Rapid review reveals limited evidence on corticosteroid benefits in pediatric neuro-oncology, highlighting adverse effects and the need for guidelines.
Background Corticosteroids are used routinely in pediatric patients with central nervous system tumors. However. the efficacy profiles of these medications, prevalence of adverse effects, dosing schedules and impact on patients’ quality of life are poorly elucidated. Aim To identify, appraise and synthesize available international evidence regarding the role of corticosteroids in the symptom management of pediatric neuro-oncology patients. Methods A rapid review of articles studying the role of corticosteroids in pediatric neuro-oncology was undertaken in August 2024. This study is reported using the PRISMA statement and was registered with PROSPERO (CRD42024567489). Five databases were searched, and data were analyzed using narrative synthesis. Results Of the 1935 identified papers, 9 met the inclusion criteria (n = 6 retrospective cohort studies and n = 3 survey studies). Four key themes were identified in this rapid review: variability in indication, dosing schedules and prescribing practices for corticosteroids;limited evidence available regarding symptomatic benefits from corticosteroid use;adverse effects from prolonged corticosteroid use; andclinicians recommend consensus guidelines to inform corticosteroid prescribing practice. Conclusion As the first review utilizing systematic methodology exploring the topic of corticosteroid use in pediatric neuro-oncology, we identified a paucity of pediatric studies addressing corticosteroid efficacy. Dosing is variable, adverse effects are duration-dependent and multi-system and there is an urgent need for the development of guidelines to inform best practice. High-income countries and inpatient perioperative settings dominate the published literature. There is an absence of consumer voices addressing the impact on quality of life from corticosteroid use.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Manoharan et al. (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: