Lomustine with or without reirradiation for first progression of glioblastoma, LEGATO, EORTC-2227-BTG: study protocol for a randomized phase III study.

BACKGROUND: Chemotherapy with lomustine is widely considered as standard treatment option for progressive glioblastoma. The value of adding radiotherapy to second-line chemotherapy is not known. METHODS: EORTC-2227-BTG (LEGATO, NCT05904119) is an investigator-initiated, pragmatic (PRECIS-2 score: 34 out of 45), randomized, multicenter phase III trial in patients with first progression of glioblastoma. A total of 411 patients will be randomized in a 1:1 ratio to lomustine (110 mg/m2 every 6 weeks) or lomustine (110 mg/m2 every 6weeks) plus radiotherapy (35 Gy in 10 fractions). Main eligibility criteria include histologic confirmation of glioblastoma, isocitrate dehydrogenase gene (IDH) wild-type per WHO 2021 classification, first progression at least 6 months after the end of prior radiotherapy, radiologically measurable disease according to RANO criteria with a maximum tumor diameter of 5 cm, and WHO performance status of 0-2. The primary efficacy endpoint is overall survival (OS) and secondary endpoints include progression-free survival, response rate, neurocognitive function, health-related quality of life, and health economic parameters. LEGATO is funded by the European Union's Horizon Europe Research program, was activated in March 2024 and will enroll patients in 43 sites in 11 countries across Europe with study completion projected in 2028. DISCUSSION: EORTC-2227-BTG (LEGATO) is a publicly funded pragmatic phase III trial designed to clarify the efficacy of adding reirradiation to chemotherapy with lomustine for the treatment of patients with first progression of glioblastoma. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT05904119. Registered before start of inclusion, 23 May 2023.

Cost-effectiveness analysis of bevacizumab combined with lomustine in the treatment of progressive glioblastoma using a Markov model simulation analysis.

Background: Progressive glioblastoma (GBM) is a malignancy with extremely poor prognosis. Chemotherapy is one of the approved systemic treatment modalities. The aim of this study is to assess the cost-effectiveness of using bevacizumab (BEV) in combination with lomustine (LOM) regimen for the treatment of progressive glioblastoma in China. Methods: The estimation results are derived from a multicenter randomized phase III trial, which demonstrated improved survival in GBM patients receiving BEV+LOM combination therapy. To calculate the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) from the perspective of Chinese society, a Markov model was established. Univariate deterministic analysis and probabilistic sensitivity analysis were employed to address the uncertainties within the model. Results: Compared to LOM monotherapy, the total treatment cost for BEV+LOM combination therapy increased from $2,646.70 to $23,650.98. The health-adjusted life years (QALYs) for BEV+LOM combination therapy increased from 0.26 QALYs to 0.51 QALYs, representing an increment of 0.25 QALYs. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) was $84,071.12. The cost-effectiveness curve indicates that within the willingness-to-pay (WTP) range of $35,906 per QALY, BEV+LOM combination therapy is not a cost-effective treatment option for unresectable malignant pleural mesothelioma patients. Conclusions: Taken as a whole, the findings of this study suggest that, from the perspective of payers in China, BEV+LOM combination therapy as a first-line treatment for GBM is not a cost-effective option. However, considering the survival advantages this regimen may offer for this rare disease, it may still be one of the clinical treatment options for this patient population.

Lomustine and nimustine exert efficient antitumor effects against glioblastoma models with acquired temozolomide resistance.

