Recent advances in Tumor Treating Fields (TTFields) therapy for glioblastoma.

Tumor Treating Fields (TTFields) therapy is a locoregional, anticancer treatment consisting of a noninvasive, portable device that delivers alternating electric fields to tumors through arrays placed on the skin. Based on efficacy and safety data from global pivotal (randomized phase III) clinical studies, TTFields therapy (Optune Gio) is US Food and Drug Administration-approved for newly diagnosed (nd) and recurrent glioblastoma (GBM) and Conformité Européenne-marked for grade 4 glioma. Here we review data on the multimodal TTFields mechanism of action that includes disruption of cancer cell mitosis, inhibition of DNA replication and damage response, interference with cell motility, and enhancement of systemic antitumor immunity (adaptive immunity). We describe new data showing that TTFields therapy has efficacy in a broad range of patients, with a tolerable safety profile extending to high-risk subpopulations. New analyses of clinical study data also confirmed that overall and progression-free survival positively correlated with increased usage of the device and dose of TTFields at the tumor site. Additionally, pilot/early phase clinical studies evaluating TTFields therapy in ndGBM concomitant with immunotherapy as well as radiotherapy have shown promise, and new pivotal studies will explore TTFields therapy in these settings. Finally, we review recent and ongoing studies in patients in pediatric care, other central nervous system tumors and brain metastases, as well as other advanced-stage solid tumors (ie, lung, ovarian, pancreatic, gastric, and hepatic cancers), that highlight the broad potential of TTFields therapy as an adjuvant treatment in oncology.

Breakthrough SARS-CoV-2 infections among patients with cancer following two and three doses of COVID-19 mRNA vaccines: a retrospective observational study from the COVID-19 and Cancer Consortium.

Background: Breakthrough SARS-CoV-2 infections following vaccination against COVID-19 are of international concern. Patients with cancer have been observed to have worse outcomes associated with COVID-19 during the pandemic. We sought to evaluate the clinical characteristics and outcomes of patients with cancer who developed breakthrough SARS-CoV-2 infections after 2 or 3 doses of mRNA vaccines. Methods: We evaluated the clinical characteristics of patients with cancer who developed breakthrough infections using data from the multi-institutional COVID-19 and Cancer Consortium (CCC19; NCT04354701). Analysis was restricted to patients with laboratory-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 diagnosed in 2021 or 2022, to allow for a contemporary unvaccinated control population; potential differences were evaluated using a multivariable logistic regression model after inverse probability of treatment weighting to adjust for potential baseline confounding variables. Adjusted odds ratios (aOR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) are reported. The primary endpoint was 30-day mortality, with key secondary endpoints of hospitalization and ICU and/or mechanical ventilation (ICU/MV). Findings: The analysis included 2486 patients, of which 564 and 385 had received 2 or 3 doses of an mRNA vaccine prior to infection, respectively. Hematologic malignancies and recent receipt of systemic anti-neoplastic therapy were more frequent among vaccinated patients. Vaccination was associated with improved outcomes: in the primary analysis, 2 doses (aOR: 0.62, 95% CI: 0.44-0.88) and 3 doses (aOR: 0.20, 95% CI: 0.11-0.36) were associated with decreased 30-day mortality. There were similar findings for the key secondary endpoints of ICU/MV (aOR: 0.60, 95% CI: 0.45-0.82 and 0.37, 95% CI: 0.24-0.58) and hospitalization (aOR: 0.60, 95% CI: 0.48-0.75 and 0.35, 95% CI: 0.26-0.46) for 2 and 3 doses, respectively. Importantly, Black patients had higher rates of hospitalization (aOR: 1.47, 95% CI: 1.12-1.92), and Hispanic patients presented with higher rates of ICU/MV (aOR: 1.61, 95% CI: 1.06-2.44). Interpretation: Vaccination against COVID-19, especially with additional doses, is a fundamental strategy in the prevention of adverse outcomes including death, among patients with cancer. Funding: This study was partly supported by grants from the National Cancer Institute grant number P30 CA068485 to C-YH, YS, SM, JLW; T32-CA236621 and P30-CA046592 to C.R.F; CTSA 2UL1TR001425-05A1 to TMW-D; ACS/FHI Real-World Data Impact Award, P50 MD017341-01, R21 CA242044-01A1, Susan G. Komen Leadership Grant Hunt to MKA. REDCap is developed and supported by Vanderbilt Institute for Clinical and Translational Research grant support (UL1 TR000445 from NCATS/NIH).

