Unmet needs and wish for support of family caregivers of primary brain tumor patients.

Background: Most primary brain tumor patients rely on family caregivers for support. Caregiving can be rewarding, but also leads to significant burden from unmet needs. We aimed to: (1) identify and characterize caregivers' unmet needs; (2) determine associations between unmet needs and wish for support; (3) evaluate acceptability of the Caregiver Needs Screen (CNS) and perceived feasibility in clinical practice. Methods: Family caregivers of primary brain tumor patients were recruited from outpatient clinics and asked to complete an adapted version of the CNS consisting of 33 common issues caregivers report (item scale 0-10), and the wish for support (yes/no). Participants ranked acceptability and feasibility (item scale 0-7; higher scores being positive) of the adapted CNS. Descriptive and non-parametric correlational analyses were applied. Results: Caregivers (N = 71) reported 1-33 unmet caregiving needs (M = 17.20, sd = 7.98) but did not always wish for support (range 0-28, M = 5.82, sd = 6.96). A weak correlation was found between total number of unmet needs and wish for support (r = 0.296, P = .014). Most distressing items were patients' changes in memory/concentration (M = 5.75, sd = 3.29), patients' fatigue (M = 5.58, sd = 3.43), and signs of disease progression (M = 5.23, sd = 3.15).Caregivers most often wished support with recognizing disease progression (N = 24), and least often with managing spiritual issues (N = 0). Caregivers evaluated acceptability and feasibility of the CNS tool positively (mean scores ranged 4.2-6.2). Conclusions: Family caregivers experience distress resulting from many neuro-oncology specific needs, but this is not directly related to wish for support. Family caregiver needs screening could be useful to tailor support to suit their preferences in clinical practice.

ESTRO-EANO guideline on target delineation and radiotherapy details for glioblastoma.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Target delineation in glioblastoma is still a matter of extensive research and debate. This guideline aims to update the existing joint European consensus on delineation of the clinical target volume (CTV) in adult glioblastoma patients. MATERIAL AND METHODS: The ESTRO Guidelines Committee identified 14 European experts in close interaction with the ESTRO clinical committee and EANO who discussed and analysed the body of evidence concerning contemporary glioblastoma target delineation, then took part in a two-step modified Delphi process to address open questions. RESULTS: Several key issues were identified and are discussed including i) pre-treatment steps and immobilisation, ii) target delineation and the use of standard and novel imaging techniques, and iii) technical aspects of treatment including planning techniques and fractionation. Based on the EORTC recommendation focusing on the resection cavity and residual enhancing regions on T1-sequences with the addition of a reduced 15 mm margin, special situations are presented with corresponding potential adaptations depending on the specific clinical situation. CONCLUSIONS: The EORTC consensus recommends a single clinical target volume definition based on postoperative contrast-enhanced T1 abnormalities, using isotropic margins without the need to cone down. A PTV margin based on the individual mask system and IGRT procedures available is advised; this should usually be no greater than 3 mm when using IGRT.

Temozolomide and Radiotherapy versus Radiotherapy Alone in Patients with Glioblastoma, IDH-wildtype: Post Hoc Analysis of the EORTC Randomized Phase III CATNON Trial.

PURPOSE: In a post hoc analysis of the CATNON trial (NCT00626990), we explored whether adding temozolomide to radiotherapy improves outcome in patients with IDH1/2 wildtype (wt) anaplastic astrocytomas with molecular features of glioblastoma [redesignated as glioblastoma, isocitrate dehydrogenase-wildtype (IDH-wt) in the 2021 World Health Organization (WHO) classification of central nervous system tumors]. PATIENTS AND METHODS: From the randomized phase III CATNON study examining the addition of adjuvant and concurrent temozolomide to radiotherapy in anaplastic astrocytomas, we selected a subgroup of IDH1/2wt and H3F3Awt tumors with presence of TERT promoter mutations and/or EGFR amplifications and/or combined gain of chromosome 7 and loss of chromosome 10. Molecular abnormalities including MGMT promoter methylation status were determined by next-generation sequencing, DNA methylation profiling, and SNaPshot analysis. RESULTS: Of the 751 patients entered in the CATNON study, 670 had fully molecularly characterized tumors. A total of 159 of these tumors met the WHO 2021 molecular criteria for glioblastoma, IDH-wt. Of these patients, 47 received radiotherapy only and 112 received a combination of radiotherapy and temozolomide. There was no added effect of temozolomide on either overall survival [HR, 1.19; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.82-1.71] or progression-free survival (HR, 0.87; 95% CI, 0.61-1.24). MGMT promoter methylation was prognostic for overall survival, but was not predictive for outcome to temozolomide treatment either with respect to overall survival or progression-free survival. CONCLUSIONS: In this cohort of patients with glioblastoma, IDH-wt temozolomide treatment did not add benefit beyond that observed from radiotherapy, regardless of MGMT promoter status. These findings require a new well-powered prospective clinical study to explore the efficacy of temozolomide treatment in this patient population.