Glioblastomas (GBM) often acquire resistance against temozolomide (TMZ) after continuous treatment and recur as TMZ-resistant GBM (TMZ-R-GBM). Lomustine (CCNU) and nimustine (ACNU), which were previously used as standard therapeutic agents against GBM before TMZ, have occasionally been used for the salvage therapy of TMZ-R-GBM; however, their efficacy has not yet been thoroughly examined. Therefore, we investigated the antitumor effects of CCNU and ACNU against TMZ-R-GBM. As a model of TMZ-R-GBM, TMZ resistant clones of human GBM cell lines (U87, U251MG, and U343MG) were established (TMZ-R-cells) by the culture of each GBM cells under continuous TMZ treatment, and the antitumor effects of TMZ, CCNU, or ACNU against these cells were analyzed in vitro and in vivo. As a result, although growth arrest and apoptosis were triggered in all TMZ-R-cells after the administration of each drug, the antitumor effects of TMZ against TMZ-R-cells were significantly reduced compared to those of parental cells, whereas CCNU and ACNU demonstrated efficient antitumor effects on TMZ-R-cells as well as parental cells. It was also demonstrated that TMZ resistance of TMZ-R-cells was regulated at the initiation of DNA damage response. Furthermore, survival in mice was significantly prolonged by systemic treatment with CCNU or ACNU but not TMZ after implantation of TMZ-R-cells. These findings suggest that CCNU or ACNU may serve as a therapeutic agent in salvage treatment against TMZ-R-GBM.

Diagnosis of Pseudoprogression Following Lomustine-Temozolomide Chemoradiation in Newly Diagnosed Glioblastoma Patients Using FET-PET.

PURPOSE: The CeTeG/NOA-09 phase III trial demonstrated a significant survival benefit of lomustine-temozolomide chemoradiation in patients with newly diagnosed glioblastoma with methylated O6-methylguanine-DNA methyltransferase (MGMT) promoter. Following lomustine-temozolomide chemoradiation, late and prolonged pseudoprogression may occur. We here evaluated the value of amino acid PET using O-(2-[18F]fluoroethyl)-l-tyrosine (FET) for differentiating pseudoprogression from tumor progression. EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN: We retrospectively identified patients (i) who were treated off-study according to the CeTeG/NOA-09 protocol, (ii) had equivocal MRI findings after radiotherapy, and (iii) underwent additional FET-PET imaging for diagnostic evaluation (number of scans, 1-3). Maximum and mean tumor-to-brain ratios (TBRmax, TBRmean) and dynamic FET uptake parameters (e.g., time-to-peak) were calculated. In patients with more than one FET-PET scan, relative changes of TBR values were evaluated, that is, an increase or decrease of >10% compared with the reference scan was considered as tumor progression or pseudoprogression. Diagnostic performances were evaluated using ROC curve analyses and Fisher exact test. Diagnoses were confirmed histologically or clinicoradiologically. RESULTS: We identified 23 patients with 32 FET-PET scans. Within 5-25 weeks after radiotherapy (median time, 9 weeks), pseudoprogression occurred in 11 patients (48%). The parameter TBRmean calculated from the FET-PET performed 10 ± 7 days after the equivocal MRI showed the highest accuracy (87%) to identify pseudoprogression (threshold, <1.95; P = 0.029). The integration of relative changes of TBRmean further improved the accuracy (91%; P < 0.001). Moreover, the combination of static and dynamic parameters increased the specificity to 100% (P = 0.005). CONCLUSIONS: The data suggest that FET-PET parameters are of significant clinical value to diagnose pseudoprogression related to lomustine-temozolomide chemoradiation.

One year of procarbazine lomustine and vincristine is poorly tolerated in low grade glioma: a real world experience in a national neuro-oncology centre.

