
23. Quinn JA, Reardon DA, Friedman AH,
et al: Phase II trial of temozolomide in patients
with progressive low-grade glioma. J Clin
Oncol 21:646-651, 2003.
24. Kuo DJ, Weiner HL, Wisoff J, et al:
Temozolomide is active in childhood, progressive,
unresectable, low-grade gliomas. J Pediatr
Hematol Oncol 25:372-378, 2003.
25. Rorke LB: The cerebellar medulloblastoma
and its relationship to primitive neuroectodermal
tumors. J Neuropathol Exp Neurol
26. Janss AJ, Yachnis AT, Silber JH, et al:
Glial differentiation predicts poor clinical outcome
in primitive neuroectodermal brain tumors.
Ann Neurol 39:481-489, 1996.
27. Grotzer MA, Hogarty MD, Janss AJ, et
al: MYC messenger RNA expression predicts
survival outcome in childhood primitive neuroectodermal
Cancer Res 7:2425-2433, 2001.
28. Grotzer MA, Janss AJ, Phillips PC, et
al: Neurotrophin receptor TrkC predicts good
clinical outcome in medulloblastoma and other
primitive neuroectodermal brain tumors. Klin
Padiatr 212:196-199, 2000.
29. Pomeroy SL, Tamayo P, Gaasenbeek M,
et al: Prediction of central nervous system embryonal
tumour outcome based on gene expression.
Nature 415:436-442, 2002.
30. Wechsler-Reya R, Scott MP: The developmental
biology of brain tumors. Annu Rev
Neurosci 24:385-428, 2001.
31. Wetmore C, Eberhart DE, Curran T: The
normal patched allele is expressed in medulloblastomas
from mice with heterozygous germline
mutation of patched. Cancer Res 60:2239-
32. Wetmore C, Eberhart DE, Curran T: Loss
of p53 but not ARF accelerates medulloblastoma
in mice heterozygous for patched. Cancer
Res 61:513-516, 2001.
33. McLendon RE, Enterline DS, Tien RD,
et al: Tumors of central neuroepithelial origin,
in Bigner DD, McLendon RE, Bruner JM (eds):
Russell & Rubinstein’s Pathology of Tumors of
the Nervous System, pp 308-571. London,
34. Giangaspero F, Bigner SH, Kleihues P,
et al: Medulloblastoma, in Kleihues P, Cavenee
WK (eds): Pathology & Genetics Tumors of the
Nervous System, pp 129-137. Lyon, IARC
35. Giangaspero F, Perilongo G, Fondelli
MP, et al: Medulloblastoma with extensive
nodularity: A variant with favorable prognosis.
J Neurosurg 91:971-977, 1999.
36. Leonard JR, Cai DX, Rivet JR, et al: Large
cell/anaplastic medulloblastomas and
medullomyoblastomas: Clinicopathological and
genetic features. J Neurosurg 95:82-88, 2001.
37. Packer RJ, Cogen P, Vezina G, et al:Medulloblastoma: Clinical and biologic aspects.
Neurooncol 1:232-250, 1999.
38. Freeman CR, Taylor RE, Kortmann RD,
et al: Radiotherapy for medulloblastoma in children:
A perspective on current international
clinical research efforts. Med Pediatr Oncol
39. Duffner PK, Horowitz ME, Krischer JP,
et al: Postoperative chemotherapy and delayed
radiation in children less than three years of age
with malignant brain tumors. N Engl J Med
40. Walter AW, Mulhern RK, Gajjar A, et
al: Survival and neurodevelopmental outcome
of young children with medulloblastoma at St
Jude Children’s Research Hospital. J Clin
Oncol 17:3720-3728, 1999.
41. Mason WP, Grovas A, Halpern S, et al:
Intensive chemotherapy and bone marrow rescue
for young children with newly diagnosed
malignant brain tumors. J Clin Oncol 16:210-
42. Merchant TE, Happersett L, Finlay JL,
et al: Preliminary results of conformal radiation
therapy for medulloblastoma. Neurooncol
43. Wolden SL, Dunkel IJ, Souweidane MM,
et al: Patterns of failure using a conformal radiation
therapy tumor bed boost for medulloblastoma.
J Clin Oncol 21:3079-3083, 2003.
