Marizomib for patients with newly diagnosed glioblastoma: a randomized phase 3 trial.

BACKGROUND: Standard treatment for patients with newly diagnosed glioblastoma includes surgery, radiotherapy (RT) and temozolomide (TMZ) chemotherapy (TMZ/RT→TMZ). The proteasome has long been considered a promising therapeutic target because of its role as a central biological hub in tumor cells. Marizomib is a novel pan-proteasome inhibitor that crosses the blood brain barrier. METHODS: EORTC 1709/CCTG CE.8 was a multicenter, randomized, controlled, open label phase 3 superiority trial. Key eligibility criteria included newly diagnosed glioblastoma, age > 18 years and Karnofsky performance status > 70. Patients were randomized in a 1:1 ratio. The primary objective was to compare overall survival (OS) in patients receiving marizomib in addition to TMZ/RT→TMZ with patients receiving only standard treatment in the whole population, and in the subgroup of patients with MGMT promoter-unmethylated tumors. RESULTS: The trial was opened at 82 institutions in Europe, Canada and the US. A total of 749 patients (99.9% of planned 750) were randomized. OS was not different between the standard and the marizomib arm (median 17 vs 16.5 months; HR=1.04; p=0.64). PFS was not statistically different either (median 6.0 vs. 6.3 months; HR=0.97; p=0.67). In patients with MGMT promoter-unmethylated tumors, OS was also not different between standard therapy and marizomib (median 14.5 vs 15.1 months, HR=1.13; p=0.27). More CTCAE grade 3/4 treatment-emergent adverse events were observed in the marizomib arm than in the standard arm. CONCLUSIONS: Adding marizomib to standard temozolomide-based radiochemotherapy resulted in more toxicity, but did not improve OS or PFS in patients with newly diagnosed glioblastoma.

Next generation sequencing of high-grade adult-type diffuse glioma in the Netherlands: interlaboratory variation in the primary diagnostic and recurrent setting.

PURPOSE: Next generation sequencing (NGS) is an important tool used in clinical practice to obtain the required molecular information for accurate diagnostics of high-grade adult-type diffuse glioma (HGG). Since individual centers use either in-house produced or standardized panels, interlaboratory variation could play a role in the practice of HGG diagnosis and treatment. This study aimed to investigate the current practice in NGS application for both primary and recurrent HGG. METHODS: This nationwide Dutch survey used the expertise of (neuro)pathologists and clinical scientists in molecular pathology (CSMPs) by sending online questionnaires on clinical and technical aspects. Primary outcome was an overview of panel composition in the different centers for diagnostic practice of HGG. Secondary outcomes included practice for recurrent HGG and future perspectives. RESULTS: Out of twelve neuro-oncology centers, the survey was filled out by eleven (neuro)pathologists and seven CSMPs. The composition of the diagnostic NGS panels differed in each center with numbers of genes ranging from 12 to 523. Differences are more pronounced when tests are performed to find therapeutic targets in the case of recurrent disease: about half of the centers test for gene fusions (60%) and tumor mutational burden (40%). CONCLUSION: Current notable interlaboratory variations as illustrated in this study should be reduced in order to refine diagnostics and improve precision oncology. In-house developed tests, standardized panels and routine application of broad gene panels all have their own advantages and disadvantages. Future research would be of interest to study the clinical impact of variation in diagnostic approaches.

Potential Adverse Outcomes of Shared Decision Making about Palliative Cancer Treatment: A Secondary Analysis of a Randomized Trial.

BACKGROUND: While shared decision making (SDM) is advocated for ethical reasons and beneficial outcomes, SDM might also negatively affect patients with incurable cancer. The current study explored whether SDM, and an oncologist training in SDM, are associated with adverse outcomes (i.e., patient anxiety, tension, helplessness/hopelessness, decisional uncertainty, and reduced fighting spirit). DESIGN: A secondary analysis of a randomized clinical trial investigating the effects of SDM interventions in the context of advanced cancer. The relations between observed SDM (OPTION12), specific SDM elements (4SDM), oncologist SDM training, and adverse outcomes were analyzed. We modeled adverse outcomes as a multivariate phenomenon, followed by univariate regressions if significant. RESULTS: In total, 194 patients consulted by 31 oncologists were included. In a multivariate analysis, observed SDM and adverse outcomes were significantly related. More specifically, more observed SDM in the consultation was related to patients reporting more tension (P = 0.002) and more decisional uncertainty (P = 0.004) at 1 wk after the consultation. The SDM element "informing about the options" was especially found to be related to adverse outcomes, specifically to more helplessness/hopelessness (P = 0.002) and more tension (P = 0.016) at 1 wk after the consultation. Whether the patient consulted an oncologist who had received SDM training or not was not significantly related to adverse outcomes. No relations with long-term adverse outcomes were found. CONCLUSIONS: It is important for oncologists to realize that for some patients, SDM may temporarily be associated with negative emotions. Further research is needed to untangle which, when, and how adverse outcomes might occur and whether and how burden may be minimized for patients. HIGHLIGHTS: Observed shared decision making was related to more tension and uncertainty postconsultation in advanced cancer patientsHowever, training oncologists in SDM did not affect adverse outcomes.Further research is needed to untangle which, when, and how adverse outcomes might occur and how burden may be minimized.