Trabectedin for recurrent WHO grade 2 or 3 meningioma: A randomized phase II study of the EORTC Brain Tumor Group (EORTC-1320-BTG).

BACKGROUND: No systemic treatment has been established for meningioma progressing after local therapies. METHODS: This randomized, multicenter, open-label, phase II study included adult patients with recurrent WHO grade 2 or 3 meningioma. Patients were 2:1 randomly assigned to intravenous trabectedin (1.5 mg/m2 every 3 weeks) or local standard of care (LOC). The primary endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS). Secondary endpoints comprised overall survival (OS), objective radiological response, safety, quality of life (QoL) assessment using the QLQ-C30 and QLQ-BN20 questionnaires, and we performed tissue-based exploratory molecular analyses. RESULTS: Ninety patients were randomized (n = 29 in LOC, n = 61 in trabectedin arm). With 71 events, median PFS was 4.17 months in the LOC and 2.43 months in the trabectedin arm (hazard ratio [HR] = 1.42; 80% CI, 1.00-2.03; P = .294) with a PFS-6 rate of 29.1% (95% CI, 11.9%-48.8%) and 21.1% (95% CI, 11.3%-32.9%), respectively. Median OS was 10.61 months in the LOC and 11.37 months in the trabectedin arm (HR = 0.98; 95% CI, 0.54-1.76; P = .94). Grade ≥3 adverse events occurred in 44.4% of patients in the LOC and 59% of patients in the trabectedin arm. Enrolled patients had impeded global QoL and overall functionality and high fatigue before initiation of systemic therapy. DNA methylation class, performance status, presence of a relevant co-morbidity, steroid use, and right hemisphere involvement at baseline were independently associated with OS. CONCLUSIONS: Trabectedin did not improve PFS and OS and was associated with higher toxicity than LOC treatment in patients with non-benign meningioma. Tumor DNA methylation class is an independent prognostic factor for OS.

Glioblastoma and the search for non-hypothesis driven combination therapeutics in academia.

Glioblastoma (GBM) remains a cancer of high unmet clinical need. Current standard of care for GBM, consisting of maximal surgical resection, followed by ionisation radiation (IR) plus concomitant and adjuvant temozolomide (TMZ), provides less than 15-month survival benefit. Efforts by conventional drug discovery to improve overall survival have failed to overcome challenges presented by inherent tumor heterogeneity, therapeutic resistance attributed to GBM stem cells, and tumor niches supporting self-renewal. In this review we describe the steps academic researchers are taking to address these limitations in high throughput screening programs to identify novel GBM combinatorial targets. We detail how they are implementing more physiologically relevant phenotypic assays which better recapitulate key areas of disease biology coupled with more focussed libraries of small compounds, such as drug repurposing, target discovery, pharmacologically active and novel, more comprehensive anti-cancer target-annotated compound libraries. Herein, we discuss the rationale for current GBM combination trials and the need for more systematic and transparent strategies for identification, validation and prioritisation of combinations that lead to clinical trials. Finally, we make specific recommendations to the preclinical, small compound screening paradigm that could increase the likelihood of identifying tractable, combinatorial, small molecule inhibitors and better drug targets specific to GBM.

Prognostic significance of genome-wide DNA methylation profiles within the randomized, phase 3, EORTC CATNON trial on non-1p/19q deleted anaplastic glioma.