BACKGROUND: Following optimal local therapy, adjuvant Procarbazine, Lomustine and Vincristine (PCV) improves overall survival (OS) in low-grade glioma (LGG). However, 1 year of PCV is associated with significant toxicities. In the pivotal RTOG 9802 randomised control trial, approximately half of the patients discontinued treatment after 6 months. As patients on clinical trials may be fitter, we aimed to further explore the tolerability of PCV chemotherapy in routine clinical practice. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective study between 2014 and 2018 at a National Neuro-Oncology centre. Patients who had received PCV during this time period were included. The primary objective was to assess tolerability of treatment. Secondary objectives included evaluation of treatment delays, dose modifications and toxicities. RESULTS: Overall, 41 patients were included, 24 (58%) were male and 21 (51%) aged ≥40 years. 38 (93%) underwent surgical resection and all patients received adjuvant radiotherapy prior to chemotherapy. The median number of cycles completed was 3,2,4 for procarbazine, lomustine and vincristine respectively. Only 4 (10%) completed all 6 cycles of PCV without dose modifications. There was a universal decline in dose intensity as cycles of chemotherapy progressed. Dose intensity for cycle 1 versus cycle 6 respectively: procarbazine (98% versus 46%), lomustine (94% versus 48%) and vincristine (93% versus 50%). Haematological toxicities were common. Six (14%) patients experienced Grade III-IV thrombocytopaenia and 13 (31%) experienced Grade III-IV neutropaenia. CONCLUSION: Toxicities are frequently observed with the PCV regimen in clinical practice. It might be preferable to adjust doses from the start of chemotherapy to improve tolerability or consider alternative chemotherapy, particularly in older patients with LGG.

Effect of Vocimagene Amiretrorepvec in Combination With Flucytosine vs Standard of Care on Survival Following Tumor Resection in Patients With Recurrent High-Grade Glioma: A Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: New treatments are needed to improve the prognosis of patients with recurrent high-grade glioma. Objective: To compare overall survival for patients receiving tumor resection followed by vocimagene amiretrorepvec (Toca 511) with flucytosine (Toca FC) vs standard of care (SOC). Design, Setting, and Participants: A randomized, open-label phase 2/3 trial (TOCA 5) in 58 centers in the US, Canada, Israel, and South Korea, comparing posttumor resection treatment with Toca 511 followed by Toca FC vs a defined single choice of approved (SOC) therapies was conducted from November 30, 2015, to December 20, 2019. Patients received tumor resection for first or second recurrence of glioblastoma or anaplastic astrocytoma. Interventions: Patients were randomized 1:1 to receive Toca 511/FC (n = 201) or SOC control (n = 202). For the Toca 511/FC group, patients received Toca 511 injected into the resection cavity wall at the time of surgery, followed by cycles of oral Toca FC 6 weeks after surgery. For the SOC control group, patients received investigators' choice of single therapy: lomustine, temozolomide, or bevacizumab. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was overall survival (OS) in time from randomization date to death due to any cause. Secondary outcomes reported in this study included safety, durable response rate (DRR), duration of DRR, durable clinical benefit rate, OS and DRR by IDH1 variant status, and 12-month OS. Results: All 403 randomized patients (median [SD] age: 56 [11.46] years; 62.5% [252] men) were included in the efficacy analysis, and 400 patients were included in the safety analysis (3 patients on the SOC group did not receive resection). Final analysis included 271 deaths (141 deaths in the Toca 511/FC group and 130 deaths in the SOC control group). The median follow-up was 22.8 months. The median OS was 11.10 months for the Toca 511/FC group and 12.22 months for the control group (hazard ratio, 1.06; 95% CI 0.83, 1.35; P = .62). The secondary end points did not demonstrate statistically significant differences. The rates of adverse events were similar in the Toca 511/FC group and the SOC control group. Conclusions and Relevance: Among patients who underwent tumor resection for first or second recurrence of glioblastoma or anaplastic astrocytoma, administration of Toca 511 and Toca FC, compared with SOC, did not improve overall survival or other efficacy end points. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02414165.

Comprehensive Genomic Analysis in NRG Oncology/RTOG 9802: A Phase III Trial of Radiation Versus Radiation Plus Procarbazine, Lomustine (CCNU), and Vincristine in High-Risk Low-Grade Glioma.