The Predictive Value of FDG PET/CT for Determining Progression-Free Survival in Advanced Stage III-IV BRAF -Mutated Melanoma Patients Treated With Targeted Therapy-What Can Be Learned From Progression?

PURPOSE: The aims of this study were to investigate whether (early) PERCIST response monitoring with 18 F-FDG PET/CT is predictive for progression-free survival (PFS) in unresectable stage III or IV melanoma patients treated with BRAF/MEK inhibitor (MEKi) and to define dissemination patterns at progression with a lesion-based evaluation in direct comparison to baseline to improve our understanding of 18 F-FDG PET/CT during BRAF/MEKi. PATIENTS AND METHODS: This prospective multicenter single-arm study included 70 patients with unresectable stage III/IV BRAF -mutated melanoma who underwent contrast-enhanced CT and 18 F-FDG PET/CT at baseline and 2 and 7 weeks during treatment with vemurafenib plus cobimetinib and at progression if possible. Tumor response assessment was done with RECIST1.1 and PERCIST. Follow-up PET/CT scans were visually compared with baseline to assess dissemination patterns. RESULTS: Using RECIST1.1, PFS was not significantly different between the response groups ( P = 0.26). At 2 weeks, PERCIST median PFS was 15.7 months for patients with complete metabolic response (CMR) versus 8.3 months for non-CMR ( P = 0.035). The hazards ratio (HR) for progression/death in non-CMR versus CMR was 1.99 (95% confidence interval [CI], 1.03-3.84; P = 0.040) and 1.77 (95% CI, 0.91-3.43; P = 0.0935) when adjusting for lactate dehydrogenase (LDH). At 7 weeks, median PFS for PERCIST CMR was 16.7 months versus 8.5 months for non-CMR ( P = 0.0003). The HR for progression/death in the non-CMR group was significantly increased (HR, 2.94; 95% CI, 1.60-5.40; P = 0.0005), even when adjusting for LDH (HR, 2.65; 95% CI, 1.43-4.91; P = 0.0020). At week 7, 18 F-FDG PET/CT was false-positive in all 4 (6%) patients with new FDG-avid lesions but CMR of known metastases. When 18 F-FDG PET/CT was performed at progressive disease, 18/22 (82%) patients had progression of known metastases with or without new 18 F-FDG-avid lesions. CONCLUSIONS: This study shows that PERCIST response assessment at week 7 is predictive for PFS, regardless of LDH. At 2 weeks, patients with CMR have longer PFS than patients with non-CMR, but different PET parameters should be investigated to further evaluate the added value of early 18 F-FDG PET/CT. Disease progression on PET/CT is predominated by progression of known metastases, and new 18 F-FDG-avid lesions during BRAF/MEKi are not automatically a sign of recurrent disease.

Efficacy and Safety of Panitumumab in Patients With RAF/RAS-Wild-Type Glioblastoma: Results From the Drug Rediscovery Protocol.

BACKGROUND: The prognosis of malignant primary high-grade brain tumors, predominantly glioblastomas, is poor despite intensive multimodality treatment options. In more than 50% of patients with glioblastomas, potentially targetable mutations are present, including rearrangements, altered splicing, and/or focal amplifications of epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) by signaling through the RAF/RAS pathway. We studied whether treatment with the clinically available anti-EGFR monoclonal antibody panitumumab provides clinical benefit for patients with RAF/RAS-wild-type (wt) glioblastomas in the Drug Rediscovery Protocol (DRUP). METHODS: Patients with progression of treatment refractory RAF/RASwt glioblastoma were included for treatment with panitumumab in DRUP when measurable according to RANO criteria. The primary endpoints of this study are clinical benefit (CB: defined as confirmed objective response [OR] or stable disease [SD] ≥ 16 weeks) and safety. Patients were enrolled using a Simon-like 2-stage model, with 8 patients in stage 1 and up to 24 patients in stage 2 if at least 1 in 8 patients had CB in stage 1. RESULTS: Between 03-2018 and 02-2022, 24 evaluable patients were treated. CB was observed in 5 patients (21%), including 2 patients with partial response (8.3%) and 3 patients with SD ≥ 16 weeks (12.5%). After median follow-up of 15 months, median progression-free survival and overall survival were 1.7 months (95% CI 1.6-2.1 months) and 4.5 months (95% CI 2.9-8.6 months), respectively. No unexpected toxicities were observed. CONCLUSIONS: Panitumumab treatment provides limited CB in patients with recurrent RAF/RASwt glioblastoma precluding further development of this therapeutic strategy.