BACKGROUND: Survival in patients with IDH1/2-mutant (mt) anaplastic astrocytomas is highly variable. We have used the prospective phase 3 CATNON trial to identify molecular factors related to outcome in IDH1/2mt anaplastic astrocytoma patients. METHODS: The CATNON trial randomized 751 adult patients with newly diagnosed 1p/19q non-codeleted anaplastic glioma to 59.4 Gy radiotherapy +/- concurrent and/or adjuvant temozolomide. The presence of necrosis and/or microvascular proliferation was scored at central pathology review. Infinium MethylationEPIC BeadChip arrays were used for genome-wide DNA methylation analysis and the determination of copy number variations (CNV). Two DNA methylation-based tumor classifiers were used for risk stratification. Next-generation sequencing (NGS) was performed using 1 of the 2 glioma-tailored NGS panels. The primary endpoint was overall survival measured from the date of randomization. RESULTS: Full analysis (genome-wide DNA methylation and NGS) was successfully performed on 654 tumors. Of these, 432 tumors were IDH1/2mt anaplastic astrocytomas. Both epigenetic classifiers identified poor prognosis patients that partially overlapped. A predictive prognostic Cox proportional hazard model identified that independent prognostic factors for IDH1/2mt anaplastic astrocytoma patients included; age, mini-mental state examination score, treatment with concurrent and/or adjuvant temozolomide, the epigenetic classifiers, PDGFRA amplification, CDKN2A/B homozygous deletion, PI3K mutations, and total CNV load. Independent recursive partitioning analysis highlights the importance of these factors for patient prognostication. CONCLUSION: Both clinical and molecular factors identify IDH1/2mt anaplastic astrocytoma patients with worse outcome. These results will further refine the current WHO criteria for glioma classification.

Non-IDH1-R132H IDH1/2 mutations are associated with increased DNA methylation and improved survival in astrocytomas, compared to IDH1-R132H mutations.

Somatic mutations in the isocitrate dehydrogenase genes IDH1 and IDH2 occur at high frequency in several tumour types. Even though these mutations are confined to distinct hotspots, we show that gliomas are the only tumour type with an exceptionally high percentage of IDH1R132H mutations. Patients harbouring IDH1R132H mutated tumours have lower levels of genome-wide DNA-methylation, and an associated increased gene expression, compared to tumours with other IDH1/2 mutations ("non-R132H IDH1/2 mutations"). This reduced methylation is seen in multiple tumour types and thus appears independent of the site of origin. For 1p/19q non-codeleted glioma (astrocytoma) patients, we show that this difference is clinically relevant: in samples of the randomised phase III CATNON trial, patients harbouring tumours with IDH mutations other than IDH1R132H have a better outcome (hazard ratio 0.41, 95% CI [0.24, 0.71], p = 0.0013). Such non-R132H IDH1/2-mutated tumours also had a significantly lower proportion of tumours assigned to prognostically poor DNA-methylation classes (p < 0.001). IDH mutation-type was independent in a multivariable model containing known clinical and molecular prognostic factors. To confirm these observations, we validated the prognostic effect of IDH mutation type on a large independent dataset. The observation that non-R132H IDH1/2-mutated astrocytomas have a more favourable prognosis than their IDH1R132H mutated counterpart indicates that not all IDH-mutations are identical. This difference is clinically relevant and should be taken into account for patient prognostication.

Extent of MGMT promoter methylation modifies the effect of temozolomide on overall survival in patients with glioblastoma: a regional cohort study.

BACKGROUND: MGMT methylation in glioblastoma predicts response to temozolomide but dichotomizing methylation status may mask the true prognostic value of quantitative MGMT methylation. This study evaluated whether extent of MGMT methylation interacts with the effect of temozolomide on overall survival. METHODS: We included consecutive glioblastoma patients aged ≥16 years diagnosed (April 2012-May 2020) at a neuro-oncology center. All patients had quantitative MGMT methylation measured using pyrosequencing. Those with MGMT methylated tumors were stratified into high and low methylation groups based on a cut-off using Youden index on 2-year survival. Our accelerated failure time survival models included extent of MGMT methylation, age, postoperative Karnofsky performance score, extent of resection, temozolomide regimen, and radiotherapy. RESULTS: There were 414 patients. Optimal cut-off point using Youden index was 25.9% MGMT methylation. The number of patients in the unmethylated, low and high methylation groups was 223 (53.9%), 81 (19.6%), and 110 (26.6%), respectively. In the adjusted model, high (hazard ratio [HR] 0.60, 95% confidence intervals [CI] 0.46-0.79, P = 0.005) and low (HR 0.67, 95% CI 0.50-0.89, P < 0.001) methylation groups had better survival compared to unmethylated group. There was no evidence for interaction between MGMT methylation and completed temozolomide regimen (interaction term for low methylation P = 0.097; high methylation P = 0.071). This suggests no strong effect of MGMT status on survival in patients completing temozolomide regimen. In patients not completing the temozolomide regimen, higher MGMT methylation predicted better survival (interaction terms P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Quantitative MGMT methylation may provide additional prognostic value. This is important when assessing clinical and research therapies.

