NUTMEG: A randomized phase II study of nivolumab and temozolomide versus temozolomide alone in newly diagnosed older patients with glioblastoma.

Background: There is an immunologic rationale to evaluate immunotherapy in the older glioblastoma population, who have been underrepresented in prior trials. The NUTMEG study evaluated the combination of nivolumab and temozolomide in patients with glioblastoma aged 65 years and older. Methods: NUTMEG was a multicenter 2:1 randomized phase II trial for patients with newly diagnosed glioblastoma aged 65 years and older. The experimental arm consisted of hypofractionated chemoradiation with temozolomide, then adjuvant nivolumab and temozolomide. The standard arm consisted of hypofractionated chemoradiation with temozolomide, then adjuvant temozolomide. The primary objective was to improve overall survival (OS) in the experimental arm. Results: A total of 103 participants were randomized, with 69 in the experimental arm and 34 in the standard arm. The median (range) age was 73 (65-88) years. After 37 months of follow-up, the median OS was 11.6 months (95% CI, 9.7-13.4) in the experimental arm and 11.8 months (95% CI, 8.3-14.8) in the standard arm. For the experimental arm relative to the standard arm, the OS hazard ratio was 0.85 (95% CI, 0.54-1.33). In the experimental arm, there were three grade 3 immune-related adverse events which resolved, with no unexpected serious adverse events. Conclusions: Due to insufficient evidence of benefit with nivolumab, the decision was made not to transition to a phase III trial. No new safety signals were identified with nivolumab. This complements the existing series of immunotherapy trials. Research is needed to identify biomarkers and new strategies including combinations.

Acetazolamide versus placebo for cerebral oedema requiring dexamethasone in recurrent and/or progressive high-grade glioma: phase II randomised placebo-controlled double-blind study.

OBJECTIVES: Symptoms of raised intracranial pressure (ICP) in recurrent high-grade glioma (HGG) generally require corticosteroid treatment, often causing toxicity with variable effects on ICP symptoms. Acetazolamide reduces ICP when used in other clinical non-cancer settings. The aim of the study was to explore whether the addition of oral acetazolamide enables safe dexamethasone dose reduction in management of raised ICP in recurrent HGG. METHODS: Participants had recurrent HGG with any of dexamethasone recommencement, dose increase or dependency; prior/current bevacizumab was an exclusion. Eligible participants were randomised 1:1 to acetazolamide or placebo for 8 weeks. Standardised protocols were used for dexamethasone dosing, with planned dose decrease from day 5 once ICP symptoms were stable. The primary endpoint was a composite of dexamethasone dose reduction and stable Karnofsky Performance Status Secondary endpoints included toxicity and feasibility. RESULTS: Thirty participants (15 per group) were enrolled (mean age 58 years) from seven Australian sites. The mean baseline dexamethasone dose was 6.2 mg. Mean duration on study treatment was 38 days (placebo group) and 31 days (acetazolamide group) with nine participants (30%) completing all study treatments (six placebo, three acetazolamide). Study withdrawal was due to adverse events (n=6; one placebo, five acetazolamide) and disease progression (n=6 (three per arm)). Four participants (13%) (two per arm) were stable responders. Ten participants experienced a total of 13 serious adverse events (acetazolamide arm: five participants (33%), six events, two related). CONCLUSIONS: The study closed early due to poor accrual and increasing availability of bevacizumab. The addition of acetazolamide did not facilitate dexamethasone reduction. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ACTRN12615001072505.

Physical activity behaviors in cancer survivors treated with neurotoxic chemotherapy.