Work-related experiences and unmet needs of patients with a malignant glioma and relevant professionals: the BrainWork study.

PURPOSE: Many patients with a malignant (i.e., grade II-IV) glioma are of working age, yet they are rarely included in "cancer and work" studies. Here, we explored (1) the work-related experiences and unmet needs of patients with a malignant glioma and (2) the experiences and needs of relevant healthcare and occupational (health) professionals ("professionals") in providing work-related support to this patient group. METHODS: Individual semi-structured interviews were held with patients with a malignant glioma who were of working age and had an employment contract at diagnosis, and relevant professionals. Interviews were transcribed verbatim and analysed thematically. RESULTS: Patients (n = 22) were on average 46 ± 13 years of age (64% male) and diagnosed with a grade II (n = 12), III (n = 4), or IV glioma (n = 6). Professionals (n = 16) had on average 15 ± 9 years of relevant work experience with the patient group. Four themes emerged from the data: (1) having a malignant glioma: experienced consequences on work ability, (2) communicating about the consequences of a malignant glioma at work, (3) distilling the right approach: generic or tailored work-related support, and (4) accessibility of work-related support. CONCLUSIONS: Glioma-specific consequences on patients' work ability necessitate better communication between, and tailored guidance for, patients, relevant professionals, and the workplace. Suggestions for improvement, e.g., the periodic use of comprehensive neuropsychological assessments, are provided in the article. IMPLICATIONS FOR CANCER SURVIVORS: Patients with a malignant glioma would benefit from tailored and proactive outreach about work-related issues bv relevant professionals.

Practice variation in re-resection for recurrent glioblastoma: A nationwide survey among Dutch neuro-oncology specialists.

Background: Despite current best treatment options, a glioblastoma almost inevitably recurs after primary treatment. However, in the absence of clear evidence, current guidelines on recurrent glioblastoma are not well-defined. Re-resection is one of the possible treatment modalities, though it can be challenging to identify those patients who will benefit. Therefore, treatment decisions are made based on multidisciplinary discussions. This study aimed to investigate the current practice variation between neuro-oncology specialists. Methods: In this nationwide study among Dutch neuro-oncology specialists, we surveyed possible practice variation. Via an online survey, 4 anonymized recurrent glioblastoma cases were presented to neurosurgeons, neuro-oncologists, medical oncologists, and radiation oncologists in The Netherlands using a standardized questionnaire on whether and why they would recommend a re-resection or not. The results were used to provide a qualitative analysis of the current practice in The Netherlands. Results: The survey was filled out by 56 respondents, of which 15 (27%) were neurosurgeons, 26 (46%) neuro-oncologists, 2 (4%) medical oncologists, and 13 (23%) radiation oncologists. In 2 of the 4 cases, there appeared to be clinical equipoise. Overall, neurosurgeons tended to recommend re-resection more frequently compared to the other specialists. Neurosurgeons and radiation oncologists showed opposite recommendations in 2 cases. Conclusions: This study showed that re-resection of recurrent glioblastoma is subject to practice variation both between and within neuro-oncology specialties. In the absence of unambiguous guidelines, we observed a relationship between preferred practice and specialty. Reduction of this practice variation is important; to achieve this, adequate prospective studies are essential.

Limited clinical activity of palbociclib and ribociclib monotherapy in advanced cancers with cyclin D-CDK4/6 pathway alterations in the Dutch DRUP and Australian MoST trials.