Pharmacokinetics, safety, and tolerability of olaparib and temozolomide for recurrent glioblastoma: results of the phase I OPARATIC trial.

BACKGROUND: The poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase (PARP) inhibitor olaparib potentiated radiation and temozolomide (TMZ) chemotherapy in preclinical glioblastoma models but brain penetration was poor. Clinically, PARP inhibitors exacerbate the hematological side effects of TMZ. The OPARATIC trial was conducted to measure penetration of recurrent glioblastoma by olaparib and assess the safety and tolerability of its combination with TMZ. METHODS: Preclinical pharmacokinetic studies evaluated olaparib tissue distribution in rats and tumor-bearing mice. Adult patients with recurrent glioblastoma received various doses and schedules of olaparib and low-dose TMZ in a 3 + 3 design. Suitable patients received olaparib prior to neurosurgical resection; olaparib concentrations in plasma, tumor core and tumor margin specimens were measured by mass spectrometry. A dose expansion cohort tested tolerability and efficacy of the recommended phase II dose (RP2D). Radiosensitizing effects of olaparib were measured by clonogenic survival in glioblastoma cell lines. RESULTS: Olaparib was a substrate for multidrug resistance protein 1 and showed no brain penetration in rats but was detected in orthotopic glioblastoma xenografts. Clinically, olaparib was detected in 71/71 tumor core specimens (27 patients; median, 496 nM) and 21/21 tumor margin specimens (9 patients; median, 512.3 nM). Olaparib exacerbated TMZ-related hematological toxicity, necessitating intermittent dosing. RP2D was olaparib 150 mg (3 days/week) with TMZ 75 mg/m2 daily for 42 days. Fourteen (36%) of 39 evaluable patients were progression free at 6 months. Olaparib radiosensitized 6 glioblastoma cell lines at clinically relevant concentrations of 100 and 500 nM. CONCLUSION: Olaparib reliably penetrates recurrent glioblastoma at radiosensitizing concentrations, supporting further clinical development and highlighting the need for better preclinical models.

Long-term neurocognitive and other side effects of radiotherapy, with or without chemotherapy, for glioma.