PURPOSE: NRG Oncology/RTOG 9802 (ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT00003375) is a practice-changing study for patients with WHO low-grade glioma (LGG, grade II), as it was the first to demonstrate a survival benefit of adjuvant chemoradiotherapy over radiotherapy. This post hoc study sought to determine the prognostic and predictive impact of the WHO-defined molecular subgroups and corresponding molecular alterations within NRG Oncology/RTOG 9802. METHODS: IDH1/2 mutations were determined by immunohistochemistry and/or deep sequencing. A custom Ion AmpliSeq panel was used for mutation analysis. 1p/19q codeletion and MGMT promoter methylation were determined by copy-number arrays and/or Illumina 450K array, respectively. Progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) were estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method. Hazard ratios (HRs) were calculated using the Cox proportional hazard model and tested using the log-rank test. Multivariable analyses (MVAs) were performed incorporating treatment and common prognostic factors as covariates. RESULTS: Of the eligible patients successfully profiled for the WHO-defined molecular groups (n = 106/251), 26 (24%) were IDH-wild type, 43 (41%) were IDH-mutant/non-codeleted, and 37(35%) were IDH-mutant/codeleted. MVAs demonstrated that WHO subgroup was a significant predictor of PFS after adjustment for clinical variables and treatment. Notably, treatment with postradiation chemotherapy (PCV; procarbazine, lomustine (CCNU), and vincristine) was associated with longer PFS (HR, 0.32; P = .003; HR, 0.13; P < .001) and OS (HR, 0.38; P = .013; HR, 0.21; P = .029) in the IDH-mutant/non-codeleted and IDH-mutant/codeleted subgroups, respectively. In contrast, no significant difference in either PFS or OS was observed with the addition of PCV in the IDH-wild-type subgroup. CONCLUSION: This study is the first to report the predictive value of the WHO-defined diagnostic classification in a set of uniformly treated patients with LGG in a clinical trial. Importantly, this post hoc analysis supports the notion that patients with IDH-mutant high-risk LGG regardless of codeletion status receive benefit from the addition of PCV.

Phosphorylated Acetyl-CoA Carboxylase Is Associated with Clinical Benefit with Regorafenib in Relapsed Glioblastoma: REGOMA Trial Biomarker Analysis.

PURPOSE: Preclinical studies show that antiangiogenic therapy exacerbates tumor glycolysis and activates liver kinase B1/AMP kinase (AMPK), a pathway involved in the regulation of tumor metabolism. We investigated whether certain metabolism-related in situ biomarkers could predict benefit to regorafenib in the phase II randomized REGOMA trial. PATIENTS AND METHODS: IHC and digital pathology analysis were used to investigate the expression in glioblastoma (GBM) sections of monocarboxylate transporter 1 and 4 (MCT1 and MCT4), associated with OXPHOS and glycolysis, respectively, phosphorylated AMPK (pAMPK), and phosphorylated acetyl-CoA carboxylase (pACC), a canonical target of AMPK activity. The status of each biomarker was associated with clinical endpoints, including overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) in patients with relapsed GBM treated either with regorafenib or lomustine. RESULTS: Between November 2015 and February 2017, 119 patients were enrolled (n = 59 regorafenib and n = 60 lomustine) and stratified for surgery at recurrence, and baseline characteristics were balanced. Biomarker analysis was performed in 84 patients (71%), including 42 patients of the regorafenib arm and 42 patients of the lomustine arm. Among all markers analyzed, only pACC showed predictive value in terms of OS. In fact, median OS was 9.3 months [95% confidence interval (CI), 5.6-13.2] for regorafenib and 5.5 months (95% CI, 4.2-6.6) for lomustine for pACC-positive patients, HR, 0.37 (95% CI, 0.20-0.70); log rank P = 0.0013; test for interaction = 0.0453. No statistically significant difference was demonstrated for PFS according to pACC status. CONCLUSIONS: We found that AMPK pathway activation is associated with clinical benefit from treatment with regorafenib in relapsed GBM.

Reverse swing-M, phase 1 study of repurposing mebendazole in recurrent high-grade glioma.