The Dutch Drug Rediscovery Protocol (DRUP) and the Australian Cancer Molecular Screening and Therapeutic (MoST) Program are similar nonrandomized, multidrug, pan-cancer trial platforms that aim to identify signals of clinical activity of molecularly matched targeted therapies or immunotherapies outside their approved indications. Here, we report results for advanced or metastatic cancer patients with tumors harboring cyclin D-CDK4/6 pathway alterations treated with CDK4/6 inhibitors palbociclib or ribociclib. We included adult patients that had therapy-refractory solid malignancies with the following alterations: amplifications of CDK4, CDK6, CCND1, CCND2 or CCND3, or complete loss of CDKN2A or SMARCA4. Within MoST, all patients were treated with palbociclib, whereas in DRUP, palbociclib and ribociclib were assigned to different cohorts (defined by tumor type and alteration). The primary endpoint for this combined analysis was clinical benefit, defined as confirmed objective response or stable disease ≥16 weeks. We treated 139 patients with a broad variety of tumor types; 116 with palbociclib and 23 with ribociclib. In 112 evaluable patients, the objective response rate was 0% and clinical benefit rate at 16 weeks was 15%. Median progression-free survival was 4 months (95% CI: 3-5 months), and median overall survival 5 months (95% CI: 4-6 months). In conclusion, only limited clinical activity of palbociclib and ribociclib monotherapy in patients with pretreated cancers harboring cyclin D-CDK4/6 pathway alterations was observed. Our findings indicate that monotherapy use of palbociclib or ribociclib is not recommended and that merging data of two similar precision oncology trials is feasible.

Health-related quality-of-life results from the randomised phase II TAVAREC trial on temozolomide with or without bevacizumab in 1p/19q intact first-recurrence World Health Organization grade 2 and 3 glioma (European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer 26091).

BACKGROUND: In an international randomised controlled phase II study of temozolomide (TMZ) versus TMZ in combination with bevacizumab (BEV) in locally diagnosed non-1p/19q co-deleted World Health Organization grade 2 or 3 gliomas with a first and contrast-enhancing recurrence after initial radiotherapy, and overall survival at 12 months was not significantly different (61% in the TMZ arm and 55% in the TMZ + BEV arm). OBJECTIVES: Health-related quality of life (HRQoL) was a key secondary end-point in this trial, and the main objective of this study was to determine the impact of the addition of BEV to TMZ on HRQoL. METHODS: HRQoL was assessed using the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer QLQ-C30 (version 3) and QLQ-BN20 at baseline, and then every 12 weeks until disease progression. The pre-selected primary HRQoL end-point was the QLQ-C30 global health scale, with self-perceived cognitive functioning and pain selected as secondary HRQoL issues. Analysis was undertaken using linear mixed modelling and complemented with sensitivity analyses using summary statistics. A difference was considered clinically relevant with ≥10 points difference on a 100-point scale. RESULTS: Baseline compliance was high at 94% and remained above 60% until 72 weeks, limiting the analysis to 60 weeks. Compliance was similar in both arms. We found no statistically significant or clinically significant differences between the primary HRQoL end-point in both treatment arms (p = 0.2642). The sensitivity analyses confirmed this finding. The overall test for post-baseline differences between the two treatment arms also showed no statistically or clinically significant differences regarding the selected secondary end-point scales. INTERPRETATION: The addition of BEV to TMZ in this patient group neither improves nor negatively impacts HRQoL.

A Phase I Trial of the Dual MET Kinase/OCT-2 Inhibitor OMO-1 in Metastatic Solid Malignancies Including MET Exon 14 Mutated Lung Cancer.

INTRODUCTION: Targeted therapy in non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients with mesenchymal epithelial transition (MET) exon 14 skipping mutations (METex14) and MET amplifications has improved patients' outcomes. The development of more potent MET kinase inhibitors could further benefit these patients. The aim of this trial is to determine the safety and recommended phase 2 dose (RP2D) of OMO-1 (an oral dual MET kinase/OCT-2 inhibitor) and to assess preliminary clinical efficacy in METex14-positive NSCLC and other MET-positive solid tumors. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This was a first-in-patient, open-label, multicenter study of OMO-1 in patients with locally advanced or metastatic solid malignancies. A standard 3 + 3 dose escalation design was utilized starting at a dose level of 100 mg BID continuously. Preliminary efficacy was investigated in patients with METex14-positive NSCLC, and MET amplified NSCLC and other solid tumors (MET basket). RESULTS: In the dose-escalation part, 24 patients were included in 5 dose levels ranging from 100 mg twice daily (BID) to 400 mg BID. Most common adverse events (≥ 20%) were nausea, fatigue, vomiting, increased blood creatinine, and headache. The RP2D was determined at 250 mg BID. In the expansion cohorts, 15 patients were included (10 in METex14-positive NSCLC cohort and 5 in MET basket cohort) and received either 200 or 250 mg BID. Eight out of the 10 patients with METex14 positive NSCLC had stable disease as the best response. CONCLUSION: OMO-1 was tolerated at the dose of 250 mg BID and shows initial signs of MET inhibition and anti-tumor activity in METex14 mutated NSCLC patients.

