Exploring management and outcomes of elderly patients with glioblastoma using data from two randomised trials (GEINO1401/EX-TEM).

PURPOSE: The impact of age on optimal management of glioblastoma remains unclear. A recent combined analysis of two randomised trials, GEINO14-01 and EX-TEM, found no benefit from extending post-radiation temozolomide in newly diagnosed glioblastoma. Here, we explore the impact of age. METHODS: Relevant intergroup statistics were used to identify differences in tumour, treatment and outcome characteristics based on age with elderly patients (EP) defined as age 65 years and over. Survival was estimated using the Kaplan Meier method. RESULTS: Of the combined 205 patients, 57 (28%) were EP. Of these, 95% were ECOG 0-1 and 65% underwent macroscopic resection compared with 97% and 61% of younger patients (YP) respectively. There were numerically less MGMT-methylated (56% vs. 63%, p = 0.4) and IDH-mutated (4% vs. 13%, p = 0.1) tumours in EP vs. YP. Following surgery, EP were more likely to receive short course chemoradiation (17.5% vs. 6%, p = 0.017). At recurrence, EP tended to receive or best supportive care (28.3% vs. 15.4%, p = 0.09) or non-surgical options (96.2% vs. 84.6%, p = 0.06), but were less likely to receive bevacizumab (23.1% vs. 49.5%, p < 0.01). Median PFS was similar at 9.3months in EP and 8.5months in YP, with similar median OS at 20months. CONCLUSION: In this trial population of predominantly fit EP, survival was similar to YP despite a proportion receiving less aggressive therapy at diagnosis and recurrence. Advancing age does not appear to be an adverse prognostic factor for glioblastoma when patients are fit for treatment, and a less aggressive approach in selected patients may not compromise outcomes.

A combined analysis of two prospective randomised studies exploring the impact of extended post-radiation temozolomide on survival outcomes in newly diagnosed glioblastoma.

PURPOSE: The optimal duration of post-radiation temozolomide in newly diagnosed glioblastoma remains unclear, with no published phase III randomised trials. Standard-of-care stipulates 6 months. However, in routine care, it is often extended to 12 months, despite lacking robust supporting data. METHODS: GEINO14-01 (Spain) and EX-TEM (Australia) studies enrolled glioblastoma patients without progression at the end of 6 months post-radiation temozolomide. Participants were randomised 1:1 to six additional months of temozolomide or observation. Primary endpoint was 6-month progression free survival from date of randomisation (6mPFS). Secondary endpoints included overall survival (OS) and toxicity. 204 patients were required to detect an improvement in 6mPFS from 50 to 60% (80% power). Neither study recruited sufficient patients. We performed a combined analysis of individual patient data. RESULTS: 205 patients were recruited: 159 in GEINO14-01 (2014-2018) and 46 in EX-TEM (2019-2022). Median follow-up was 20.0 and 14.5 months. Baseline characteristics were balanced. There was no significant improvement in 6mPFS (57.2% vs 64.0%, OR0.75, p = 0.4), nor across any subgroups, including MGMT methylated; PFS (HR0.92, p = 0.59, median 7.8 vs 9.7 months); or OS (HR1.03, p = 0.87, median 20.1 vs 19.4 months). During treatment extension, 64% experienced any grade adverse event, mainly fatigue and gastrointestinal (both 54%). Only a minority required treatment changes: 4.5% dose delay, 7.5% dose reduction, 1.5% temozolomide discontinuation. CONCLUSION: For glioblastoma patients, extending post-radiation temozolomide from 6 to 12 months is well tolerated but does not improve 6mPFS. We could not identify any subset that benefitted from extended treatment. Six months should remain standard-of-care.

Monitoring of RAS mutant clones in plasma of patients with RAS mutant metastatic colorectal cancer.

PURPOSE: Some patients with histologically confirmed primary mCRC and mutated RAS reported undetectable RAS mutant clones in plasma after receiving anti-VEGF treatment. The aim was to prospectively assess it with its potential therapeutic implications. METHODS: RAS mutant genes in solid biopsy (before first-line treatment: FOLFOX/CAPOX + bevacizumab) were compared in liquid biopsy (before second-line treatment: panitumumab + FOLFIRI), using Idylla™ system. Discordant results between solid/liquid biopsies were assessed by the next-generation sequencing (NGS) test (solid/liquid biopsies). RESULTS: Twenty-three patients were assessed (seven had RAS mutant discrepancies between solid/liquid biopsies). The NGS test confirmed that 3/23 (13%) patients had undetectable RAS mutant clones in liquid biopsy and 3/23 (13%) presented discrepancies in solid biopsy (Idylla™ system vs. NGS test). CONCLUSION: Thirteen percentage of patients had undetectable RAS mutant clones in liquid biopsy after first-line treatment. However, some discrepancies between solid and liquid biopsies have been observed. These results suggest a need to improve accuracy of RAS analyses, especially in solid biopsies.