AIM: There are many barriers to physical activity among cancer survivors. Survivors treated with neurotoxic chemotherapy may develop chemotherapy-induced peripheral neuropathy (CIPN) and experience additional barriers related to sensorimotor and mobility deficits. This study examined physical activity behaviors, including physical activity predictors, among cancer survivors treated with neurotoxic chemotherapies. METHODS: A cross-sectional study of 252 participants, 3-24 months after neurotoxic chemotherapy, was undertaken. Physical activity was self-reported (IPAQ). CIPN was self-reported (FACT/GOG-Ntx-13), clinically graded (NCI-CTCAE), and objectively measured using neurological grading scales and neurophysiological techniques (tibial and sural nerve conduction studies). Balance (Swaymeter) and fine motor skills (grooved pegboard) were assessed. Regression models were used to identify clinical, demographic and CIPN predictors of walking and moderate-vigorous physical activity. RESULTS: Forty-four percent of participants did not meet recommended physical activity guidelines (≥150 min/week). Sixty-six percent presented with CIPN. Nineteen percent of participants with CIPN reported that symptoms interfered with their ability to be physically active. A lower proportion of survivors aged ≥60, with grade ≥1 CIPN or BMI ≥30, reported meeting physical activity guidelines (all p < .05). Regression models identified older age, higher BMI, and patient-reported CIPN associated with lower walking, while higher BMI and females were associated with lower moderate-vigorous physical activity. Neurologically assessed CIPN did not associate with walking or moderate-vigorous physical activity. CONCLUSION: Cancer survivors exposed to neurotoxic chemotherapy have low physical activity levels. Further work should examine the factors causing physical activity limitations in this cohort and designing interventions to improve physical function and quality of life in survivors.

Multi-Arm GlioblastoMa Australasia (MAGMA): protocol for a multiarm randomised clinical trial for people affected by glioblastoma.

INTRODUCTION: Glioblastoma (GBM) is the most common malignant primary central nervous system cancer in adults. The objective of the Multi-Arm GlioblastoMa Australasia (MAGMA) trial is to test hypotheses in real world setting to improve survival of people with GBM. Initial experimental arms are evaluating the effectiveness of interventions in newly diagnosed GBM (ndGBM). This study will compare maximal surgical resection followed by chemoradiotherapy plus adjuvant chemotherapy for 6 months with the addition of (1) 'neoadjuvant' chemotherapy beginning as soon as possible after surgery and/or (2) adjuvant chemotherapy continued until progression within the same study platform. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: MAGMA will establish a platform for open-label, multiarm, multicentre randomised controlled testing of treatments for GBM. The study began recruiting in September 2020 and recruitment to the initial two interventions in MAGMA is expected to continue until September 2023.Adults aged ≥18 years with ndGBM will be given the option of undergoing randomisation to each study intervention separately, thereby giving rise to a partial factorial design, with two separate randomisation time points, one for neoadjuvant therapy and one for extended therapy. Patients will have the option of being randomised at each time point or continuing on with standard treatment.The primary outcome for the study is overall survival from the date of initial surgery until death from any cause. Secondary outcomes include progression-free survival, time to first non-temozolomide treatment, overall survival from each treatment randomisation, clinically significant toxicity as measured by grade 3 or 4 adverse events and health-related quality-of-life measures. Tertiary outcomes are predictive/prognostic biomarkers and health utilities and incremental cost-effectiveness ratio.The primary analysis of overall survival will be performed separately for each study intervention according to the intention to treat principle on all patients randomised to each study intervention. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The study (Protocol version 2.0 dated 23 November 2020) was approved by a lead Human Research Ethics Committee (Sydney Local Health District: 2019/ETH13297). The study will be conducted in accordance with the principles of the Declaration of Helsinki and Good Clinical Practice. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ACTRN12620000048987.

Understanding sleep disturbance in the context of malignant brain tumors: a qualitative analysis.

BACKGROUND: Sleep is an important element in health-related quality of life of cancer patients and caregivers. This study aimed to explore the experience of sleep disturbance in people with malignant brain tumors (BT) and their family caregivers. METHODS: Participants were recruited from ambulatory neuro-oncology clinics. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with 24 patients (67% with high-grade gliomas) and 14 caregivers. Data were analyzed thematically using a framework synthesis. RESULTS: We identified six themes relating to perceptions of the nature, impact, causal factors, and interventions for sleep disturbance, beliefs about sleep and impact, and personal coping strategies. Participants described their sleep disturbance in terms of insomnia symptoms; most commonly difficulties initiating and maintaining sleep. Participants had varied views on causal factors including the BT diagnosis and treatment and caregiver burden. However, excessive thinking and BT-related anxiety were evident in both patients and caregivers. The described impact on daytime functioning due to non-restful sleep and fatigue appeared to be significant and many participants needed daytime naps, although they understated the impact on individual functioning. Some participants were reluctant to seek help from clinicians for sleep disturbance due to previous experiences where sleep disturbance was overlooked, or because they held negative views toward pharmacological interventions. Participants reported various coping strategies, ranging from relaxation-promoting techniques to behaviors to distract thinking at night that may instead disturb sleep. CONCLUSIONS: Psychological factors contribute to sleep disturbance in patients with BT and caregivers. This population may benefit from information about sleep disturbance and interventions targeting anxiety.