Prevalence and Predictors of Physician-Patient Discordance in Prognostic Perceptions in Advanced Cancer.

BACKGROUND: Discordance between physicians' and patients' prognostic perceptions in advanced cancer care threatens informed medical decision-making and end-of-life preparation, yet this phenomenon is poorly understood. We sought to: (1) describe the extent and direction of prognostic discordance, patients' prognostic information preferences in cases of prognostic discordance, and physicians' awareness of prognostic discordance; and (2) examine which patient, physician, and caregiver factors predict prognostic discordance. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Oncologists and advanced cancer patients (median survival ≤12 months; n = 515) from 7 Dutch hospitals completed structured surveys in a cross-sectional study. Prognostic discordance was operationalized by comparing physicians' and patients' perceptions of the likelihood of cure, 2-year mortality risk, and 1-year mortality risk. RESULTS: Prognostic discordance occurred in 20% (likelihood of cure), 24%, and 35% (2-year and 1-year mortality risk) of physician-patient dyads, most often involving patients with more optimistic perceptions than their physician. Among patients demonstrating prognostic discordance, the proportion who preferred not knowing prognosis varied from 7% (likelihood of cure) to 37% (1-year mortality risk), and 45% (2-year mortality risk). Agreement between physician-perceived and observed prognostic discordance or concordance was poor (kappa = 0.186). Prognostic discordance was associated with several patient factors (stronger fighting spirit, self-reported absence of prognostic discussions, an information source other than the healthcare provider), and greater physician-reported uncertainty about prognosis. CONCLUSION: Up to one-third of the patients perceive prognosis discordantly from their physician, among whom a substantial proportion prefers not knowing prognosis. Most physicians lack awareness of prognostic discordance, raising the need to explore patients' prognostic information preferences and perceptions, and to tailor prognostic communication.

Dabrafenib plus trametinib in BRAFV600E-mutated rare cancers: the phase 2 ROAR trial.

BRAFV600E alterations are prevalent across multiple tumors. Here we present final efficacy and safety results of a phase 2 basket trial of dabrafenib (BRAF kinase inhibitor) plus trametinib (MEK inhibitor) in eight cohorts of patients with BRAFV600E-mutated advanced rare cancers: anaplastic thyroid carcinoma (n = 36), biliary tract cancer (n = 43), gastrointestinal stromal tumor (n = 1), adenocarcinoma of the small intestine (n = 3), low-grade glioma (n = 13), high-grade glioma (n = 45), hairy cell leukemia (n = 55) and multiple myeloma (n = 19). The primary endpoint of investigator-assessed overall response rate in these cohorts was 56%, 53%, 0%, 67%, 54%, 33%, 89% and 50%, respectively. Secondary endpoints were median duration of response (DoR), progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS) and safety. Median DoR was 14.4 months, 8.9 months, not reached, 7.7 months, not reached, 31.2 months, not reached and 11.1 months, respectively. Median PFS was 6.7 months, 9.0 months, not reached, not evaluable, 9.5 months, 5.5 months, not evaluable and 6.3 months, respectively. Median OS was 14.5 months, 13.5 months, not reached, 21.8 months, not evaluable, 17.6 months, not evaluable and 33.9 months, respectively. The most frequent (≥20% of patients) treatment-related adverse events were pyrexia (40.8%), fatigue (25.7%), chills (25.7%), nausea (23.8%) and rash (20.4%). The encouraging tumor-agnostic activity of dabrafenib plus trametinib suggests that this could be a promising treatment approach for some patients with BRAFV600E-mutated advanced rare cancers. ClinicalTrials.gov registration: NCT02034110 .

Cancer patients' trust as a motivator to seek a second opinion and its effects on trust.