First-line panitumumab plus docetaxel and cisplatin in advanced gastric and gastro-oesophageal junction adenocarcinoma: results of a phase II trial.

PURPOSE: Panitumumab is extensively used for RAS-WT metastatic colorectal cancer. This study assessed the efficacy and safety of panitumumab plus first-line chemotherapy [docetaxel (DOC) and cisplatin (CIS)] in treatment-naïve advanced gastric or gastro-oesophageal junction (GEJ) adenocarcinoma (ADC) patients. METHODS: Phase II, open-label, single-arm study includes treatment-naïve advanced gastric or GEJ-ADC patients from ten Spanish centres. Patients received panitumumab (6 mg/kg) plus DOC and CIS (50 mg/m2 both) every 2 weeks until disease progression, unacceptable toxicity, or patient withdrawal. Primary endpoint: objective response rate (ORR); main secondary endpoints: disease control rate (DCR), duration of response (DoR), time to progressive disease (TTP), progression-free-survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), and safety. RESULTS: Forty-four patients were included; median age: 67.8 (range 43.3-82.7) years, 68.2% male. The ORR was 27.3% (95% CI 15.0, 42.8); median PFS and OS: 5.0 (95% CI 3.6, 6.9) and 7.2 (5.5, 9.0) months, respectively. Median TTP, DCR and DoR: 5.3 (range 3.8-7.0) months, 70.5% (95% CI 54.8, 83.2%), and 4.8 (1.8, NE) months. Median panitumumab treatment duration: 11.9 (range 0.1-34.9) weeks; 25.0% patients had a dose reduction and 40.9% discontinued treatment. Grade 3-4 adverse events (AEs): 68.2%/22.2% patients. Most common AEs: asthenia (75.0%) and mucosal inflammation (54.5%). Serious AEs were experienced by 54.6% patients; 9.1%, 13.6%, and 15.9% related to panitumumab, DOC, and CIS, respectively. Three (6.8%) patients died due to AEs not related to study treatment. CONCLUSIONS: The addition of panitumumab to standard chemotherapy as the first-line treatment in advanced gastric or GEJ-ADC does not appear to improve the efficacy outcomes.

GEINOFOTE: efficacy and safety of fotemustine in patients with high-grade recurrent gliomas and poor performance status.

PURPOSE: The treatment of recurrent high-grade gliomas (HGG) is controversial. There are different therapeutic schedules but without a clear orientation about which of them should be used in each clinical situation. In addition, when patients suffer a second recurrence or they have poor performance status, they are excluded from clinical trials, although second recurrences and poor performance status are indeed more and more real and common situations in the clinical setting. In this study, we assessed the efficacy and safety of fotemustine (FTM) in HGG [fundamentally, glioblastomas (GB)], independent of time of recurrence or performance status. METHODS/PATIENTS: Retrospective study in HGG patients treated with FTM in second or further line according to standard, the Addeo or any other scheme, starting treatment prior to 30 November 2012. Included patients reflect the regular situation in which the drug is used in terms of comorbidities and analytic situation (hematologic, renal and hepatic functions). Response assessment was performed by MRI and according to the clinical protocols of each center (every 8-12 weeks). Clinical situation and supportive care drugs were evaluated in each medical consultation. Clinical end-points analyzed, among others, were: PFS-6, PFS, OS, response rates, toxicity, quality of life and neurocognitive impact. RESULTS: In terms of activity, an overall response rate of 8 % was observed: partial response 6 % (7 patients) and complete response 2 % (2 patients). The median time to achieve the greater response with FTM was 73 days (4-841 days). Patients treated according to the Addeo schedule had a shorter time to greater response in comparison with other schedules (85.9 vs 114 days), although without statistical significance. There were no significant differences in progression-free survival (PFS) when comparing different FTM schedules or using FTM in first or second recurrence. Median PFS: 3 months. PFS-6: 30.3 %. Overall survival (OS): although without significant differences, a tendency to better survival when using the Addeo schedule versus other schedules was observed (at 6 months, 44.6 vs 34.5 %; at 12 months, 25 vs 23.6 %; at 18 months, 11.5 vs 7.9 %), as well as if earlier use (second vs third line) concerning OS-12 (33.7 vs 18.2 %). Median OS: 5.2 months. Grades 3-4 toxicity was 28 % (31 patients), being neutropenia (4 %) and thrombocytopenia (17 %) the most frequent adverse reactions. From quality of life and neuro-cognitive function perspectives, 11 patients (10 %) and 16 (14 %) improved the Karnofsky Index and neurological impairment, respectively, after FTM treatment. CONCLUSION: This study has shown that FTM is safe and has a comparable activity with other available therapeutic options of use in the treatment of recurrent HGG.