Purpose: Cancer-related fatigue (CRF) negatively affects the lives of childhood, adolescent, and young adult (CAYA) cancer survivors. We aimed to provide an evidence-based clinical practice guideline (CPG) with internationally harmonized CRF surveillance recommendations for CAYA cancer survivors diagnosed < 30 years. Methods: This CPG was developed by a multidisciplinary panel under the umbrella of the International Late Effects of Childhood Cancer Guideline Harmonization Group. After evaluating concordances and discordances of four existing CPGs, we performed systematic literature searches. We screened articles for eligibility, assessed quality, extracted, and summarized the data from included articles. We formulated recommendations based on the evidence and clinical judgment. Results: Of 3647 articles identified, 70 articles from 14 countries were included. The prevalence of CRF in CAYA cancer survivors ranged from 10–85%. We recommend that healthcare providers are aware of the risk of CRF, implement regular screening with validated measures, and recommend effective interventions to fatigued survivors. Conclusions: A considerable proportion of CAYA cancer survivors suffers from CRF even years after the end of treatment. Implications for Cancer Survivors: We recommend that healthcare providers adopt regular screening to detect and treat CRF early and positively influence survivors’ health and quality of life.

Adolescents and young adults (AYAs) with cancer face unique challenges. We aimed to describe (i) education, employment, and financial outcomes and (ii) determinants for adverse outcomes in AYA cancer survivors. We performed a systematic literature search. We included original research articles on AYA (15–39 years of age) cancer survivors (≥2 years after diagnosis) and our outcomes of interest. We narratively synthesized the results of the included articles. We included 35 articles (24 quantitative and 11 qualitative studies). Patients in education had to interrupt their education during cancer treatment, and re-entry after treatment was challenging. After treatment, most survivors were employed but started their employment at an older age than the general population. Overall, no disadvantages in income were found. Survivors reported more absent workdays than comparisons. We identified chemotherapy, radiotherapy, late effects or health problems, female sex, migration background, and lower education associated with adverse outcomes. Although most AYA cancer survivors were able to re-enter education and employment, they reported difficulties with re-entry and delays in their employment pathway. To facilitate successful re-entry, age-tailored support services should be developed and implemented.

Introduction: Survivors of pediatric central nervous system (CNS) tumors are at high risk for late effects and long-term morbidity. The quality of survival became increasingly important, as advances in diagnostics, multimodal treatment strategies, and supportive care have led to significant increases in long-term survival. Aim: This review aims to provide a global overview of the potential late effects and long-term follow-up care of CNS tumor survivors, directed to trainees and practitioners with less targeted training in pediatric oncology. Late effects in CNS tumor survivors: A specific focus on CNS tumor survivors relies on cognitive and psychosocial late effects, as they may have an impact on education, professional career, independent living, and quality of life. Further important late effects in CNS tumor survivors include endocrine, metabolic, cardiovascular, and cerebrovascular diseases. Conclusions: Comprehensive long-term follow-up care is essential for pediatric CNS tumor survivors to improve their quality of survival and quality of life. An individualized approach, taking all potential late effects into account, and carried out by an interdisciplinary team, is recommended, and should continue into adulthood. Existing recommendations and guidelines on long-term follow-up care guide the multidisciplinary teams.

Background: A cancer diagnosis and its treatment often disrupt a child’s and adolescent’s normal level of physical activity, which plays a vital role in their development and health. They are therefore often less physically active during treatment than before the diagnosis or compared to healthy peers. Today, there is no comprehensive overview of the safety, feasibility, clinical effectiveness, and potentially long-lasting impact of physical activity (PA) interventions in this population. Methods: We conducted a systematic review in PubMed according to PRISMA guidelines to evaluate studies on PA interventions during cancer treatment in children and adolescents up to 25 years of age. We used the Joanna Briggs Institute’s critical appraisal tools to assess the risk of bias. Due to the heterogeneity in interventions and outcomes, we used descriptive approaches only to present the results. Results: Half of the 21 included studies were randomized controlled trials (10/21). PA interventions were found to be safe and feasible when tailored to the patient’s age, treatment phase, and clinical condition. Most studies reported improvements in physical fitness, strength, and quality of life, with some reductions in fatigue. Variability in interventions and outcomes, along with small sample sizes and heterogeneous patient populations, made it difficult to draw clear conclusions. Conclusions: PA appears to be a feasible and, in terms of injuries, safe adjunct to cancer treatment in children and adolescents. Despite promising trends, further large-scale, multicenter trials with standardized protocols are needed to better establish the long-term benefits and optimal interventions.

Background: We describe post-traumatic stress symptoms (PTSS) and post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) in parents of long-term childhood cancer survivors (CCS-parents) and compare them to parents of similar-aged children (comparison-parents) of the Swiss general population (SGP). We compare type of reported stressful event, prevalence of PTSS and PTSD, and psychosocial and cancer-related characteristics associated with PTSS. We further describe the respective normative data for the SGP. Methods: We conducted a nationwide cross-sectional questionnaire survey in a population-based sample of long-term CCS-parents (survivors aged ≤16 years at diagnosis, ≥20 years at study, >5 years post-diagnosis) and in the SGP. Using the Impact of Event Scale-Revised, we measured PTSS regarding the most stressful event experienced, and computed probable cases of PTSD. Results: Participants included 663 CCS-parents (39.4% fathers) and 1035 individuals of the SGP (40.0% male), of which we identified 391 comparison-parents (41.2% fathers). Illness was most often indicated as stressful event (CCS-parents: 49.5%, comparison-parents: 27.6%, SGP: 25.3%). Prevalence of PTSS and PTSD (CCS-parents: 4.8%, comparison-parents: 6.7%, SGP: 5.6%) did not significantly differ. Lower education was associated with higher intrusion, avoidance, and hyperarousal in all samples (all P ≤ .003). Parents of children with a chronic illness reported higher intrusion (all P ≤ .004). We found no associations with cancer-related characteristics. Conclusions: No increased risk for PTSS or PTSD was found among CCS-parents. Individuals with lower education and those with a chronically ill child might benefit from additional support to help manage and resolve the stress symptoms in the long term.

Background: Pediatric glioblastoma (GBM) is an aggressive central nervous system tumor in children that has dismal prognosis. Standard of care is surgery with subsequent irradiation and temozolomide. We aimed to outline currently available data on novel pharmacological treatments for pediatric GBM. Methods: We conducted a systematic literature search in PubMed and Embase, including reports published in English from 2010 to 2021. We included randomized trials, cohort studies and case series. Phase I trials were not analyzed. We followed PRISMA guidelines, assessed the quality of the eligible reports using the Newcastle-Ottawa scale (NOS) and the RoB-2 tool and registered the protocol on PROSPERO. Results: We included 6 out of 1122 screened reports. All six selected reports were prospective, multicenter phase II trials (five single-arm and one randomized controlled trial). None of the investigated novel treatment modalities showed any benefit regarding overall or progression free survival. Conclusions: To date, the role of pharmacological approaches regarding pediatric GBM remains unclear, since no novel treatment approach could provide a significant impact on overall or progression free survival. Further research should aim to combine different treatment strategies in large international multicenter trials with central comprehensive diagnostics regarding subgrouping. These novel treatment approaches should include targeted and immunotherapeutic treatments, potentially leading to a more successful outcome.