Search

Objective Steroids play an essential role in treating pediatric acute lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL). The downside is that these drugs can cause severe side effects, such as adverse psychological reactions (APRs) and sleep problems, which can compromise health‐related quality of life. This study aimed to systematically review literature to identify risk factors for steroid‐induced APRs and sleep problems in children with ALL. Methods A systematic search was performed in six databases. Titles/abstracts were independently screened by two researchers. Data from each included study was extracted based on predefined items. Risk of bias and level of evidence were assessed, using the Quality in Prognosis Studies tool and the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation tool, respectively. Results Twenty‐four articles were included. APR measurement ranged from validated questionnaires to retrospective record retrieval, sleep measurement included questionnaires or actigraphy. Overall, quality of evidence was very low. Current evidence suggests that type/dose of steroid is not related to APRs, but might be to sleep problems. Younger patients seem at risk for behavior problems and older patients for sleep problems. No studies describing parental stress or medical history were identified. Genetic susceptibility associations remain to be replicated. Conclusions Based on the current evidence, conclusions about risk factors for steroid‐induced adverse psychological reactions or sleep problems in children with ALL should be drawn cautiously, since quality of evidence is low and methods of measurement are largely heterogeneous. A standardized registration of steroid‐induced APRs/sleep problems and risk factors is warranted for further studies in children with ALL.

Simple Summary Insomnia symptoms and daytime fatigue significantly impact physical and psychosocial health. While these are common symptoms in pediatric oncology, relationships between these symptoms remain unclear. This study evaluated the prevalence of insomnia only, daytime fatigue only, the co-occurrence of insomnia and daytime fatigue symptoms, and associated risk factors in adolescent/young adult childhood cancer patients in follow-up after treatment. Results showed that around forty percent had insomnia and daytime fatigue symptoms, which often co-occurred. Risk factors that emerged were: female sex and co-morbidities (all), shorter time after treatment and bedtime gaming (insomnia only), young adulthood (insomnia-fatigue and fatigue only), needing someone else to fall asleep and inconsistent wake times (both insomnia groups), and lower educational level and consistent bedtimes (insomnia-fatigue). Overall, insomnia symptoms and daytime fatigue were common and often co-occurred in this patient population. While current fatigue guidelines do not include insomnia symptoms, healthcare providers should inquire about insomnia as this potentially provides additional options for treatment and prevention. Insomnia symptoms and daytime fatigue commonly occur in pediatric oncology, which significantly impact physical and psychosocial health. This study evaluated the prevalence of insomnia only, daytime fatigue only, the co-occurrence of insomnia-daytime fatigue symptoms, and associated risk factors. Childhood cancer patients (n = 565, 12-26 years old, >= 6 months after treatment) participated in a national, cross-sectional questionnaire study, measuring insomnia symptoms (ISI; Insomnia Severity Index) and daytime fatigue (single item). Prevalence rates of insomnia and/or daytime fatigue subgroups and ISI severity ranges were calculated. Multinomial regression models were applied to assess risk factors. Most patients reported no insomnia symptoms or daytime fatigue (61.8%). In the 38.2% of patients who had symptoms, 48.1% reported insomnia and daytime fatigue, 34.7% insomnia only, and 17.1% daytime fatigue only. Insomnia scores were higher in patients with insomnia-daytime fatigue compared to insomnia only (p < 0.001). Risk factors that emerged were: female sex and co-morbidities (all), shorter time after treatment and bedtime gaming (insomnia only), young adulthood (insomnia-fatigue/fatigue only), needing someone else to fall asleep and inconsistent wake times (both insomnia groups), lower educational level and consistent bedtimes (insomnia-fatigue). Insomnia symptoms and daytime fatigue are common and often co-occur. While current fatigue guidelines do not include insomnia symptoms, healthcare providers should inquire about insomnia as this potentially provides additional options for treatment and prevention.