BACKGROUND: Relapsed high-grade glioma has dismal outcomes. Mebendazole has shown promising activity against glioma in in-vitro and in-vivo studies. Hence, we undertook a phase 1 study to repurpose mebendazole in the treatment of glioblastoma. METHODS: We conducted a phase 1 study (accelerated titrated design 4) of mebendazole in patients with recurrent glioblastoma (GBM). Patients eligible for re-irradiation were enrolled in arm A1 (radiation with concurrent temozolomide 75 mg/m2 daily during the course of radiation+mebendazole) while patients who were ineligible were enrolled in either arm B1 (CCNU 110 mg/m2 day 1, every 6 weekly + mebendazole) or arm C1 (temozolomide 200 mg/m2 day 1-5, every 4 weekly + mebendazole). The primary endpoint of phase 1 was to identify the MTD of mebendazole in each combination. FINDINGS: 11 patients were enrolled in the whole study. MTD of mebendazole was not reached in arm A1 and C1 and hence the recommended dose for phase 2 was 1600 mg TDS (4800 mg) per day. The MTD of mebendazole in combination with CCNU was 1600 mg TDS (4800 mg) per day and the dose recommended for phase 2 was 800 mg TDS (2400 mg) per day. The three most common adverse events seen in the study were anemia (n = 9, 81.8%), nausea (n = 7, 63.6%), and fatigue (n = 6, 55.5%). INTERPRETATION: The recommended phase 2 dose of mebendazole is 1600 mg TDS with temozolomide and temozolomide-radiation combination while the dose of 800 mg TDS needs to be used with single-agent CCNU.

How did lomustine become standard of care in recurrent glioblastoma?

Glioblastomas are the most common malignant primary intrinsic brain tumors. Their incidence increases with age, and males are more often affected. First-line management includes maximum safe surgical resection followed by involved-field radiotherapy plus concomitant and six cycles of maintenance temozolomide chemotherapy. Standards of care at recurrence are much less well defined. Minorities of patients are offered second surgery or re-irradiation, but data on a positive impact on survival from randomized trials are lacking. The majority of patients who are eligible for salvage therapy receive systemic treatment, mostly with nitrosourea-based regimens or, depending on availability, bevacizumab alone or in various combinations. In clinical trials, lomustine alone has been increasingly used as a control arm, assigning this drug a standard-of-care position in the setting of recurrent glioblastoma. Here we review the activity of lomustine in the treatment of diffuse gliomas of adulthood in various settings. The most compelling data for lomustine stem from three randomized trials when lomustine was combined with procarbazine and vincristine as the PCV regimen in the newly diagnosed setting together with radiotherapy; improved survival with PCV was restricted to patients with isocitrate dehydrogenase-mutant tumors. No other agent with the possible exception of regorafenib has shown superior activity to lomustine in recurrent glioblastoma, but activity is largely restricted to patients with tumors with O6-methylguanine DNA methyltransferase (MGMT) promoter methylation. Hematological toxicity, notably thrombocytopenia often limits adequate exposure.

Tumour Treating Fields (TTFields) in combination with lomustine and temozolomide in patients with newly diagnosed glioblastoma.

PURPOSE: In the EF-14 trial for newly diagnosed glioblastoma (ndGBM) patients addition of Tumour Treating Fields (TTFields) to temozolomide treatment resulted in a significantly improved overall survival (OS). In the NOA-09/CeTeG trial, combination of lomustine and temozolomide was superior to temozolomide monotherapy in patients with O6-methylguanine DNA methyltransferase (MGMT) promoter methylated (MGMTm) ndGBM. We evaluated combination of these two treatment modalities in patients with MGMTm ndGBM. There have been so far no data on the combination of these two efficient regimens. METHODS: This bicentric retrospective analysis investigated 16 patients. Parameters evaluated included safety outcome as measured by Common Toxicity Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE), clinical outcomes, and compliance to treatment. RESULTS: Hematologic adverse events CTCAE ≥ 3 were observed in seven, hepatotoxic adverse events of CTCAE ≥ 3 in four patients. Mild to moderate skin toxicity was detected in six patients. At data cutoff, patients demonstrated a median progression-free survival (PFS) of 20 months. The usage rate of TTFields showed a high median adherence (83%) to the therapy. CONCLUSIONS: This analysis provides first indication that the combination of TTFields/lomustine/temozolomide is safe and feasible. The observed survival outcomes might suggest potential beneficial effects.

