Nivolumab reaches brain lesions in patients with recurrent glioblastoma and induces T-cell activity and upregulation of checkpoint pathways.

Glioblastoma (GBM) is an aggressive brain tumor with poor prognosis. Although immunotherapy is being explored as a potential treatment option for patients with GBM, it is unclear whether systemic immunotherapy can reach and modify the tumor microenvironment in the brain. We evaluated immune characteristics in patients receiving the anti-PD1 immune checkpoint inhibitor Nivolumab one week prior to surgery, compared to control patients receiving salvage resection without prior Nivolumab treatment. We observed saturating levels of Nivolumab bound to intratumorally- and tissue-resident T cells in the brain, implicating saturating levels of Nivolumab reaching brain tumors. Following Nivolumab treatment, significant changes in T-cell activation and proliferation were observed in the tumor resident T-cell population, and peripheral T cells upregulated chemokine receptors related to brain homing. A strong Nivolumab-driven upregulation in compensatory checkpoint inhibition molecules, TIGIT, LAG-3, TIM-3 and CTLA-4 was observed, potentially counteracting the treatment effect. Finally, tumor-reactive tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes (TILs) were found in a subset of Nivolumab-treated patients with prolonged survival, and neoantigen-reactive T cells were identified in both TILs and blood. This indicates a systemic response towards GBM in a subset of patients, which was further boosted by Nivolumab, with T-cell responses towards tumor-derived neoantigens. Our study demonstrates that Nivolumab does reach the GBM tumor lesion and enhances antitumor T-cell responses both intratumorally and systemically. However, various anti-inflammatory mechanisms mitigate the clinical efficacy of the anti-PD1 treatment.

The Neurogenome study: Comprehensive molecular profiling to optimize treatment for Danish glioblastoma patients.

Background: Glioblastoma is an aggressive brain cancer with no possibility for cure. Treatment and survival have only improved slightly since 2005 when the current regime was implemented. The limited improvements in the treatment of glioblastoma may reflect our poor understanding of the disease. We hypothesize that systematically collected translational data will improve knowledge and hereby treatment. Methods: We have been performing whole exome sequencing in glioblastoma tumor tissue since 2016 and whole genome sequencing (WGS) since 2020 with the aim of offering experimental treatment. Results: We have sequenced 400+ GBM patients and from these 100+ are paired tumor samples from relapse surgery. To develop genomic profiling and to increase the information on each patient´s contribution, we have initiated the Neurogenome study as of June 2022. The Neurogenome protocol is a national, comprehensive, translational, and omic protocol. It is a continuation of 2 previous protocols from 2016 and forth in our department, but with more substudies added, focusing on the translational and clinical utility. We collect and analyze data from an out-patient clinic in a systematic approach to a number of subprojects ranging from basic science to applied clinical science, including clinical trials. Conclusions: The protocol will act as a backbone for future projects in the national research center, Danish Comprehensive Cancer Center-Brain Tumor Center with the overall aim to select eligible patients for experimental treatment based upon genomic alterations. The article will present the Neurogenome setup and a presentation of selected projects that are based upon inclusion.

Implementing targeted therapies in the treatment of glioblastoma: Previous shortcomings, future promises, and a multimodal strategy recommendation.

The introduction of targeted therapies to the field of oncology has prolonged the survival of several tumor types. Despite extensive research and numerous trials, similar outcomes have unfortunately not been realized for glioblastoma. For more than 15 years, the standard treatment of glioblastoma has been unchanged. This review walks through the elements that have challenged the success of previous trials and highlight some future promises. Concurrently, this review describes how institutions, through a multimodal and comprehensive strategy with 4 essential components, may increase the probability of finding a meaningful role for targeted therapies in the treatment of glioblastoma. These components are (1) prudent trial designs, (2) considered drug and target selection, (3) harnessed real-world clinical and molecular evidence, and (4) incorporation of translational research.

Diagnostic yield of simultaneous dynamic contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance perfusion measurements and [18F]FET PET in patients with suspected recurrent anaplastic astrocytoma and glioblastoma.