BACKGROUND: Gliomas are brain tumours arising from glial cells with an annual incidence of 4 to 11 people per 100,000. In this review we focus on gliomas with low aggressive potential in the short term, i.e. low-grade gliomas. Most people with low-grade gliomas are treated with surgery and may receive radiotherapy thereafter. However, there is concern about the possible long-term effects of radiotherapy, especially on neurocognitive functioning. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the long-term neurocognitive and other side effects of radiotherapy (with or without chemotherapy) compared with no radiotherapy, or different types of radiotherapy, among people with glioma (where 'long-term' is defined as at least two years after diagnosis); and to write a brief economic commentary. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the following databases on 16 February 2018 and updated the search on 14 November 2018: Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL; 2018, Issue 11) in the Cochrane Library; MEDLINE via Ovid; and Embase via Ovid. We also searched clinical trial registries and relevant conference proceedings from 2014 to 2018 to identify ongoing and unpublished studies. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised and non-randomised trials, and controlled before-and-after studies (CBAS). Participants were aged 16 years and older with cerebral glioma other than glioblastoma. We included studies where patients in at least one treatment arm received radiotherapy, with or without chemotherapy, and where neurocognitive outcomes were assessed two or more years after treatment. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently extracted data and assessed risk of bias. We assessed the certainty of findings using the GRADE approach. MAIN RESULTS: The review includes nine studies: seven studies were of low-grade glioma and two were of grade 3 glioma. Altogether 2406 participants were involved but there was high sample attrition and outcome data were available for a minority of people at final study assessments. In seven of the nine studies, participants were recruited to randomised controlled trials (RCTs) in which longer-term follow-up was undertaken in a subset of people that had survived without disease progression. There was moderate to high risk of bias in studies due to lack of blinding and high attrition, and in two observational studies there was high risk of selection bias. Paucity of data and risk of bias meant that evidence was of low to very low certainty. We were unable to combine results in meta-analysis due to diversity in interventions and outcomes.The studies examined the following five comparisons.Radiotherapy versus no adjuvant treatmentTwo observational studies contributed data. At the 12-year follow-up in one study, the risk of cognitive impairment (defined as cognitive disability deficits in at least five of 18 neuropsychological tests) was greater in the radiotherapy group (risk ratio (RR) 1.95, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.02 to 3.71; n = 65); at five to six years the difference between groups did not reach statistical significance (RR 1.38, 95% CI 0.92 to 2.06; n = 195). In the other study, one subject in the radiotherapy group had cognitive impairment (defined as significant deterioration in eight of 12 neuropsychological tests) at two years compared with none in the control group (very low certainty evidence).With regard to neurocognitive scores, in one study the radiotherapy group was reported to have had significantly worse mean scores on some tests compared with no radiotherapy; however, the raw data were only given for significant findings. In the second study, there were no clear differences in any of the various cognitive outcomes at two years (n = 31) and four years (n = 15) (very low certainty evidence).Radiotherapy versus chemotherapyOne RCT contributed data on cognitive impairment at up to three years with no clear difference between arms (RR 1.43, 95% CI 0.36 to 5.70, n = 117) (low-certainty evidence).High-dose radiotherapy versus low-dose radiotherapyOnly one of two studies reporting this comparison contributed data, and at two and five years there were no clear differences between high- and low-dose radiotherapy arms (very low certainty evidence).Conventional radiotherapy versus stereotactic conformal radiotherapyOne study involving younger people contributed limited data from the subgroup aged 16 to 25 years. The numbers of participants with neurocognitive impairment at five years after treatment were two out of 12 in the conventional arm versus none out of 11 in the stereotactic conformal radiotherapy arm (RR 4.62, 95% CI 0.25 to 86.72; n = 23; low-certainty evidence).Chemoradiotherapy versus radiotherapyTwo RCTs tested for cognitive impairment. One defined cognitive impairment as a decline of more than 3 points in MMSE score compared with baseline and reported data from 2-year (110 participants), 3-year (91 participants), and 5-year (57 participants) follow-up with no clear difference between the two arms at any time point. A second study did not report raw data but measured MMSE scores over five years in 126 participants at two years, 110 at three years, 69 at four years and 53 at five years. Authors concluded that there was no difference in MMSE scores between the two study arms (P = 0.4752) (low-certainty evidence).Two RCTs reported quality of life (QoL) outcomes for this comparison. One reported no differences in Brain-QoL scores between study arms over a 5-year follow-up period (P = 0.2767; no raw data were given and denominators were not stated). The other trial reported that the long-term results of health-related QoL showed no difference between the arms but did not give the raw data for overall HRQoL scores (low-certainty evidence).We found no comparative data on endocrine dysfunction; we planned to develop a brief economic commentary but found no relevant economic studies for inclusion. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Radiotherapy for gliomas with a good prognosis may increase the risk of neurocognitive side effects in the long term; however the magnitude of the risk is uncertain. Evidence on long-term neurocognitive side effects associated with chemoradiotherapy is also uncertain. Neurocognitive assessment should be an integral part of long-term follow-up in trials involving radiotherapy for lower-grade gliomas to improve the certainty of evidence regarding long-term neurocognitive effects. Such trials should also assess other potential long-term effects, including endocrine dysfunction, and evaluate costs and cost effectiveness.

Do statins, ACE inhibitors or sartans improve outcome in primary glioblastoma?

Glioblastomas are malignant brain tumors with poor prognosis. Lately, data from clinical studies assessing the role of co-medications in different cancer types suggested reduced mortality and potential anti-tumor activity for statins, angiotensin-I converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEI) and angiotensin II receptor blockers (sartans). Here, we analysed the association of co-treatment with statins, ACEI or sartans with outcome in a cohort of 810 patients enrolled in the phase III CENTRIC and phase II CORE trials on the role of the integrin antagonist, cilengitide, in newly diagnosed glioblastoma with or without O6-methylguanine DNA methyltransferase (MGMT) promoter methylation. Progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) were analysed for each medication in the pooled patient group. No association was found for co-medication with either drug for PFS or OS. Median OS was 22.1 (statins) versus 22.2 (control) months (HR 1.06, 95% CI 0.81-1.39, p = 0.69), 20.4 (ACEI) versus 22.6 (control) months (HR 1.25, 95% CI 0.96-1.62, p = 0.10), and 21.7 (sartans) versus 22.3 (control) months (HR 0.86, 95% CI 0.61-1.21, p = 0.38). None of the comparisons showed a signal for different PFS or OS when analyses were controlled for MGMT promoter methylation or treatment group (TMZ/RT â†’ TMZ vs. RT + CIL + TMZ â†’ TMZ + CIL). This secondary analysis of two large glioblastoma trials thus was unable to detect evidence for an association of the use of statins, ACEI or sartans with outcome in patients with newly diagnosed glioblastoma. These data challenge the rationale for prospective studies on the possible role of these non-tumor-specific drugs within the concept of drug repurposing.