Managing Central Nervous System Tumors During Pregnancy.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: This article discusses current recommendations and special considerations for the management of central nervous system (CNS) tumors in pregnant women and provides case vignettes to emphasize important clinical concepts. RECENT FINDINGS: Given that nearly 60% of all intracranial and spinal cord tumors, including both primary and metastatic tumor types, malignant or benign, are diagnosed in women, it is equitable to bring attention to the unique management considerations that pertain to women during specific phases of their lifespan, such as pregnancy. The pregnancy phase is marked by changes in hormonal, immunologic, and other physiologic responses. Although substantial evidence supports a pregnancy influence on tumor oncogenicity, the cumulative effect of the pregnancy state on brain tumor biology remains elusive. Furthermore, as innovative cancer treatments and surveillance technologies expand, providers must consider potential new risks to safe pregnancy maintenance. This article reviews pregnancy considerations in CNS tumor care and offers best practice approaches and considerations. SUMMARY: Informed neuro-oncology practices on safer surgical, radiation, medical, device, and imaging techniques is of critical importance to pregnancy and fertility maintenance in cancer survivors. Expanding this knowledge relies on advocacy and a commitment to develop equitable and multidisciplinary research within the field. This also requires a focus on patient-reported outcomes and patient-centered conversations to best care for pregnant women with CNS tumors.

Assessment of Regional Variability in COVID-19 Outcomes Among Patients With Cancer in the United States.

Importance: The COVID-19 pandemic has had a distinct spatiotemporal pattern in the United States. Patients with cancer are at higher risk of severe complications from COVID-19, but it is not well known whether COVID-19 outcomes in this patient population were associated with geography. Objective: To quantify spatiotemporal variation in COVID-19 outcomes among patients with cancer. Design, Setting, and Participants: This registry-based retrospective cohort study included patients with a historical diagnosis of invasive malignant neoplasm and laboratory-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection between March and November 2020. Data were collected from cancer care delivery centers in the United States. Exposures: Patient residence was categorized into 9 US census divisions. Cancer center characteristics included academic or community classification, rural-urban continuum code (RUCC), and social vulnerability index. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was 30-day all-cause mortality. The secondary composite outcome consisted of receipt of mechanical ventilation, intensive care unit admission, and all-cause death. Multilevel mixed-effects models estimated associations of center-level and census division-level exposures with outcomes after adjustment for patient-level risk factors and quantified variation in adjusted outcomes across centers, census divisions, and calendar time. Results: Data for 4749 patients (median [IQR] age, 66 [56-76] years; 2439 [51.4%] female individuals, 1079 [22.7%] non-Hispanic Black individuals, and 690 [14.5%] Hispanic individuals) were reported from 83 centers in the Northeast (1564 patients [32.9%]), Midwest (1638 [34.5%]), South (894 [18.8%]), and West (653 [13.8%]). After adjustment for patient characteristics, including month of COVID-19 diagnosis, estimated 30-day mortality rates ranged from 5.2% to 26.6% across centers. Patients from centers located in metropolitan areas with population less than 250 000 (RUCC 3) had lower odds of 30-day mortality compared with patients from centers in metropolitan areas with population at least 1 million (RUCC 1) (adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 0.31; 95% CI, 0.11-0.84). The type of center was not significantly associated with primary or secondary outcomes. There were no statistically significant differences in outcome rates across the 9 census divisions, but adjusted mortality rates significantly improved over time (eg, September to November vs March to May: aOR, 0.32; 95% CI, 0.17-0.58). Conclusions and Relevance: In this registry-based cohort study, significant differences in COVID-19 outcomes across US census divisions were not observed. However, substantial heterogeneity in COVID-19 outcomes across cancer care delivery centers was found. Attention to implementing standardized guidelines for the care of patients with cancer and COVID-19 could improve outcomes for these vulnerable patients.