OBJECTIVE: Cancer patients may seek a second opinion (SO) driven by reduced trust in their own providers. Their trust may be diminished or reinforced through the SO. This study aimed to assess (1) what proportion of patients seek SOs motivated by lacking trust and how trust changes over time; (2) whether patients' trust differs by the outcome of the SO (i.e. similar/different opinion); and (3) how communication during the SO affects trust. DESIGN: A longitudinal mixed methods study including self-report assessments before (T0), immediately following (T1), and two months after the SO (T2). SO consultations (N = 62) were audio recorded, and patient-oncologist communication about the referring oncologist was coded. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Patient-reported motives and their trust in referring oncologists. RESULTS: Reduced trust motivated 21% of patients to seek a SO. Most patients criticised their referring oncologist. Consulting oncologists generally defended their colleagues, but such affirmation was unrelated to patients' subsequent trust. Over time, trust did not change substantially. Yet, it was restored in patients motivated by impaired trust, and remained low for patients receiving a different medical outcome. CONCLUSION: Patients need support to more constructively discuss their treatment relationship. Oncologists need support in providing independent SOs without harming trust relations.

Depatuxizumab mafodotin in EGFR-amplified newly diagnosed glioblastoma: A phase III randomized clinical trial.

BACKGROUND: Approximately 50% of newly diagnosed glioblastomas (GBMs) harbor epidermal growth factor receptor gene amplification (EGFR-amp). Preclinical and early-phase clinical data suggested efficacy of depatuxizumab mafodotin (depatux-m), an antibody-drug conjugate comprised of a monoclonal antibody that binds activated EGFR (overexpressed wild-type and EGFRvIII-mutant) linked to a microtubule-inhibitor toxin in EGFR-amp GBMs. METHODS: In this phase III trial, adults with centrally confirmed, EGFR-amp newly diagnosed GBM were randomized 1:1 to radiotherapy, temozolomide, and depatux-m/placebo. Corneal epitheliopathy was treated with a combination of protocol-specified prophylactic and supportive measures. There was 85% power to detect a hazard ratio (HR) ≤0.75 for overall survival (OS) at a 2.5% 1-sided significance level (ie traditional two-sided p ≤ 0.05) by log-rank testing. RESULTS: There were 639 randomized patients (median age 60, range 22-84; 62% men). Prespecified interim analysis found no improvement in OS for depatux-m over placebo (median 18.9 vs. 18.7 months, HR 1.02, 95% CI 0.82-1.26, 1-sided p = 0.63). Progression-free survival was longer for depatux-m than placebo (median 8.0 vs. 6.3 months; HR 0.84, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.70-1.01, p = 0.029), particularly among those with EGFRvIII-mutant (median 8.3 vs. 5.9 months, HR 0.72, 95% CI 0.56-0.93, 1-sided p = 0.002) or MGMT unmethylated (HR 0.77, 95% CI 0.61-0.97; 1-sided p = 0.012) tumors but without an OS improvement. Corneal epitheliopathy occurred in 94% of depatux-m-treated patients (61% grade 3-4), causing 12% to discontinue. CONCLUSIONS: Interim analysis demonstrated no OS benefit for depatux-m in treating EGFR-amp newly diagnosed GBM. No new important safety risks were identified.

Study protocol of the GLOW study: maximising treatment options for recurrent glioblastoma patients by whole genome sequencing-based diagnostics-a prospective multicenter cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Glioblastoma (GBM), the most common glial primary brain tumour, is without exception lethal. Every year approximately 600 patients are diagnosed with this heterogeneous disease in The Netherlands. Despite neurosurgery, chemo -and radiation therapy, these tumours inevitably recur. Currently, there is no gold standard at time of recurrence and treatment options are limited. Unfortunately, the results of dedicated trials with new drugs have been very disappointing. The goal of the project is to obtain the evidence for changing standard of care (SOC) procedures to include whole genome sequencing (WGS) and consequently adapt care guidelines for this specific patient group with very poor prognosis by offering optimal and timely benefit from novel therapies, even in the absence of traditional registration trials for this small volume cancer indication. METHODS: The GLOW study is a prospective diagnostic cohort study executed through collaboration of the Hartwig Medical Foundation (Hartwig, a non-profit organisation) and twelve Dutch centers that perform neurosurgery and/or treat GBM patients. A total of 200 patients with a first recurrence of a glioblastoma will be included. Dual primary endpoint is the percentage of patients who receive targeted therapy based on the WGS report and overall survival. Secondary endpoints include WGS report success rate and number of targeted treatments available based on WGS reports and number of patients starting a treatment in presence of an actionable variant. At recurrence, study participants will undergo SOC neurosurgical resection. Tumour material will then, together with a blood sample, be sent to Hartwig where it will be analysed by WGS. A diagnostic report with therapy guidance, including potential matching off-label drugs and available clinical trials will then be sent back to the treating physician for discussing of the results in molecular tumour boards and targeted treatment decision making. DISCUSSION: The GLOW study aims to provide the scientific evidence for changing the SOC diagnostics for patients with a recurrent glioblastoma by investigating complete genome diagnostics to maximize treatment options for this patient group. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT05186064.