Barriers to managing sleep disturbance in people with malignant brain tumours and their caregivers: a qualitative analysis of healthcare professionals' perception.

PURPOSE: This study explores healthcare professionals (HCPs)' perception and current management of sleep disturbance (SD) in people with malignant brain tumours and their caregivers. We aimed to identify barriers to effective management of SD in neuro-oncology care. METHODS: We conducted semi-structured interviews with 11 HCPs involved in neuro-oncology care. The study was underpinned by the Capability Opportunity Motivation-Behaviour (COM-B) model within the Behavioural Change Wheel (BCW) guiding topic selection for the exploration of underlying processes of HCPs' behaviours and care decisions for SD management. Data were analysed thematically using a framework synthesis, and subsequently mapped onto the BCW to identify barriers for effective management and recommend potential interventions. RESULTS: We identified four themes: HCPs' clinical opinions about SD, the current practice of SD management in neuro-oncology clinics, gaps in the current practice, and suggested areas for improvements. HCPs perceived SD as a prevalent yet secondary issue of low priority in neuro-oncology care. SD was unrecognised, and inadequately managed in usual clinical settings. Interventional options included modifying the use of corticosteroids or prescribing sedatives. When mapped onto the BCW, themes identified main barriers as a lack of awareness among HCPs about SD warranting care, due to the absence of screening tools and limited knowledge and resources for therapeutic interventions. CONCLUSIONS: Multidisciplinary HCPs need training in the routine use of appropriate sleep assessment tools, and access to clear management pathways. More professional resources are needed to educate staff in implementing appropriate interventions for people with malignant brain tumours who are experiencing SD.

LUMOS - Low and Intermediate Grade Glioma Umbrella Study of Molecular Guided TherapieS at relapse: Protocol for a pilot study.

INTRODUCTION: Grades 2 and 3 gliomas (G2/3 gliomas), when combined, are the second largest group of malignant brain tumours in adults. The outcomes for G2/3 gliomas at progression approach the dismal outcomes for glioblastoma (GBM), yet there is a paucity of trials for Australian patients with relapsed G2/3 gliomas compared with patients with GBM. LUMOS will be a pilot umbrella study for patients with relapsed G2/3 gliomas that aims to match patients to targeted therapies based on molecular screening with contemporaneous tumour tissue. Participants in whom no actionable or no druggable mutation is found, or in whom the matching drug is not available, will form a comparator arm and receive standard of care chemotherapy. The objective of the LUMOS trial is to assess the feasibility of this approach in a multicentre study across five sites in Australia, with a view to establishing a national molecular screening platform for patient treatment guided by the mutational analysis of contemporaneous tissue biopsies METHODS AND ANALYSIS: This study will be a multicentre pilot study enrolling patients with recurrent grade 2/3 gliomas that have previously been treated with radiotherapy and chemotherapy at diagnosis or at first relapse. Contemporaneous tumour tissue at the time of first relapse, defined as tissue obtained within 6 months of relapse and without subsequent intervening therapy, will be obtained from patients. Molecular screening will be performed by targeted next-generation sequencing at the reference laboratory (PathWest, Perth, Australia). RNA and DNA will be extracted from representative formalin-fixed paraffin embedded tissue scrolls or microdissected from sections on glass slides tissue sections following a review of the histology by pathologists. Extracted nucleic acid will be quantified by Qubit Fluorometric Quantitation (Thermo Fisher Scientific). Library preparation and targeted capture will be performed using the TruSight Tumor 170 (TST170) kit and samples sequenced on NextSeq 550 (Illumina) using NextSeq V.2.5 hi output reagents, according to the manufacturer's instructions. Data analysis will be performed using the Illumina BaseSpace TST170 app v1.02 and a custom tertiary pipeline, implemented within the Clinical Genomics Workspace software platform from PierianDx (also refer to section 3.2). Primary outcomes for the study will be the number of patients enrolled and the number of patients who complete molecular screening. Secondary outcomes will include the proportion of screened patients enrolled; proportion of patients who complete molecular screening; the turn-around time of molecular screening; and the value of a brain tumour specific multi-disciplinary tumour board, called the molecular tumour advisory panel as measured by the proportion of patients in whom the treatment recommendation was refined compared with the recommendations from the automated bioinformatics platform of the reference laboratory testing. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The study was approved by the lead Human Research Ethics Committee of the Sydney Local Health District: Protocol No. X19-0383. The study will be conducted in accordance with the principles of the Declaration of Helsinki 2013, guidelines for Good Clinical Practice and the National Health and Medical Research Council National Statement on Ethical Conduct in Human Research (2007, updated 2018 and as amended periodically). Results will be disseminated using a range of media channels including newsletters, social media, scientific conferences and peer-reviewed publications. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ACTRN12620000087954; Pre-results.