Treatment for Brain Metastases: ASCO-SNO-ASTRO Guideline.

PURPOSE: To provide guidance to clinicians regarding therapy for patients with brain metastases from solid tumors. METHODS: ASCO convened an Expert Panel and conducted a systematic review of the literature. RESULTS: Thirty-two randomized trials published in 2008 or later met eligibility criteria and form the primary evidentiary base. RECOMMENDATIONS: Surgery is a reasonable option for patients with brain metastases. Patients with large tumors with mass effect are more likely to benefit than those with multiple brain metastases and/or uncontrolled systemic disease. Patients with symptomatic brain metastases should receive local therapy regardless of the systemic therapy used. For patients with asymptomatic brain metastases, local therapy should not be deferred unless deferral is specifically recommended in this guideline. The decision to defer local therapy should be based on a multidisciplinary discussion of the potential benefits and harms that the patient may experience. Several regimens were recommended for non-small-cell lung cancer, breast cancer, and melanoma. For patients with asymptomatic brain metastases and no systemic therapy options, stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) alone should be offered to patients with one to four unresected brain metastases, excluding small-cell lung carcinoma. SRS alone to the surgical cavity should be offered to patients with one to two resected brain metastases. SRS, whole brain radiation therapy, or their combination are reasonable options for other patients. Memantine and hippocampal avoidance should be offered to patients who receive whole brain radiation therapy and have no hippocampal lesions and 4 months or more expected survival. Patients with asymptomatic brain metastases with either Karnofsky Performance Status ≤ 50 or Karnofsky Performance Status < 70 with no systemic therapy options do not derive benefit from radiation therapy.Additional information is available at www.asco.org/neurooncology-guidelines.

PA- and NP-led Ommaya clinics to manage leptomeningeal carcinomatosis.

OBJECTIVES: Physician assistants (PAs) and NPs are essential to quality care delivery. The need to demonstrate value and optimize PA and NP roles in neurology subspecialty clinics is unmet. We outline the development of a PA- and NP-led neuro-oncology procedural clinic and provide metrics to support the institutional and clinician value added. METHODS: We designed a PA- and NP-led Geisinger Ommaya Clinic (GOC) to manage leptomeningeal carcinomatosis (LMC) with defined clinician roles and the GOC treatment protocol. A retrospective review of 135 patients (2012-2019) compared survival outcomes for patients treated on the protocol compared with those treated off the protocol. RESULTS: Centralized care in the GOCs minimized shared physician encounters and improved PA and NP autonomy and utility. LMC therapy as part of the GOC protocol improved care continuity and survival outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: PA- and NP-led procedural clinics optimize use of these clinicians and open physician availability for nonprocedural duties. This research highlights the institutional patient and financial benefit while demonstrating the operational and leadership growth potential for PAs and NPs.

Hormone-Dependent Tumors and Sexuality in the Neuro-Oncology of Women (N.O.W.): Women's Brain Tumors, Gaps in Sexuality Considerations, and a Need for Evidence-Based Guidelines.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: While females make up almost 60% of all brain and spinal cord tumors in adults, guidelines that address women's issues in neuro-oncology are lacking. This review sheds light on two common women's issues in neuro-oncology. RECENT FINDINGS: Neuro-oncology providers are often faced with patient questions about fertility and pregnancy maintenance or prevention and typically respond with generic cancer chemotherapy recommendations, based on the paucity of evidence on the use of common neuro-oncology chemotherapies and pregnancy. While these remain important gap issues, there are several other poorly researched issues in the Neuro-Oncology of Women (N.O.W.) including recommendations around endogenous and iatrogenic hormone exposure and female sexuality in cancer. As a significant percentage of cancers are hormone-dependent, it is important to understand how changes in hormone levels impact tumor biology over the course of a woman's lifespan. Furthermore, greater attention should be given to the impact of tumors and tumor treatments on female sexuality. This article is intended to serve as an introduction to these two specific subjects within the vast expanse of N.O.W. subject matter.