Trotabresib (CC-90010) in combination with adjuvant temozolomide or concomitant temozolomide plus radiotherapy in patients with newly diagnosed glioblastoma.

Background: Standard-of-care treatment for newly diagnosed glioblastoma (ndGBM), consisting of surgery followed by radiotherapy (RT) and temozolomide (TMZ), has improved outcomes compared with RT alone; however, prognosis remains poor. Trotabresib, a novel bromodomain and extraterminal inhibitor, has demonstrated antitumor activity in patients with high-grade gliomas. Methods: In this phase Ib, dose-escalation study (NCT04324840), we investigated trotabresib 15, 30, and 45 mg combined with TMZ in the adjuvant setting and trotabresib 15 and 30 mg combined with TMZ+RT in the concomitant setting in patients with ndGBM. Primary endpoints were to determine safety, tolerability, maximum tolerated dose, and/or recommended phase II dose (RP2D) of trotabresib. Secondary endpoints were assessment of preliminary efficacy and pharmacokinetics. Pharmacodynamics were investigated as an exploratory endpoint. Results: The adjuvant and concomitant cohorts enrolled 18 and 14 patients, respectively. Trotabresib in combination with TMZ or TMZ+RT was well tolerated; most treatment-related adverse events were mild or moderate. Trotabresib pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics in both settings were consistent with previous data for trotabresib monotherapy. The RP2D of trotabresib was selected as 30 mg 4 days on/24 days off in both settings. At last follow-up, 5 (28%) and 6 (43%) patients remain on treatment in the adjuvant and concomitant settings, respectively, with 1 patient in the adjuvant cohort achieving complete response. Conclusions: Trotabresib combined with TMZ in the adjuvant setting and with TMZ+RT in the concomitant setting was safe and well tolerated in patients with ndGBM, with encouraging treatment durations. Trotabresib 30 mg was established as the RP2D in both settings.

Attitudes Toward Striving for Quality and Length of Life Among Patients With Advanced Cancer and a Poor Prognosis.

PURPOSE: When deliberating palliative cancer treatment, insight into patients' attitudes toward striving for quality of life (QL) and length of life (LL) may facilitate goal-concordant care. We investigated the (1) attitudes of patients with advanced cancer toward striving for QL and/or LL and whether these change over time, and (2) characteristics associated with these attitudes (over time). METHODS: We performed a secondary analysis of a randomized controlled trial on improving shared decision making (SDM), without differentiation between intervention arms. Patients (n = 173) with advanced cancer, a median life expectancy of < 12 months without anticancer treatment, and a median survival benefit of < 6 months from systemic therapy were included in seven Dutch hospitals. We used audio-recorded consultations and surveys at baseline (T0), shortly after the consultation (T2), at 3 and 6 months (T3 and T4). Primary outcomes were patients' attitudes toward striving for QL and LL (Quality Quantity Questionnaire; T2, T3, and T4). RESULTS: Overall, patients' attitudes toward striving for QL became less positive over 6 months (P < .01); attitudes toward striving for LL did not change on group level. Studying individual patients, 76% showed changes in their attitudes toward striving for QL and/or LL at some point during the study, which occurred in various directions. More helplessness/hopelessness (P < .001), less fighting spirit (P < .05), less state anxiety (P < .001), and more observed SDM (P < .05) related to more positive attitudes toward striving for QL. Lower education, less helplessness/hopelessness, more fighting spirit, and more state anxiety (P < .001) related to more positive attitudes toward striving for LL. CONCLUSION: Oncologists may explore patients' attitudes toward striving for QL and LL repeatedly and address patients' coping style and emotions during SDM to facilitate goal-concordant care throughout the last phase of life.

Preclinical comparative study of [18F]AlF-PSMA-11 and [18F]PSMA-1007 in varying PSMA expressing tumors.