A case study of a long-term glioblastoma survivor with unmethylated MGMT and hypermutated genotype.

Effective treatments that extend survival of malignant brain tumor glioblastoma (GBM) have not changed in more than a decade; however, there exists a minority patient group (<5%) whose survival is longer than 3 yr. We herein present a case report of a long-term surviving 51-yr-old female diagnosed with a MGMT unmethylated GBM. The patient was progression-free for 23 mo. Fresh primary and recurrent tumor samples were collected and processed for patient-derived model development. Whole-genome sequencing (WGS) was performed concurrently with additional standard of care diagnostics. WGS revealed a hypermutated genotype in the germline tissue and in both the primary and recurrent tumor samples. Specific to the matched tumors, an average of 30 cancer driver genes were mutated. Noteworthy was the identification of a nonsynonymous mutation in the POLE gene. As a possible instigator of the hypermutational genotype observed in the tumors, we identified nonsynonymous germline mutations within the mismatch repair genes, MLH1 and PMS2 Mutations within these genes are often indicative of the pan-cancer phenotype known as Lynch syndrome; however, their pathogenicity remains unreported. We performed a drug screen of 165 compounds, which identified one compound, YM155, an experimental survivin inhibitor, that showed effectivity to the patient-derived cell lines of both tumors. Treatment selection based on a patient's genome to individualize treatment for GBM patients could potentially be useful in the clinic. This is a promising avenue for further translational research, with larger databases and integrated platforms to increase the efficiency of analyzing and interpreting the individual genomic data of GBM.

Comparison between site and central radiological assessments for patients with recurrent glioblastoma on a clinical trial.

AIM: Assessment of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) in glioblastoma can be challenging. For patients with recurrent glioblastoma managed on the CABARET trial, we compared disease status assessed at hospitals and subsequent blinded central expert radiological review. METHODS: MRI results and clinical status at specified time points were used for site and central assessment of disease status. Clinical status was determined by the site. Response Assessment in Neuro-Oncology (RANO) criteria were used for both assessments. Site and central assessments of progression-free survival (PFS) and response rates were compared. Inter-rater variability for central review progression dates was assessed. RESULTS: Central review resulted in shorter PFS in 45% of 89 evaluable patients (n = 40). Median PFS was 3.6 (central) versus 3.9 months (site) (hazard ratio 1.5, 95% confidence interval 1.3-1.8, P < 0.001). Responses were documented more frequently by sites (n = 16, 18%) than centrally (n = 11, 12%). Seven of 120 patients continued on trial without site-determined progression for more than 6 months beyond the central review determination of progression. Of scans reviewed by all three central reviewers, 33% were fully concordant for progression date. CONCLUSION: While the difference between site and central PFS dates was statistically significant, the 0.3-month median difference is small. The variability within central review is consistent with previous studies, highlighting the challenges in MRI interpretation in this context. A small proportion of patients benefited from treatment well beyond the centrally determined progression date, reinforcing that clinical status together with radiology results are important determinants of whether a therapy is effective for an individual.