PURPOSE: Both amino acid positron emission tomography (PET) and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) blood volume (BV) measurements are used in suspected recurrent high-grade gliomas. We compared the separate and combined diagnostic yield of simultaneously acquired dynamic contrast-enhanced (DCE) perfusion MRI and O-(2-[18F]-fluoroethyl)-L-tyrosine ([18F]FET) PET in patients with anaplastic astrocytoma and glioblastoma following standard therapy. METHODS: A total of 76 lesions in 60 hybrid [18F]FET PET/MRI scans with DCE MRI from patients with suspected recurrence of anaplastic astrocytoma and glioblastoma were included retrospectively. BV was measured from DCE MRI employing a 2-compartment exchange model (2CXM). Diagnostic performances of maximal tumour-to-background [18F]FET uptake (TBRmax), maximal BV (BVmax) and normalised BVmax (nBVmax) were determined by ROC analysis using 6-month histopathological (n = 28) or clinical/radiographical follow-up (n = 48) as reference. Sensitivity and specificity at optimal cut-offs were determined separately for enhancing and non-enhancing lesions. RESULTS: In progressive lesions, all BV and [18F]FET metrics were higher than in non-progressive lesions. ROC analyses showed higher overall ROC AUCs for TBRmax than both BVmax and nBVmax in both lesion-wise (all lesions, p = 0.04) and in patient-wise analysis (p < 0.01). Combining TBRmax with BV metrics did not increase ROC AUC. Lesion-wise positive fraction/sensitivity/specificity at optimal cut-offs were 55%/91%/84% for TBRmax, 45%/77%/84% for BVmax and 59%/84%/72% for nBVmax. Combining TBRmax and best-performing BV cut-offs yielded lesion-wise sensitivity/specificity of 75/97%. The fraction of progressive lesions was 11% in concordant negative lesions, 33% in lesions only BV positive, 64% in lesions only [18F]FET positive and 97% in concordant positive lesions. CONCLUSION: The overall diagnostic accuracy of DCE BV imaging is good, but lower than that of [18F]FET PET. Adding DCE BV imaging did not improve the overall diagnostic accuracy of [18F]FET PET, but may improve specificity and allow better lesion-wise risk stratification than [18F]FET PET alone.

A Prognostic Model for Glioblastoma Patients Treated With Standard Therapy Based on a Prospective Cohort of Consecutive Non-Selected Patients From a Single Institution.

BACKGROUND: Glioblastoma patients administered standard therapies, comprising maximal surgical resection, radiation therapy with concomitant and adjuvant temozolomide, have a variable prognosis with a median overall survival of 15-16 months and a 2-year overall survival of 30%. The aim of this study was to develop a prognostic nomogram for overall survival for glioblastoma patients treated with standard therapy outside clinical trials. METHODS: The study included 680 consecutive, non-selected glioblastoma patients administered standard therapy as primary treatment between the years 2005 and 2016 at Rigshospitalet, Copenhagen, Denmark. The prognostic model was generated employing multivariate Cox regression analysis modeling overall survival. RESULTS: The following poor prognostic factors were included in the final prognostic model for overall survival: Age (10-year increase: HR = 1.18, 95% CI: 1.08-1.28, p < 0.001), ECOG performance status (PS) 1 vs. 0 (HR = 1.30, 95% CI: 1.07-1.57, p = 0.007), PS 2 vs. 0 (HR = 2.99, 95% CI: 1.99-4.50, p < 0.001), corticosteroid use (HR = 1.42, 95% CI: 1.18-1.70, p < 0.001), multifocal disease (HR = 1.63, 95% CI: 1.25-2.13, p < 0.001), biopsy vs. resection (HR = 1.35, 95% CI: 1.04-1.72, p = 0.02), un-methylated promoter of the MGMT (O6-methylguanine-DNA methyltransferase) gene (HR = 1.71, 95% CI: 1.42-2.04, p < 0.001). The model was validated internally and had a concordance index of 0.65. CONCLUSION: A nomogram for overall survival was established. This model can be used for risk stratification and treatment planning, as well as improve enrollment criteria for clinical trials.

Phase II study of bevacizumab and temsirolimus combination therapy for recurrent glioblastoma multiforme.