Health-related quality of life and neurocognitive functioning with lomustine-temozolomide versus temozolomide in patients with newly diagnosed, MGMT-methylated glioblastoma (CeTeG/NOA-09): a randomised, multicentre, open-label, phase 3 trial.

BACKGROUND: The CeTeG/NOA-09 trial showed significantly longer overall survival with combined lomustine-temozolomide therapy compared with standard temozolomide for patients with glioblastoma with methylated MGMT promoter. The trial also aimed to investigate the effect of lomustine-temozolomide therapy on health-related quality of life (HRQOL) and neurocognitive function, which we report here. METHODS: In this randomised, multicentre, open-label, phase 3 trial, newly diagnosed, chemoradiotherapy-naive patients with MGMT-methylated glioblastoma, aged 18-70 years, with a Karnofsky performance score of 70% or higher, were recruited and enrolled at 17 university hospitals in Germany. Patients received standard radiotherapy (60 Gy) and were randomly assigned (1:1, stratified by centre by allocating complete blocks of six to a centre, without masking) to either six 6-week courses of oral combined lomustine (100 mg/m2 on day 1) plus temozolomide (100-200 mg/m2 on days 2-6) or standard oral temozolomide (75 mg/m2 daily during radiotherapy plus six 4-week courses of temozolomide [150-200 mg/m2] on days 1-5, every 4 weeks). The primary endpoint was overall survival. HRQOL, assessed using the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) quality of life questionnaire core-30 and the EORTC brain cancer module (BN20); and neurocognitive function, assessed using the Mini Mental State Examination (MMSE), plus a neurocognitive test battery (NOA-07), including Trail Making Test A and B (TMT-A and B), working memory tests, and tests for lexical (Controlled Oral Word Association [COWA]) and semantic verbal fluency, were secondary endpoints analysed in the modified intention-to-treat population (mITT; all randomly assigned patients who received at least one dose of study chemotherapy). We used linear mixed-model analyses to investigate differences between treatment groups regarding HRQOL (clinically relevant ≥10 points) and MMSE scores (clinically relevant ≥3 points). The trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT01149109. FINDINGS: Between June 17, 2011 and April 8, 2014, 141 patients were randomly assigned and 129 patients began treatment and were included in the mITT population (63 in the temozolomide and 66 in the lomustine-temozolomide group). Median follow-up for HRQOL (the item global health) was 19·4 months (IQR 7·8-38·6), for MMSE was 15·3 months (4·1-29·6), and for COWA was 11·0 months (0-27·5). We found no significant impairment regarding any item of HRQOL in the lomustine-temozolomide group (difference between the groups for global health 0·30 [95% CI -0·23 to 0·83]; p=0·26). Differences in MMSE were in favour of the temozolomide group (difference -0·11 [95% CI -0·19 to -0·03]; p=0·0058) but were not clinically relevant (1·76/30 points over 4 years). We found no significant difference between the groups in any subtest of the neurocognitive test battery (difference for COWA 0·04 [95% CI -0·01 to 0·09]; p=0·14). INTERPRETATION: The absence of systematic and clinically relevant changes in HRQOL and neurocognitive function combined with the survival benefit of lomustine-temozolomide versus temozolomide alone suggests that a long-term net clinical benefit exists for patients with newly diagnosed glioblastoma with methylation of the MGMT promoter and supports the use of lomustine-temozolomide as a treatment option for these patients. FUNDING: German Federal Ministry of Education and Research.