The role of early magnetic resonance imaging in predicting survival on bevacizumab for recurrent glioblastoma: Results from a prospective clinical trial (CABARET).

BACKGROUND: Bevacizumab has been associated with prolonged progression-free survival for patients with recurrent glioblastoma; however, not all derive a benefit. An early indicator of efficacy or futility may allow early discontinuation for nonresponders. This study prospectively assessed the role of early magnetic resonance imaging (eMRI) and its correlation with subsequent routine magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) results and survival. METHODS: Patients were part of a randomized phase 2 clinical trial (CABARET) comparing bevacizumab with bevacizumab plus carboplatin for recurrent glioblastoma. eMRI was conducted after 4 weeks in the trial (after 2 treatments with bevacizumab [10 mg/kg every 2 weeks]). The results were compared with the results of the subsequent 8-week MRI standard. RESULTS: For 119 of 122 patients, eMRI was available, and 111 had subsequent MRI for comparison. Thirty-six (30%) had an early radiological response, and 17 (14%) had progressive disease. The concordance between eMRI and 8-week MRI was moderate (κ = 0.56), with most providing the same result (n = 79 [71%]). There was strong evidence that progression-free survival and overall survival were predicted by the eMRI response (both P values < .001). The median survival was 8.6 months for an eMRI response, 6.6 months for stable disease, and 3.7 months for progressive disease; the hazard ratio (progressive disease vs stable disease) was 3.4 (95% confidence interval, 1.9-6.0). Landmark analyses showed that eMRI progression was a strong predictor of mortality independent of other potential baseline predictors. CONCLUSIONS: In this study, early progression on MRI appears to be a robust marker of a poor prognosis for patients on bevacizumab. Cancer 2017;123:3576-82. © 2017 American Cancer Society.

Continuing or ceasing bevacizumab beyond progression in recurrent glioblastoma: an exploratory randomized phase II trial.

BACKGROUND: In patients with recurrent glioblastoma, the benefit of bevacizumab beyond progression remains uncertain. We prospectively evaluated continuing or ceasing bevacizumab in patients who progressed while on bevacizumab. METHODS: CABARET, a phase II study, initially randomized patients to bevacizumab with or without carboplatin (Part 1). At progression, eligible patients underwent a second randomization to continue or cease bevacizumab (Part 2). They could also receive additional chemotherapy regimens (carboplatin, temozolomide, or etoposide) or supportive care. RESULTS: Of 120 patients treated in Part 1, 48 (80% of the anticipated 60-patient sample size) continued to Part 2. Despite randomization, there were some imbalances in patient characteristics. The best response was stable disease in 7 (30%) patients who continued bevacizumab and 2 (8%) patients who stopped receiving bevacizumab. There were no radiological responses. Median progression-free survival was 1.8 vs 2.0 months (bevacizumab vs no bevacizumab; hazard ratio [HR], 1.08; 95% CI, .59-1.96; P = .81). Median overall survival was 3.4 vs 3.0 months (HR, .84; 95% CI, .47-1.50; P = .56 and HR .70; 95% CI .38-1.29; P = .25 after adjustment for baseline factors). Quality-of-life scores did not significantly differ between arms. While the maximum daily steroid dose was lower in the continuation arm, the difference was not statistically significant. CONCLUSIONS: Patients who continued bevacizumab beyond disease progression did not have clear survival improvements, although the study was not powered to detect other than very large differences. While these data provide the only randomized evidence related to continuing bevacizumab beyond progression in recurrent glioblastoma, the small sample size precludes definitive conclusions and suggests this remains an open question.

Randomized phase 2 study of carboplatin and bevacizumab in recurrent glioblastoma.

