Article Text

Download PDFPDF
Bone growth mechanisms and the effects of cytotoxic drugs
  1. Helen Robson
  1. Department of Tumour Biochemistry, Clinical Research, Christie Hospital NHS Trust, Wilmslow Road, Manchester M20 4BX, UK
  1. Dr Robson

Statistics from Altmetric.com

Request Permissions

If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.

With improved survival rates for most childhood malignancies, it has become increasingly apparent that some children grow poorly, long after chemotherapy is stopped. However, there have been very few studies that have examined the mechanisms by which chemotherapy affects growth. In general, any such reports suggest that the effects of chemotherapy on growth are independent of the hypothalamic–pituitary axis, but act directly on the cartilage growth plate to reduce longitudinal bone growth. New knowledge about the mechanisms of chemotherapy actions on longitudinal bone growth is timely; in particular because the trend in paediatric oncology is for further intensification of treatment, as a result of the successful use of intensive chemotherapy. This review provides an overview of the cellular mechanisms that contribute to linear growth; based on my own studies and the limited data available from the literature, it also considers how cytotoxic chemotherapy might disrupt the normal growth process.

Growth in children treated for childhood cancers

Several groups of investigators have examined the effects of chemotherapy on the growth patterns of children treated for various cancers and have documented a decrease in skeletal growth rate during treatment with chemotherapy. However, the pattern of growth after completion of treatment has been a point of some controversy. Some investigators reported a permanent deficit,1-3 whereas others reported catch up growth, with only minimal loss in final height.4-6 Examination of the chemotherapy protocols used in these studies suggested that the dissimilar growth patterns observed were caused by the variable intensity of the chemotherapy regimens used. For example, in an Australian study by Kirk and colleagues7 there was no catch up growth and the long term adverse effects on growth were more severe than in children treated for acute lymphoblastic leukaemia (ALL) with UK schedules.8There is no doubt that the chemotherapy protocol used by Kirket al …

View Full Text