This study’s aim is to evaluate the psychometric properties of the pediatric Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) sleep disturbance (SD), sleep-related impairment (SRI), and fatigue item banks in Dutch children and adolescents since they are yet to be validated in this population. Children and adolescents aged 8–18 years old (n = 1,325), representative of the Dutch general population, were invited. The following psychometric properties of both item banks were assessed: structural validity by fitting a graded response model (GRM) for which assumptions were checked and assessing item fit, reliability, and efficiency for the full-length item bank, short forms, and computerized adaptive test (CAT). Mean T scores and cutoff scores for mild, moderate, and severe scores were determined. A total of 527 children (response rate 39.7%) were included. SD did not meet the assumption of unidimensionality. The SRI and fatigue item banks showed sufficient structural validity. Three items showed GRM misfit; SRI item w026c and fatigue items 3224R1r and 4191R1r. Both item banks measured reliable (>.90) at the mean of the population and 2SD in the clinical direction. CATs outperformed short forms in efficiency. Mean T scores for the Dutch population were: SRI 47.5 (SD = 10.0) and fatigue 39.8 (SD = 12.4). Cutoffs included SRI minimal ≥ 34.7, moderate ≥ 55.6, severe ≥ 63.2 and fatigue minimal ≥ 23.9, moderate ≥ 49.9, severe ≥ 61.3. PROMIS pediatric SRI and fatigue item banks, short forms, and CAT showed sufficient structural validity and reliability in the Dutch population. Dutch reference values are provided. More research is needed for the PROMIS SD item bank.

Simple Summary Sleep disorders negatively impact adolescent and young adult childhood cancer patients' physical and psychosocial health. Early recognition might improve timely treatment. This national cohort study describes subjective sleep disorders (using a validated self-report questionnaire according to international diagnostic criteria) in childhood cancer patients after treatment, including all types of diagnoses. Sleep disorder prevalence rates ranged from 1.8-9.6%. Insomnia and circadian rhythm sleep disorders were most commonly reported and more prevalent than in the general population. Female sex, young adulthood (18-26 years old) and co-morbid health conditions were risk factors for having a sleep disorder, but cancer-related factors were not. The most commonly used sleep medication was melatonin, which exceeded use described in the general population. Patients with a sleep disorder expressed an unmet need for sleep treatment. Screening for sleep disorders after cancer might improve access to treatment and support childhood cancer patients to maintain optimal health and quality of life. Background: Sleep disorders negatively impact adolescent and young adult childhood cancer patients' physical and psychosocial health. Early recognition improves timely treatment. We therefore studied the prevalence of subjective sleep disorders, risk factors and sleep treatment needs after completion of childhood cancer treatment. Methods: Childhood cancer patients (12-26 years old), >= 6 months after treatment, were invited to fill out the Holland Sleep Disorders Questionnaire, which distinguishes six sleep disorders in substantial agreement with the International Classification of Sleep Disorders, second edition (ICSD-2). They additionally indicated sleep treatment needs. Prevalence rates and needs were displayed in percentages. Logistic regression models were used for risk factors. Results: 576 patients participated (response rate 55.8%)-49.5% females, mean age 17.0 years, 44.4% hemato-oncology, 31.9% solid tumors, 23.6% neuro-oncology. Prevalence rates were: insomnia (9.6%), circadian rhythm sleep disorder (CRSD; 8.1%), restless legs syndrome (7.6%), parasomnia (3.5%), hypersomnia (3.5%) and sleep-related breathing disorders (1.8%). Female sex, comorbid health conditions and young adulthood seem to be risk factors for sleep disorders, but cancer-related factors were not. Differing per sleep disorder, 42-72% wanted help, but only 0-5.6% received sleep treatment. Conclusions: Insomnia and CRSD were most prevalent. An unmet need for sleep treatment was reported by childhood cancer patients during follow-up. Screening for sleep disorders after cancer might improve access to treatment and patient wellbeing.