SNO 2020 diversity survey: defining demographics, racial biases, career success metrics and a path forward for the field of neuro-oncology.

BACKGROUND: Neuro-oncology has grown tremendously since 2010, marked by increasing society membership, specialized clinical expertise, and new journals. Yet, modest improvement in racial/ethnic diversity amongst clinical trial participants, researchers, and clinicians led us to conduct a survey to identify opportunities to enhance diversity and inclusiveness amongst neuro-oncology professionals. METHODS: In summer 2020, the Women and Diversity Committee of the Society for Neuro-Oncology (SNO) distributed an anonymous online survey to members and affiliates including the European Association of Neuro-Oncology (EANO), Asian Society for Neuro-Oncology (ASNO), Society for Neuro-Oncology Latin America (SNOLA) and Society for Neuro-Oncology Sub-Saharan Africa (SNOSSA). The survey captured personal and professional characteristics, biases, effective mentorship qualities, career service metrics, and suggested field/society changes. Results were analyzed by geography, profession, age, racial/ethnic, and sexual identity. Standard descriptive statistics characterized the study population. RESULTS: The 386 respondents were predominantly female (58%) with a median age range of 40-49 years (31%), White (65%), and SNO members (97%). Most worked in North America (77%) in a research profession (67%). A majority of White respondents reported never experiencing biases (64%), while the majority of non-White respondents reported unconscious biases/microaggressions, followed by a lack of/limited mentorship. Qualitative assessments showcased that personal/professional success metrics were linked to needed improvements in diversity and inclusion efforts within the neuro-oncology field. CONCLUSIONS: The prevalence of racial/ethnic biases and poor mentorship rates amongst underrepresented groups in neuro-oncology is high and potentially linked to the limited diverse representation amongst members and affiliates. These findings warrant a swift implementation of equity and inclusion practices within the neuro-oncology field.

Case series review of neuroradiologic changes associated with immune checkpoint inhibitor therapy.

While immuno-oncotherapy (IO) has significantly improved outcomes in the treatment of systemic cancers, various neurological complications have accompanied these therapies. Treatment with immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) risks multi-organ autoimmune inflammatory responses with gastrointestinal, dermatologic, and endocrine complications being the most common types of complications. Despite some evidence that these therapies are effective to treat central nervous system (CNS) tumors, there are a significant range of related neurological side effects due to ICIs. Neuroradiologic changes associated with ICIs are commonly misdiagnosed as progression and might limit treatment or otherwise impact patient care. Here, we provide a radiologic case series review restricted to neurological complications attributed to ICIs, anti-CTLA-4, and PD-L-1/PD-1 inhibitors. We report the first case series dedicated to the review of CNS/PNS radiologic changes secondary to ICI therapy in cancer patients. We provide a brief case synopsis with neuroimaging followed by an annotated review of the literature relevant to each case. We present a series of neuroradiological findings including nonspecific parenchymal and encephalitic, hypophyseal, neural (cranial and peripheral), meningeal, cavity-associated, and cranial osseous changes seen in association with the use of ICIs. Misdiagnosis of radiologic abnormalities secondary to neurological immune-related adverse events can impact patient treatment regimens and clinical outcomes. Rapid recognition of various neuroradiologic changes associated with ICI therapy can improve patient tolerance and adherence to cancer therapies.

Tumor Treating Fields for Glioblastoma Therapy During the COVID-19 Pandemic.

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic has placed excessive strain on health care systems and is especially evident in treatment decision-making for cancer patients. Glioblastoma (GBM) patients are among the most vulnerable due to increased incidence in the elderly and the short survival time. A virtual meeting was convened on May 9, 2020 with a panel of neuro-oncology experts with experience using Tumor Treating Fields (TTFields). The objective was to assess the risk-to-benefit ratio and provide guidance for using TTFields in GBM during the COVID-19 pandemic. PANEL DISCUSSION: Topics discussed included support and delivery of TTFields during the COVID-19 pandemic, concomitant use of TTFields with chemotherapy, and any potential impact of TTFields on the immune system in an intrinsically immunosuppressed GBM population. Special consideration was given to TTFields' use in elderly patients and in combination with radiotherapy regimens. Finally, the panel discussed the need to better capture data on COVID-19positive brain tumor patients to analyze longitudinal outcomes and changes in treatment decision-making during the pandemic. EXPERT OPINION: TTFields is a portable home-use device which can be managed via telemedicine and safely used in GBM patients during the COVID-19 pandemic. TTFields has no known immunosuppressive effects which is important during a crisis where other treatment methods might be limited, especially for elderly patients with multiple co-morbidities. It is too early to estimate the full impact of COVID-19 on the global healthcare system and on patient outcomes and the panel strongly recommended collaboration with existing cancer COVID-19 registries to follow CNS tumor patients.