BACKGROUND: Bevacizumab combined with chemotherapy has recently shown promising efficacy in recurrent high-grade glioma. Phosphatase and tensin homolog (PTEN) mutation in glioblastoma multiforme (GBM) patients causes abnormally high activity of the pathways of Phosphatidylinositide 3-kinases (PI3K), Protein Kinase B (AKT), and the mammalian target of rapamycin (mTOR) and is associated with unfavorable prognosis. Temsirolimus, an mTOR inhibitor, has been well-tolerated in monotherapy, but with limited effects. The combination of temsirolimus and antibodies to vascular endothelial factor (VEGF) has not yet been investigated, but with the hypothesis that temsirolimus might provide complimentary therapeutic benefit in combination with bevacizumab, we included patients with progressive GBM after bevacizumab in an open phase II study. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Adult patients with GBM recurrence after standard temozolomide chemoradiotherapy and bevacizumab-containing second-line therapy, received temsirolimus (25 mg i.v.) on days 1 and 8 and bevacizumab (10 mg/kg) on day 8, every two weeks. Assessments were performed every eight weeks. Blood samples for biomarkers were collected weekly for the first eight weeks and at progression. The primary end-point was median progression-free survival (PFS) and secondary end-points were radiographic response, overall survival (OS), and safety of the bevacizumab-temsirolimus combination. RESULTS: Thirteen patients were included, whereof three went off-study during the first four weeks and were replaced. The trial was terminated at 13 patients, according to the planned two-stage design, because 0/10 patients obtained partial remission (PR). Two out of 10 patients obtained radiological stable disease (SD). The median PFS survival was eight weeks, and OS was 15 weeks. One patient had an serious adverse event (SAE) with a hypersensitive reaction to temsirolimus; overall, side-effects were mild, and the most common grade III side-effect was hypercholesterolaemia (4/10). Other grade III side-effects included hypertriglyceridaemia (1/10), thrombocytopenia (1/10), infection (1/10), hypertension (1/10), and hyperglycemia (1/10). CONCLUSION: Temsirolimus can be safely administered in combination with bevacizumab. This study failed to detect activity of such a combination in patients with progressive GBM beyond bevacizumab therapy.

Irinotecan and bevacizumab in recurrent glioblastoma multiforme.

INTRODUCTION: Glioblastoma multiforme (GBM) is the most common high grade primary brain tumor in adults. Despite significant advances in treatment, the prognosis remains poor. Bevacizumab (BVZ) and irinotecan (CPT-11) are currently being investigated in the treatment of GBM patients. Although treatment with BVZ and irinotecan provides impressive response rates (RR), it is still uncertain if this treatment translates into improved clinical benefit in GBM patients. AREAS COVERED: This review discusses the clinical efficacy, safety and difficulties regarding response evaluation when treating with BVZ and CPT-11 in recurrent GBM. Particular attention is placed on the literature and a discussion on whether treatment with BVZ and CPT-11 improves clinical outcome. Antiangiogenic treatment has led to difficulties when evaluating objective response by the conventional MacDonald criteria. In the present paper the authors discuss selected key aspects of this treatment modality. A literature search was performed using PubMed in February 2011. EXPERT OPINION: BVZ + irinotecan leads to high RR and to an increased 6-month progression-free survival. However, no improvement in median overall survival has been observed compared with conventional chemotherapy. Nevertheless, the GBM patients who respond to treatment with BVZ and irinotecan have survived significantly longer than non-responders, indicating that it could be beneficial for a selection of patients to receive this treatment.

Prospective evaluation of angiogenic, hypoxic and EGFR-related biomarkers in recurrent glioblastoma multiforme treated with cetuximab, bevacizumab and irinotecan.

Several recent studies have demonstrated a beneficial effect of anti-angiogenic treatment with the vascular endothelial growth factor-neutralizing antibody bevacizumab in recurrent high-grade glioma. In the current study, immunohistochemical evaluation of biomarkers involved in angiogenesis, hypoxia and mediators of the epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) pathway were investigated. Tumor tissue was obtained from a previous phase II study, treating recurrent primary glioblastoma multiforme (GBM) patients with the EGFR inhibitor cetuximab in combination with bevacizumab and irinotecan. Of the 37 patients with available tumor tissue, 29 were evaluable for response. We concurrently performed immunohistochemical stainings on tumor tissue from 21 GBM patients treated with bevacizumab and irinotecan. We found a tendency of correlation between the hypoxia-related markers, indicating that they share the same regulatory mechanisms. None of the EGFR-related biomarkers showed any significant correlations with each other. None of the biomarkers tested alone or in combination could identify a patient population likely to benefit from bevacizumab and irinotecan, with or without the addition of cetuximab. There is still an urgent need for one or more reliable and reproducible biomarkers able to predict the efficacy of anti-angiogenic therapy.

