Background: Prior studies suggest that neuroblastomas that do not accumulate metaiodobenzylguanidine (MIBG) on diagnostic imaging (MIBG non-avid) may have more favorable features compared with MIBG avid tumors. We compared clinical features, biologic features, and clinical outcomes between patients with MIBG nonavid and MIBG avid neuroblastoma. Procedure: Patients had metastatic high- or intermediate-risk neuroblastoma and were treated on Children's Oncology Group protocols A3973 or A3961. Comparisons of clinical and biologic features according to MIBG avidity were made with chi-squared or Fisher exact tests. Event-free (EFS) and overall (OS) survival compared using log–rank tests and modeled using Cox models. Results: Thirty of 343 patients (8.7%) had MIBG nonavid disease. Patients with nonavid tumors were less likely to have adrenal primary tumors (34.5 vs. 57.2%; P = 0.019), bone metastases (36.7 vs. 61.7%; P = 0.008), or positive urine catecholamines (66.7 vs. 91.0%; P < 0.001) compared with patients with MIBG avid tumors. Nonavid tumors were more likely to be MYCN amplified (53.8 vs. 32.6%; P = 0.030) and had lower norepinephrine transporter expression. Patients with MIBG nonavid disease had a 5-year EFS of 50.0% compared with 38.7% for patients with MIBG avid disease (P = 0.028). On multivariate testing in high-risk patients, MIBG avidity was the sole adverse prognostic factor for EFS identified (hazard ratio 1.77; 95% confidence interval 1.04–2.99; P = 0.034). Conclusions: Patients with MIBG nonavid neuroblastoma have lower rates of adrenal primary tumors, bone metastasis, and catecholamine secretion. Despite being more likely to have MYCN-amplified tumors, these patients have superior outcomes compared with patients with MIBG avid disease.
Bibliographical noteFunding Information:
Supported by NIH grants: U10-CA098543; U10-CA98413; U10-CA29139; U10-CA180899; U10-CA180886; RC1MD004418 to the TARGET consortium; and T32-HG000046. Additional support provided by Department of Defense Grant PR120935, Alex's Lemonade Stand Foundation, and the Ben Towne Foundation. The funding sources did not play a role in study design, conduct, data analysis, interpretation, or manuscript preparation. The authors gratefully acknowledge the support of the staff at the Imaging and Radiation Oncology Core Group (IROC) Rhode Island for facilitating central review of MIBG scans. The authors declare that there are no relevant disclaimers or disclosur.
© 2017 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.
- norepinephrine transporter