Telemedicine review in neuro-oncology: comparative experiential analysis for Barrow Neurological Institute and Geisinger Health during the 2020 COVID-19 pandemic.

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has grossly affected how we deliver health care and how health care institutions derive value from the care provided. Adapting to new technologies and reimbursement patterns were challenges that had to be met by the institutions while patients struggled with decisions to prioritize concerns and to identify new pathways to care. With the implementation of social distancing practices, telemedicine plays an increasing role in patient care delivery, particularly in the field of neurology. This is of particular concern in our cancer patient population given that these patients are often at increased infectious risk on immunosuppressive therapies and often have mobility limitations. We reviewed telemedicine practices in neurology pre- and post-COVID-19 and evaluated the neuro-oncology clinical practice approaches of 2 large care systems, Barrow Neurological Institute and Geisinger Health. Practice metrics were collected for impact on clinic volumes, institutional recovery techniques, and task force development to address COVID-19 specific issues. Neuro-Oncology divisions reached 67% or more of prepandemic capacity (patient visits and slot utilization) within 3 weeks and returned to 90% or greater capacity within 6 weeks of initial closures due to COVID-19. The 2 health systems rapidly and effectively implemented telehealth practices to recover patient volumes. Although telemedicine will not replace the in-person clinical visit, telemedicine will likely continue to be an integral part of neuro-oncologic care. Telemedicine has potential for expanding access in remote areas and provides a convenient alternative to patients with limited mobility, transportation, or other socioeconomic complexities that otherwise challenge patient visit adherence.

Pharmacist value-added to neuro-oncology subspecialty clinics: A pilot study uncovers opportunities for best practices and optimal time utilization.

PURPOSE: To evaluate neuro-oncology clinician time utilization for medication management and identify a cost beneficial role for integration of a dedicated pharmacy specialists. METHODS: A pharmacist was temporarily integrated into a neuro-oncology clinic for a 30-day period to evaluate the clinical practice and perform a 14-day clinical chart evaluation and patient interactions as part of a single institutional exploratory analysis. The pharmacist completed screenings for drug-drug interactions, new therapies, medication reconciliation, and advanced interventions as part of a collaborative practice agreement for pharmacist autonomy. Pharmacist time spent was calculated and documented within the patient encounters to support physician decision-making. A comparative estimate of pharmacist versus physician time utilization and cost for each was completed to derive a savings analysis for integration of a dedicated clinic pharmacist. RESULT: During the 14-day clinical assessment, the pharmacist completed 147 encounters with 338 interventions. Of the encounters, 90% (n = 132) were higher complexity requiring plan modification, and approximately 48% (n = 162) of all interventions required ≥10 minutes of the pharmacist's time. Physician non-patient-facing time devoted to medication tasks was 5-hours weekly (0.125 FTE, full time equivalents), an estimated direct salary cost of $937/week ($45,000 yearly). Hire of a part-time pharmacist at 0.50 FTE would cover the clinical need with supported documentation and medication monitoring at a cost of $45,000/year. CONCLUSION: Defining the roles for dedicated neuro-oncology clinic pharmacists allows for cost-savings through re-allocation of physician time and improves subspecialty clinic operations as well as patient care.

Early imaging marker of progressing glioblastoma: a window of opportunity.