BACKGROUND: The optimal use of bevacizumab in recurrent glioblastoma (GBM), including the choice of monotherapy or combination therapy, remains uncertain. The purpose of this study was to compare combination therapy with bevacizumab monotherapy. METHODS: This was a 2-part randomized phase 2 study. Eligibility criteria included recurrent GBM after radiotherapy and temozolomide, no other chemotherapy for GBM, and Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status 0-2. The primary objective (Part 1) was to determine the effect of bevacizumab plus carboplatin versus bevacizumab monotherapy on progression-free survival (PFS) using modified Response Assessment in Neuro-Oncology criteria. Bevacizumab was given every 2 weeks, 10 mg/kg; and carboplatin every 4 weeks, (AUC 5). On progression, patients able to continue were randomized to continue or cease bevacizumab (Part 2). Secondary endpoints included objective radiological response rate (ORR), quality of life, toxicity, and overall survival (OS). RESULTS: One hundred twenty-two patients (median age, 55y) were enrolled to Part 1 from 18 Australian sites. Median follow-up was 32 months, and median on-treatment time was 3.3 months. Median PFS was 3.5 months for each arm (hazard ratio [HR]: 0.92, 95% CI: 0.64-1.33, P = .66). ORR was 14% (combination) versus 6% (monotherapy) (P = .18). Median OS was 6.9 (combination) versus 7.5 months (monotherapy) (HR: 1.18, 95% CI: 0.82-1.69, P = .38). The incidence of bevacizumab-related adverse events was similar to prior literature, with no new toxicity signals. Toxicities were higher in the combination arm. Part 2 data (n = 48) will be reported separately. CONCLUSIONS: Adding carboplatin resulted in more toxicity without additional clinical benefit. Clinical outcomes in patients with recurrent GBM treated with bevacizumab were inferior to those in previously reported studies. CLINICAL TRIALS REGISTRATION NR: ACTRN12610000915055.

Geriatric assessment of older patients with cancer in Australia--a multicentre audit.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study is to determine the frequency of geriatric assessment in patients aged over 70 years in Australian medical oncology clinics. MATERIAL AND METHODS: This was a multicentre audit in two parts: a retrospective file review of initial consultations with an oncologist and prospective audit of case presentations at multidisciplinary meetings (MDMs). Patients aged over 70 years presenting to a medical oncology clinic or being discussed at an MDM were eligible. Data was collected at six oncology centres in Victoria, NSW and Canberra from October 2009 to March 2010. RESULTS: Data was collected from 251 file reviews and 108 MDM discussions in a total of 304 patients. Median age was 76 years (range 70-95). The geriatric assessment (GA) domains most frequently assessed during an initial consultation were the presence of comorbidities (92%), social situation-living alone or with someone (80%), social supports (63%), any mention of at least one Activity of Daily Living (ADL) (50%) and performance status (49%). Less frequently assessed were any Instrumental Activity of Daily Living (IADL) (26%), presence of a geriatric syndrome (24%), polypharmacy (29%) and creatinine clearance (11%). Only one patient had all components of ADLs and IADLs assessed. During MDMs all the geriatric domains were comparatively less frequently assessed. No patients had all ADL and IADL components discussed formally in an MDM. CONCLUSION: This is the first multicentre audit that reveals the low rates of GA in Australian medical oncology practice and describes the GA domains considered important by oncology clinicians.

Bevacizumab in high-grade gliomas: a review of its uses, toxicity assessment, and future treatment challenges.

High-grade gliomas continue to have dismal prognosis despite advances made in understanding the molecular genetics, signaling pathways, cytoskeletal dynamics, and the role of stem cells in gliomagenesis. Conventional treatment approaches, including surgery, radiotherapy, and cytotoxic chemotherapy, have been used with limited success. Therapeutic advances using molecular targeted therapy, immunotherapy, and others such as dietary treatments have not been able to halt tumor progression and disease-related death. High-grade gliomas (World Health Organization grades III/IV) are histologically characterized by cellular and nuclear atypia, neoangiogenesis, and necrosis. The expression of vascular endothelial growth factor, a molecular mediator, plays a key role in vascular proliferation and tumor survival. Targeting vascular endothelial growth factor has demonstrated promising results, with improved quality of life and progression-free survival. Bevacizumab, a humanized monoclonal antibody to vascular endothelial growth factor, is approved by the Food and Drug Administration as a single agent in recurrent glioblastoma and is associated with manageable toxicity. This review discusses the efficacy, practical aspects, and response assessment challenges with the use of bevacizumab in the treatment of high-grade gliomas.