44. Dunkel IJ, Boyett JM, Yates A, et al:
High-dose carboplatin, thiotepa, and etoposide
with autologous stem-cell rescue for patients
with recurrent medulloblastoma. Children’s
Cancer Group. J Clin Oncol 16:222-228, 1998.
45. Guruangan S, Dunkel IJ, Goldman S, et
al: Myeloablative chemotherapy with autologous
bone marrow rescue in young children
with recurrent malignant brain tumors. J Clin
Oncol 16:2486-2493, 1998.
46. MacDonald TJ, Brown KM, LaFleur B,
et al: Expression profiling of medulloblastoma:
PDGFRA and the RAS/MAPK pathway as
therapeutic targets for metastatic disease. Nat
Genet 29:143-152, 2001.
47. Hallahan AR, Pritchard JI, Chandraratna
RA, et al: BMP-2 mediates retinoid-induced
apoptosis in medulloblastoma cells through a
paracrine effect. Nat Med 9:1033-1038, 2003.
48. Singh AD, Shields CL, Shields JA: New
insights into trilateral retinoblastoma. Cancer
49. Paulino AC: Trilateral retinoblastoma:
Is the location of the intracranial tumor important?
Cancer 86:135-141, 1999.
50. Jakacki RI: Pineal and nonpineal supratentorial
primitive neuroectodermal tumors.
Childs Nerv Syst 15:586-591, 1999.
51. Gururangan S, McLaughlin C, Quinn J,
et al: High-dose chemotherapy with autologous
stem-cell rescue in children and adults with
newly diagnosed pineoblastomas. J Clin Oncol
52. Strother D, Ashley D, Kellie SJ, et al:
Feasibility of four consecutive high-dose chemotherapy
cycles with stem- cell rescue for patients
with newly diagnosed medulloblastoma
or supratentorial primitive neuroectodermal tumor
after craniospinal radiotherapy: Results of
a collaborative study. J Clin Oncol 19:2696-
53. Wisoff JH, Boyett JM, Berger MS, et al:
Current neurosurgical management and the
impact of the extent of resection in the treatment
of malignant gliomas of childhood: A
report of the Children’s Cancer Group trial no.
CCG-945. J Neurosurg 89:52-59, 1998.
54. Mandell LR, Kadota R, Freeman C, et
al: There is no role for hyperfractionated radiotherapy
in the management of children with
newly diagnosed diffuse intrinsic brainstem tumors:
Results of a Pediatric Oncology Group
phase III trial comparing conventional vs
hyperfractionated radiotherapy. Int J Radiat
Oncol Biol Phys 43:959-964, 1999.
55. Reardon DA, Gajjar A, Sanford RA, et
al: Bithalamic involvement predicts poor outcome
among children with thalamic glial tumors.
Pediatr Neurosurg 29:29-35, 1998.
56. Lashford LS, Thiesse P, Jouvet A, et al:
Temozolomide in malignant gliomas of childhood:
A United Kingdom Children’s Cancer
Study Group and French Society for Pediatric
Oncology Intergroup Study. J Clin Oncol
57. Gilbert MR, Friedman HS, Kuttesch JF,
et al: A phase II study of temozolomide in patients
with newly diagnosed supratentorial
malignant glioma before radiation therapy.
Neurooncol 4:261-267, 2002.
58. Turner CD, Gururangan S, Eastwood J, et
al: Phase II study of irinotecan (CPT-11) in children
with high-risk malignant brain tumors: The
Duke experience. Neurooncol 4:102-108, 2002.
59. Brem H, Piantadosi S, Burger PC, et al:
Placebo-controlled trial of safety and efficacy
of intraoperative controlled delivery by biodegradable
polymers of chemotherapy for recurrent
gliomas. The Polymer-brain Tumor Treatment
Group. Lancet 345:1008-1012, 1995.
60. Sampson JH, Akabani G, Archer GE, et
al: Progress report of a phase I study of the
intracerebral microinfusion of a recombinant
chimeric protein composed of transforming
growth factor (TGF)-alpha and a mutated form
of the Pseudomonas exotoxin termed PE-38
(TP-38) for the treatment of malignant brain
tumors. J Neurooncol 65:27-35, 2003.
61. Kunwar S: Convection enhanced delivery
of IL13-PE38QQR for treatment of recurrent
malignant glioma: Presentation of interim
findings from ongoing phase 1 studies. Acta
Neurochir Suppl 88:105-111, 2003.
62. Dolan ME, Pegg AE: O6-benzylguanine
and its role in chemotherapy. Clin Cancer Res
63. Friedman HS, McLendon RE, Kerby T,
et al: DNA mismatch repair and O6-
alkylguanine-DNA alkyltransferase analysis and
response to Temodal in newly diagnosed malignant
glioma. J Clin Oncol 16:3851-3857, 1998.
64. Quinn JA, Dolan ME, Pegg AE, et al:
Phase II trial of BCNU plus O6-benzylguanine
for patients with recurrent or progressive malignant
glioma (abstract 251). Proc Am Soc Clin
Oncol 20:64a, 2001.
65. Rhines LD, Sampath P, Dolan ME, et al:
O6-benzylguanine potentiates the antitumor
effect of locally delivered carmustine against
an intracranial rat glioma. Cancer Res 60:6307-
66. Sampath P, Brem H: Implantable slowrelease
chemotherapeutic polymers for the
treatment of malignant brain tumors. Cancer
Control 5:130-137, 1998.
67. MacDonald TJ, Taga T, Shimada H, et al:
Preferential susceptibility of brain tumors to the
antiangiogenic effects of an alpha(v) integrin
antagonist. Neurosurgery 48:151-157, 2001.
68. Tremont-Lukats IW, Gilbert MR: Advances
in molecular therapies in patients with
brain tumors. Cancer Control 10:125-137, 2003.
69. Allen JC, Siffert J, Hukin J: Clinical
manifestations of childhood ependymoma: A
multitude of syndromes. Pediatr Neurosurg
70. Robertson PL, Zeltzer PM, Boyett JM,
et al: Survival and prognostic factors following
radiation therapy and chemotherapy for ependymomas
in children: A report of the Children’s
Cancer Group. J Neurosurg 88:695-703, 1998.
71. Duffner PK, Krischer JP, Sanford RA, et
al: Prognostic factors in infants and very young
children with intracranial ependymomas.
Pediatr Neurosurg 28:215-222, 1998.
72. Chou PM, Barquin N, Gonzalez-Crussi
F, et al: Ependymomas in children express the
multidrug resistance gene: Immunohistochemical
and molecular biologic study. Pediatr Pathol
Lab Med 16:551-561, 1996.
73. Biegel JA: Cytogenetics and molecular
genetics of childhood brain tumors. Neurooncol
74. Gilbertson RJ, Bentley L, Hernan R, et
al: ERBB receptor signaling promotes ependymoma
cell proliferation and represents a potential
novel therapeutic target for this disease. Clin
Cancer Res 8:3054-3064, 2002.
75. Carter M, Nicholson J, Ross F, et al:
Genetic abnormalities detected in ependymomas
by comparative genomic hybridisation. Br
J Cancer 86:929-939, 2002.
76. Rosenblum MK, Matsutani M, Van Meir
EG: CNS Germ cell tumors, in Kleihues P,
Cavenee WK (eds): Pathology & Genetics Tumors
of the Central Nervous System, pp 208-
214. Lyon, France, IARC Press, 2000.
77. Diez B, Balmaceda C, Matsutani M, et
al: Germ cell tumors of the CNS in children:
Recent advances in therapy. Childs Nerv Syst
78. Gregory JJ Jr, Finlay JL: Alpha-fetoprotein
and beta-human chorionic gonadotropin:
Their clinical significance as tumour markers.
Drugs 57:463-467, 1999.
79. Shibamoto Y, Takahashi M, Sasai K:
Prognosis of intracranial germinoma with
syncytiotrophoblastic giant cells treated by radiation
therapy. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys
80. Tada T, Takizawa T, Nakazato F, et al:
Treatment of intracranial nongerminomatous
germ-cell tumor by high-dose chemotherapy
and autologous stem-cell rescue. J Neurooncol
81. Greenberg ML: Chemotherapy of choroid
plexus carcinoma. Childs Nerv Syst 15:571-
82. Fitzpatrick LK, Aronson LJ, Cohen KJ:
Is there a requirement for adjuvant therapy for
choroid plexus carcinoma that has been completely
resected? J Neurooncol 57:123-126,