Evidence Hub

Impact of Race on the Outcomes of Retinoblastoma Treated With Primary Enucleation: A Global Study of 1426 Patients

Kaliki S, Vempuluru VS, Ahmad A, Berry JL, Diaz-Coronado R, Eiger-Moscovich M, Fabian ID, Grossniklaus H et al.

Clinical & experimental ophthalmology, 2025

1,426 participants · 2 citations

Abstract

Background: To evaluate the clinical presentation, pathological features and outcomes of retinoblastoma based on the race of origin in a global cohort of patients.

Methods: Retrospective collaborative study of 1426 patients who underwent primary enucleation for retinoblastoma.

Results: Patients were grouped into Caucasians (n = 231, 16%), Asians (n = 841, 59%), Hispanics (n = 226, 16%), Arabs (n = 96, 7%) and Others (Africans, African Americans, Indigenous Australians; n = 32, 2%) cohorts. On histopathology, massive choroidal invasion was higher in Asians (30%) and Hispanics (26%) than Caucasians (15%, p < 0.001). Post-laminar optic nerve invasion was higher in Asians (28%), Hispanics (20%) and Others (9%) than Caucasians (11%, p < 0.001). At a mean follow-up of 41 months (median, 35 months; range, < 1-149 months), tumour recurrence and metastasis-related death was higher in Hispanics (9% and 12%, respectively), Asians (4% and 13%, respectively) and Others (6% and 6%, respectively). Multivariate Cox proportional hazards analysis of outcomes based on race with 8th edition AJCC pT stage and adjuvant therapy as covariates revealed 6.8 times greater risk for orbital tumour recurrence in Hispanics compared to Caucasians (p = 0.010) and 3.2 times risk hazards for metastasis-related death in Hispanics and Asians compared to Caucasians (p = 0.028 and p = 0.038, respectively).

Conclusion: The histopathological features in primarily enucleated eyes with retinoblastoma vary with race.…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a cohort study, done in people. Its evidence level is 3 of 5 (Moderate · trial / cohort / secondary analysis). Trials without a large randomized design, cohorts and secondary analyses give moderate evidence. Reported size: 1,426 participants or records.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free