PURPOSE: Therapeutic intervention at glioblastoma (GBM) progression, as defined by current assessment criteria, is arguably too late as second-line therapies fail to extend survival. Still, most GBM trials target recurrent disease. We propose integration of a novel imaging biomarker to more confidently and promptly define progression and propose a critical timepoint for earlier intervention to extend therapeutic exposure. METHODS: A retrospective review of 609 GBM patients between 2006 and 2019 yielded 135 meeting resection, clinical, and imaging inclusion criteria. We qualitatively and quantitatively analyzed 2000+ sequential brain MRIs (initial diagnosis to first progression) for development of T2 FLAIR signal intensity (SI) within the resection cavity (RC) compared to the ventricles (V) for quantitative inter-image normalization. PFS and OS were evaluated using Kaplan-Meier curves stratified by SI. Specificity and sensitivity were determined using a 2 × 2 table and pathology confirmation at progression. Multivariate analysis evaluated SI effect on the hazard rate for death after adjusting for established prognostic covariates. Recursive partitioning determined successive quantifiers and cutoffs associated with outcomes. Neurological deficits correlated with SI. RESULTS: Seventy-five percent of patients developed SI on average 3.4 months before RANO-assessed progression with 84% sensitivity. SI-positivity portended neurological decline and significantly poorer outcomes for PFS (median, 10 vs. 15 months) and OS (median, 20 vs. 29 months) compared to SI-negative. RC/V ratio ≥ 4 was the most significant prognostic indicator of death. CONCLUSION: Implications of these data are far-reaching, potentially shifting paradigms for glioma treatment response assessment, altering timepoints for salvage therapeutic intervention, and reshaping glioma clinical trial design.

Case Report of Immuno-Oncotherapy (IO) Provoked Encephalitis Mimicking Brain Metastasis in a Patient with History of Traumatic Brain Injury.

BACKGROUND: Immuno-oncotherapy (IO) has revolutionized systemic cancer care but remains experimental in brain tumors. IO treatment risks multiorgan autoimmune inflammatory responses that limit its use. The central nervous system (CNS) is an immune-specialized compartment with restricted cellular access, thus fewer cases are reported for immune-mediated encephalitis. Interestingly, patients with history of blood-brain barrier compromise are potentially at higher risk for immune cell trafficking to the CNS. CASE DESCRIPTION: We report the first case, to our knowledge, of a 70-year-old man with clear cell renal cell carcinoma with pulmonary metastases treated with lung irradiation, nephrectomy, and chemotherapy prior to switching to single-agent nivolumab IO. The patient presented with new-onset generalized tonic-clonic seizure and left visual field-cut. Review of patient history revealed remote traumatic brain injury (TBI). Brain imaging noted a solid-enhancing right occipital mass that was presumed metastasis versus lymphoma. Cerebrospinal fluid cytology was negative for malignancy but concerning for lymphoproliferative process not determined to be malignant. The patient started steroids and anti-epileptic therapy. After negative systemic cancer re-staging, IO was discontinued and steroids were initiated with demonstrated patient clinical improvement. CONCLUSIONS: We concluded the diagnosis of immune-mediated encephalitis secondary to IO with collection of reactive T-cells within the area of encephalomalacia. The area of encephalomalacia from prior TBI served to compartmentalize the reactive lymphocytes, giving the appearance of a mass. Taken together, new onset seizure in patients on IO might signal encephalitis and CNS metastatic mimicry should be considered in patients with a prior history of TBI and encephalomalacia.

Urgent Considerations for the Neuro-oncologic Treatment of Patients with Gliomas During the COVID-19 Pandemic.

The COVID-19 outbreak is posing unprecedented risks and challenges for all communities and healthcare systems, worldwide. There are unique considerations for many adult patients with gliomas who are vulnerable to the novel coronavirus due to older age and immunosuppression. As patients with terminal illnesses, they present ethical challenges for centers that may need to ration access to ventilator care due to insufficient critical care capacity. It is urgent for the neuro-oncology community to develop a pro-active and coordinated approach to the care of adults with gliomas in order to provide them with the best possible oncologic care while also reducing their risk of viral infection during times of potential healthcare system failure. In this article, we present an approach developed by an international multi-disciplinary group to optimize the care of adults with gliomas during this pandemic. We recommend measures to promote strict social distancing and minimize exposures for patients, address risk and benefit of all therapeutic interventions, pro-actively develop end of life plans, educate patients and caregivers and ensure the health of the multi-disciplinary neuro-oncology workforce. This pandemic is already changing neuro-oncologic care delivery around the globe. It is important to highlight opportunities to maximize the benefit and minimize the risk of glioma management during this pandemic and potentially, in the future.