Hemorrhagic diathesis and bone marrow aplasia secondary to lomustine overdose in a dog.

A 9-year-old mixed breed 13 kg spayed female dog was presented for evaluation of two masses in the right abdominal mammary gland region. Surgery was conducted to excise the masses. A grade I complex mammary gland carcinoma and high grade (grade III) mast cell tumor with an inguinal lymph node metastasis were diagnosed. Forty-seven days after the surgical procedure, the mast cell tumor relapsed, and neoadjuvant treatment with lomustine (81 mg/m2 ) was prescribed. Thirteen days from initiation of lomustine therapy, the dog was re-presented to the hospital with bloody diarrhea, hematemesis, epistaxis, an elevated rectal temperature, depression, severe dehydration, and marked dyspnea. The CBC showed severe thrombocytopenia and leukopenia. According to the owner, lomustine (45mg per os [PO]) was mistakenly administered daily for 10 consecutive days (total dose, 810 mg/m2 ). The dog died and a necropsy was performed. The main gross lesions consisted of severe multifocal hemorrhages in multiple organs, especially in the digestive system. Histopathologic evaluation revealed disseminated hemorrhages, as well as marked bone marrow aplasia. This report describes the clinical, hematologic, gross, and histologic findings in a fatal case of lomustine overdose in a dog.

A Real-World Claims Analysis of Costs and Patterns of Care in Treated Patients with Glioblastoma Multiforme in the United States.

BACKGROUND: Patients with glioblastoma multiforme (GBM) have a poor prognosis and high likelihood of recurrence. Routine care for incident cases in the United States involves surgical resection, followed by radiation therapy (RT) with concurrent and adjuvant temozolomide. Real-world data reporting the treatments and health care burden associated with GBM are limited. OBJECTIVE: To assess patterns of care, health care resource utilization (HCRU), and costs associated with treatment of GBM in the United States. METHODS: This study is a retrospective claims database analysis. Adult patients with a GBM diagnosis (index date) between January 1, 2010, and June 30, 2016, who had undergone brain surgery within 90 days of the index date, had received temozolomide and/or RT up to 90 days after index date, and had at least 6 months of continuous enrollment before the index date, were identified. Patients were excluded if they had (a) another primary cancer within 6 months pre-index, (b) secondary brain metastases, or (c) received temozolomide and/or RT pre-index. Baseline characteristics, treatments, HCRU, and costs were reported. First-line therapy began upon first receipt of RT and/or temozolomide after index date; second-line therapy began when a new drug was added > 28 days after initiation of first-line therapy or when there was a treatment gap > 90 days. Treatment regimens, duration of treatment (corrected group prognosis method), HCRU, and costs were reported descriptively in the 0- to 6-month and 7- to 12-month periods following initiation of first-line and second-line therapy. RESULTS: Baseline characteristics were comparable between patients receiving temozolomide and/or RT. Patients receiving RT without chemotherapy tended to be older, be retired, and have more baseline comorbidities. Of the 4,071 patients receiving first-line therapy for GBM, most (73.0%) received temozolomide + RT; 24.4% received RT; and 2.5% received temozolomide monotherapy. Of those receiving first-line therapy, 1,283 (31.5%) patients subsequently received second-line therapy: 39.4% received bevacizumab monotherapy; 28.9% received bevacizumab combination therapy (temozolomide, 45.2% of patients; irinotecan, 24.3%; and temozolomide + lomustine, 15.4%); 15.5% received temozolomide monotherapy; and 13.7% received other systemic cancer therapies. The proportion of patients with hospitalizations increased from 2.9% (4-6 months pre-index) to 20.8% in the 3 months before the index date (likely due to diagnostic procedures) and 28.1% in the first 6 months after index (likely due to surgery) and then decreased to 13.3% in the 7- to 12-month period after index. Mean total per-patient costs at 6 and 12 months were $117,325 and $162,550 (first line) and $126,128 and $243,833 (second line). Costs in all time periods were largely driven by costs of RT/systemic cancer therapy. CONCLUSIONS: Most patients with newly diagnosed GBM received treatment according to recommendations. However, relatively few patients received second-line therapy, and the HCRU burden and costs associated with both lines of therapy were substantial. Novel therapies for GBM are required to improve treatment options and outcomes in these patients. DISCLOSURES: This study was funded by Bristol-Myers Squibb (Princeton Pike, NJ). Neither honoraria nor payments were provided for authorship. Norden received consultancy fees relating to this study from Bristol-Myers Squibb. Dastani, Korytowsky, Le, Singh, and You are employees of Bristol-Myers Squibb. Dastani and Korytowsky are shareholders of Bristol-Myers Squibb. Bobiak was an employee of Bristol-Myers Squibb at the time of this study. Preliminary data from this study were previously presented at the International Society for Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research 22nd Annual International Meeting in Boston, MA, May 20-24, 2017.

