Randomized controlled trial on the effect of 1-hour infusion of vincristine versus push injection on neuropathy in children with cancer (final analysis)

  • Aniek Uittenboogaard*
  • , Marleen H. van den Berg
  • , Floor C.H. Abbink
  • , Jos W.R. Twisk
  • , Inge M. van der Sluis
  • , Cor van den Bos
  • , Marry M. van den Heuvel-Eibrink
  • , Heidi Segers
  • , Christophe Chantrain
  • , Jutte van der Werff ten Bosch
  • , Leen Willems
  • , Gertjan J.L. Kaspers
  • , Mirjam Esther van de Velde
  • *Corresponding author for this work

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleAcademicpeer-review

74 Downloads (Pure)

Abstract

Introduction: 

Vincristine is an integral component of treatment for children with cancer. Its main dose-limiting side effect is vincristine-induced peripheral neuropathy (VIPN). The VINCA trial was a randomized controlled trial that explored the effect of 1-hour infusion compared with push injection of vincristine on the development of VIPN in children with cancer. The short-term outcomes (median follow-up 9 months) showed that there was no difference in VIPN between the randomization groups. However, 1-hour infusion was less toxic in children who also received azoles. We now report the results of the final analyses (median follow-up 20 months), which includes treatment outcome as a secondary objective (follow-up 3 years). 

Methods: 

VIPN was measured 1–7 times per participant using the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE) and the pediatric-modified total neuropathy score. Poisson mixed model and logistic generalized estimating equation analysis for repeated measures were performed.

Results: 

Forty-five participants per randomization group were included. There was no significant effect of 1-hour infusion compared with push injection on VIPN. In participants receiving concurrent azoles, the total CTCAE score was significantly lower in the one-hour group (rate ratio 0.52, 95% confidence interval 0.33–0.80, p = 0.003). Four patients in the one-hour group and one patient in the push group relapsed. Two patients in the one-hour group died. 

Conclusion:

1-hour infusion of vincristine is not protective against VIPN. However, in patients receiving concurrent azoles, 1-hour infusion may be less toxic. The difference in treatment outcome is most likely the result of differences in risk profile.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)19480-19490
Number of pages11
JournalCancer Medicine
Volume12
Issue number19
Early online date21 Sept 2023
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - Oct 2023

Bibliographical note

Funding Information:
This research was funded by the Netherlands Organization for Health and Development (pro‐gram Proper Use of Medication; 836021006) and the Belgian Health Care Knowledge Centre (16015).

Publisher Copyright:
© 2023 The Authors. Cancer Medicine published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Randomized controlled trial on the effect of 1-hour infusion of vincristine versus push injection on neuropathy in children with cancer (final analysis)'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this