Cetuximab insufficiently inhibits glioma cell growth due to persistent EGFR downstream signaling.

Overexpression and/or amplification of the epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) is present in 35-45% of primary glioblastoma multiforme tumors and has been correlated with a poor prognosis. In this study, we investigated the effect of cetuximab and intracellular signaling pathways downstream of EGFR, important for cell survival and proliferation. We show insufficient EGFR downregulation and competition with endogenous EGFR ligands upon cetuximab treatment. Dose-response experiments showed inhibition of EGFR phosphorylation without affecting two of the prominent downstream signaling pathways. Our results indicate that amplification and/or overexpression of EGFR is an unsatisfactory predictor for response to cetuximab.

Cetuximab, bevacizumab, and irinotecan for patients with primary glioblastoma and progression after radiation therapy and temozolomide: a phase II trial.

The aim of this clinical trial was to investigate safety and efficacy when combining cetuximab with bevacizumab and irinotecan in patients with recurrent primary glioblastoma multiforme (GBM). Patients were included with recurrent primary GBM and progression within 6 months of ending standard treatment (radiotherapy and temozolomide). Bevacizumab and irinotecan were administered IV every 2 weeks. The first 10 patients received bevacizumab 5 mg/kg, but this was increased to 10 mg/kg after interim safety analysis. Irinotecan dose was based on whether patients were taking enzyme-inducing antiepileptic drugs or not: 340 and 125 mg/m(2), respectively. Cetuximab 400 mg/m(2) as loading dose followed by 250 mg/m(2) weekly was administered IV. Forty-three patients were enrolled in the trial, of which 32 were available for response. Radiographic responses were noted in 34%, of which 2 patients had complete responses and 9 patients had partial responses. The 6-month progression-free survival probability was 30% and median overall survival was 29 weeks (95% CI: 23-37 weeks). One patient had lacunar infarction, 1 patient had multiple pulmonary embolisms, and 3 patients had grade 3 skin toxicity, for which 1 patient needed plastic surgery. One patient was excluded due to suspicion of interstitial lung disease. Three patients had deep-vein thrombosis; all continued on study after adequate treatment. Cetuximab in combination with bevacizumab and irinotecan in recurrent GBM is well tolerated except for skin toxicity, with an encouraging response rate. However, the efficacy data do not seem to be superior compared with results with bevacizumab and irinotecan alone.

Bevacizumab plus irinotecan in the treatment patients with progressive recurrent malignant brain tumours.

MATERIAL AND METHODS: We retrospectively determined the efficacy and safety of a combination of bevacizumab and irinotecan in a consecutive series of 52 heavily pre-treated patients with recurrent high-grade brain tumours. Patients received bevacizumab (10 mg/kg) and irinotecan [340 mg/m(2) for those receiving enzyme-inducing antiepileptic drugs (EIAEDs) and 125 mg/m(2) for those not receiving EIAEDs] every 2 weeks. Fifty-two patients were included and 47 were evaluable for response. RESULTS: Complete or partial response was observed in 25% of all cases (30% response in grade IV glioma and 15% in grade III glioma). Estimated median progression-free survival (PFS) for both grade IV and grade III glioma was 22 weeks. The 6-month PFS was 32% for all patients, 40% for grade IV glioma and 33% for grade III glioma. Estimated median overall survival was 30 weeks for all patients, 28 weeks for grade IV glioma and 32 weeks for grade III glioma. Four patients discontinued treatment because of unmanageable toxicity: cerebral haemorrhage, cardiac arrhythmia, intestinal perforation and diarrhoea, the latter resulting in death. DISCUSSION: We conclude that the combination of bevacizumab and irinotecan shows acceptable safety and is a clinically relevant choice of therapy in heavily pre-treated patients with recurrent high-grade brain tumours.