Lomustine-temozolomide combination therapy versus standard temozolomide therapy in patients with newly diagnosed glioblastoma with methylated MGMT promoter (CeTeG/NOA-09): a randomised, open-label, phase 3 trial.

BACKGROUND: There is an urgent need for more effective therapies for glioblastoma. Data from a previous unrandomised phase 2 trial suggested that lomustine-temozolomide plus radiotherapy might be superior to temozolomide chemoradiotherapy in newly diagnosed glioblastoma with methylation of the MGMT promoter. In the CeTeG/NOA-09 trial, we aimed to further investigate the effect of lomustine-temozolomide therapy in the setting of a randomised phase 3 trial. METHODS: In this open-label, randomised, phase 3 trial, we enrolled patients from 17 German university hospitals who were aged 18-70 years, with newly diagnosed glioblastoma with methylated MGMT promoter, and a Karnofsky Performance Score of 70% and higher. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) with a predefined SAS-generated randomisation list to standard temozolomide chemoradiotherapy (75 mg/m2 per day concomitant to radiotherapy [59-60 Gy] followed by six courses of temozolomide 150-200 mg/m2 per day on the first 5 days of the 4-week course) or to up to six courses of lomustine (100 mg/m2 on day 1) plus temozolomide (100-200 mg/m2 per day on days 2-6 of the 6-week course) in addition to radiotherapy (59-60 Gy). Because of the different schedules, patients and physicians were not masked to treatment groups. The primary endpoint was overall survival in the modified intention-to-treat population, comprising all randomly assigned patients who started their allocated chemotherapy. The prespecified test for overall survival differences was a log-rank test stratified for centre and recursive partitioning analysis class. The trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01149109. FINDINGS: Between June 17, 2011, and April 8, 2014, 141 patients were randomly assigned to the treatment groups; 129 patients (63 in the temozolomide and 66 in the lomustine-temozolomide group) constituted the modified intention-to-treat population. Median overall survival was improved from 31·4 months (95% CI 27·7-47·1) with temozolomide to 48·1 months (32·6 months-not assessable) with lomustine-temozolomide (hazard ratio [HR] 0·60, 95% CI 0·35-1·03; p=0·0492 for log-rank analysis). A significant overall survival difference between groups was also found in a secondary analysis of the intention-to-treat population (n=141, HR 0·60, 95% CI 0·35-1·03; p=0·0432 for log-rank analysis). Adverse events of grade 3 or higher were observed in 32 (51%) of 63 patients in the temozolomide group and 39 (59%) of 66 patients in the lomustine-temozolomide group. There were no treatment-related deaths. INTERPRETATION: Our results suggest that lomustine-temozolomide chemotherapy might improve survival compared with temozolomide standard therapy in patients with newly diagnosed glioblastoma with methylated MGMT promoter. The findings should be interpreted with caution, owing to the small size of the trial. FUNDING: German Federal Ministry of Education and Research.