Anticonvulsant Prophylaxis and Steroid Use in Adults With Metastatic Brain Tumors: ASCO and SNO Endorsement of the Congress of Neurological Surgeons Guidelines.

PURPOSE: The Congress of Neurological Surgeons (CNS) has developed a series of guidelines for the treatment of adults with metastatic brain tumors, including systemic therapy and supportive care topics. ASCO has a policy and set of procedures for endorsing clinical practice guidelines that have been developed by other professional organizations. METHODS: Two CNS guidelines were reviewed for developmental rigor by methodologists, and an independent multidisciplinary Expert Panel was formed to review the content and assess agreement with the recommendations. The Expert Panel voted to endorse the two guidelines, and ASCO and Society for Neuro-Oncology (SNO) independently reviewed and approved the ASCO/SNO guideline endorsement. RESULTS: The ASCO/SNO Expert Panel determined that the recommendations from the CNS anticonvulsants and steroids guidelines, published January 9, 2019, are clear, thorough, and based on the most relevant scientific evidence. ASCO/SNO endorsed these two CNS guidelines with minor alterations. RECOMMENDATIONS: Key recommendations include the following: prophylactic antiepileptic drugs were not recommended for routine use; and corticosteroids, specifically dexamethasone, were recommended for temporary symptomatic relief in patients with neurologic symptoms and signs related to mass effect from brain metastases. Additional information is available at www.asco.org/neurooncology-guidelines .

Anticonvulsant prophylaxis and steroid use in adults with metastatic brain tumors: summary of SNO and ASCO endorsement of the Congress of Neurological Surgeons guidelines.

BACKGROUND: The Congress of Neurological Surgeons (CNS) has developed a series of guidelines on the treatment of adults with metastatic brain tumors, including systemic therapy and supportive care topics. ASCO has a policy and set of procedures for endorsing clinical practice guidelines that have been developed by other professional organizations. METHODS: Two CNS Guidelines were reviewed for developmental rigor by methodologists and an independent multi-disciplinary Expert Panel was formed to review the content and assess agreement with the recommendations. The expert panel voted to endorse the two guidelines and ASCO and SNO independently reviewed and approved the ASCO/SNO guideline endorsement. RESULTS: The ASCO/SNO Expert Panel determined that the recommendations from the CNS anticonvulsants and steroids guidelines, published January 9, 2019, are clear, thorough, and based upon the most relevant scientific evidence. ASCO/SNO endorsed these two CNS guidelines, with minor alterations. CONCLUSIONS: Key recommendations include: prophylactic anti-epileptic drugs were not recommended for routine use; corticosteroids (specifically dexamethasone) were recommended for temporary symptomatic relief in patients with neurologic symptoms and signs related to mass effect from brain metastases.

ReACT Phase II trial: a critical evaluation of the use of rindopepimut plus bevacizumab to treat EGFRvIII-positive recurrent glioblastoma.

Glioblastoma is the most deadly primary brain tumor in adults and has long represented a therapeutic challenge. Disease recurrence is inevitable, and the management of recurrent disease is complicated by spontaneous or induced tumor heterogeneity which confers resistance to therapy and increased oncogenicity. EGFR and the tumor-specific mutation EGFRvIII is commonly altered in glioblastoma making it an appealing therapeutic target. Immunotherapy is an emerging and promising therapeutic approach to glioma and the EGFRvIII vaccine, rindopepimut, is the first immunotherapeutic drug to enter Phase III clinical trials for glioblastoma. Rindopepimut activates a specific immune response against tumor cells harboring the EGFRvIII protein. This review evaluates the recently completed ReACT Phase II trial using rindopepimut plus bevacizumab in the setting of EGFRvIII-positive recurrent glioblastoma (Clinical Trials identifier: NCT01498328).