A wide variety of 18F-labeled PSMA-targeting PET radiotracers have been developed, including [18F]AlF-PSMA-11. As there is only limited data on the comparison with other 18F-labeled PSMA PET tracers, a comparative preclinical study between [18F]AlF-PSMA-11 and [18F]PSMA-1007 was conducted. Mice with varying PSMA expressing tumors (C4-2, 22Rv1 and PC-3, each n = 5) underwent two PET/CT scans with both [18F]AlF-PSMA-11 and [18F]PSMA-1007. Ten additional mice bearing C4-2 xenografts were subjected to ex vivo biodistribution with either [18F]AlF-PSMA-11 (n = 5) or [18F]PSMA-1007 (n = 5). Absolute SUVmean and SUVmax values were significantly higher for [18F]PSMA-1007 scans in both C4-2 tumors (p < 0.01) and 22Rv1 tumors (p < 0.01). In C4-2 xenograft bearing mice, the tumor-to-organ ratios did not significantly differ between [18F]AlF-PSMA-11 and [18F]PSMA-1007 for liver, muscle, blood and salivary glands (p > 0.05). However, in 22Rv1 xenograft bearing mice, all tumor-to-organ ratios were higher for [18F]AlF-PSMA-11 (p < 0.01). In healthy organs, [18F]PSMA-1007 uptake was higher in the liver, gallbladder, small intestines and glands. Biodistribution data confirmed the increased uptake in the heart, small intestines and liver with [18F]PSMA-1007. Absolute tumor uptake was higher with [18F]PSMA-1007 in all tumors. Tumor-to-organ ratios did not differ significantly in high PSMA expressing tumors, but were higher for [18F]AlF-PSMA-11 in low PSMA expressing tumors. Furthermore, [18F]PSMA-1007 showed higher uptake in healthy organs.

Cost-Utility of the eHealth Application 'Oncokompas', Supporting Incurably Ill Cancer Patients to Self-Manage Their Cancer-Related Symptoms: Results of a Randomized Controlled Trial.

Evidence on the cost-effectiveness of eHealth in palliative care is scarce. Oncokompas, a fully automated behavioral intervention technology, aims to support self-management in cancer patients. This study aimed to assess the cost-utility of the eHealth application Oncokompas among incurably ill cancer patients, compared to care as usual. In this randomized controlled trial, patients were randomized into the intervention group (access to Oncokompas) or the waiting-list control group (access after three months). Healthcare costs, productivity losses, and health status were measured at baseline and three months. Intervention costs were also taken into account. Non-parametric bootstrapping with 5000 replications was used to obtain 95% confidence intervals around the incremental costs and quality-adjusted life years (QALYs). A probabilistic approach was used because of the skewness of cost data. Altogether, 138 patients completed the baseline questionnaire and were randomly assigned to the intervention group (69) or the control group (69). In the base case analysis, mean total costs and mean total effects were non-significantly lower in the intervention group (-€806 and -0.01 QALYs). The probability that the intervention was more effective and less costly was 4%, whereas the probability of being less effective and less costly was 74%. Among patients with incurable cancer, Oncokompas does not impact incremental costs and seems slightly less effective in terms of QALYs, compared to care as usual. Future research on the costs of eHealth in palliative cancer care is warranted to assess the generalizability of the findings of this study.

Characteristics of patients with advanced cancer preferring not to know prognosis: a multicenter survey study.

BACKGROUND: For some patients with advanced cancer not knowing prognosis is essential. Yet, in an era of informed decision-making, the potential protective function of unawareness is easily overlooked. We aimed to investigate 1) the proportion of advanced cancer patients preferring not to know prognosis; 2) the reasons underlying patients' prognostic information preference; 3) the characteristics associated with patients' prognostic information preference; and 4) the concordance between physicians' perceived and patients' actual prognostic information preference. METHODS: This is a cross-sectional study with structured surveys (PROSPECT). Medical and thoracic oncologists included patients (n = 524), from seven Dutch hospitals, with metastatic/inoperable cancer and an expected median overall survival of ≤ 12 months. For analysis, descriptive statistics and logistic regression models were used. RESULTS: Twenty-five to 31% of patients preferred not to know a general life expectancy estimate or the 5/2/1-year mortality risk. Compared to patients preferring to know prognosis, patients preferring unawareness more often reported optimism, avoidance and inability to comprehend information as reasons for wanting limited information; and less often reported expectations of others, anxiety, autonomy and a sense of control as reasons for wanting complete information. Females (p < .05), patients receiving a further line of systemic treatment (p < .01) and patients with strong fighting spirit (p < .001) were more likely to prefer not to know prognosis. Concordance between physicians' perceived and patients' actual prognostic information preference was poor (kappa = 0.07). CONCLUSIONS: We encourage physicians to explore patients' prognostic information preferences and the underlying reasons explicitly, enabling individually tailored communication. Future studies may investigate changes in patients' prognostic information preferences over time and examine the impact of prognostic disclosure on patients who prefer unawareness.