Challenges of Treating Childhood Medulloblastoma in a Country With Limited Resources: 20 Years of Experience at a Single Tertiary Center in Malaysia.

purposePediatric medulloblastoma (MB) treatment has evolved over the past few decades; however, treating children in countries with limited resources remains challenging. Until now, the literature regarding childhood MB in Malaysia has been nonexistent. Our objectives were to review the demographics and outcome of pediatric MB treated at the University Malaya Medical Center between January 1994 and December 2013 and describe the challenges encountered.

methodsFifty-one patients with childhood MB were seen at University Malaya Medical Center. Data from 43 patients were analyzed; eight patients were excluded because their families refused treatment after surgery.

resultsHeadache and vomiting were the most common presenting symptoms, and the mean interval between symptom onset and diagnosis was 4 weeks. Fourteen patients presented with metastatic disease. Five-year progression-free survival (± SE) for patients ≥ 3 years old was 41.7% ± 14.2% (95% CI, 21.3% to 81.4%) in the high-risk group and 68.6% ± 18.6% (95% CI, 40.3% to 100%) in the average-risk group, and 5-year overall survival (± SE) in these two groups was 41.7% ± 14.2% (95% CI, 21.3% to 81.4%) and 58.3% ± 18.6% (95% CI, 31.3% to 100%), respectively. Children younger than 3 years old had 5-year progression-free and overall survival rates (± SE) of 47.6% ± 12.1% (95% CI, 28.9% to 78.4%) and 45.6% ± 11.7% (95% CI, 27.6% to 75.5%), respectively. Time to relapse ranged from 4 to 132 months. Most patients who experienced relapse died within 1 year. Febrile neutropenia, hearing loss, and endocrinopathy were the most common treatment-related complications.

conclusionThe survival rate of childhood MB in Malaysia is inferior to that usually reported in the literature. We postulate that the following factors contribute to this difference: lack of a multidisciplinary neuro-oncology team, limited health care facilities, inconsistent risk assessment, insufficient data in the National Cancer Registry and pathology reports, inadequate long-term follow-up, and cultural beliefs leading to treatment abandonment.