Brain tumor research in the United Kingdom: current perspective and future challenges. A strategy document from the NCRI Brain Tumor CSG.

The National Cancer Research Institute (NCRI) is a partnership of charity and government research funders whose purpose is to improve health and quality of life by accelerating progress in cancer-related research through collaboration. Under this umbrella, the NCRI Brain Tumor Clinical Studies Group is focused on improving clinical outcomes for adult patients with brain and central nervous system tumors, including those with brain metastasis from other primary sites. This document discusses the current state of clinical brain tumor research in the United Kingdom and the challenges to increasing study and trial opportunities for patients. The clinical research priorities are defined along with a strategy to strengthen the existing brain tumor research network, improve access to tissue and imaging and to develop the future leadership for brain tumor research in the United Kingdom. This strategy document may serve as a framework for other organizations and countries.

Malignant Peripheral Nerve Sheath Tumors are not a Feature of Neurofibromatosis Type 2 in the Unirradiated Patient.

BACKGROUND: The published literature suggests that malignant peripheral nerve sheath tumors (MPNST) occur at increased frequency in neurofibromatosis type 2 (NF2). A recent review based on incidence data in North America showed that 1 per 1000 cerebellopontine angle nerve sheath tumors were malignant. OBJECTIVE: To determine whether MPNST occurred spontaneously in NF2 by reviewing our NF2 database. METHODS: The prospective database consists of 1253 patients with NF2. One thousand and nine are known to be alive at last follow-up. The presence and laterality/pathology of vestibular schwannoma at diagnosis and last follow-up was sought. RESULTS: There were no cases of spontaneous MPNST with 2114 proven (n = 1150) and presumed benign (n = 964) vestibular schwannomas found. Two patients had developed MPNST (1 presumed) after having previously undergone stereotactic radiosurgery for a vestibular schwannoma. CONCLUSION: In this series, and from the literature, malignant transformation of a vestibular schwannoma was not a feature of NF2 in the unirradiated patient. NF2 patients should not be told that they have an increased risk of malignant change in a vestibular schwannoma unless they undergo radiation treatment. However, very much larger datasets are required before it can be determined whether there is any association between NF2 and MPNST in the unirradiated patient.

Interim results from the CATNON trial (EORTC study 26053-22054) of treatment with concurrent and adjuvant temozolomide for 1p/19q non-co-deleted anaplastic glioma: a phase 3, randomised, open-label intergroup study.

BACKGROUND: The role of temozolomide chemotherapy in newly diagnosed 1p/19q non-co-deleted anaplastic gliomas, which are associated with lower sensitivity to chemotherapy and worse prognosis than 1p/19q co-deleted tumours, is unclear. We assessed the use of radiotherapy with concurrent and adjuvant temozolomide in adults with non-co-deleted anaplastic gliomas. METHODS: This was a phase 3, randomised, open-label study with a 2 × 2 factorial design. Eligible patients were aged 18 years or older and had newly diagnosed non-co-deleted anaplastic glioma with WHO performance status scores of 0-2. The randomisation schedule was generated with the electronic EORTC web-based ORTA system. Patients were assigned in equal numbers (1:1:1:1), using the minimisation technique, to receive radiotherapy (59·4 Gy in 33 fractions of 1·8 Gy) alone or with adjuvant temozolomide (12 4-week cycles of 150-200 mg/m2 temozolomide given on days 1-5); or to receive radiotherapy with concurrent temozolomide 75 mg/m2 per day, with or without adjuvant temozolomide. The primary endpoint was overall survival adjusted for performance status score, age, 1p loss of heterozygosity, presence of oligodendroglial elements, and MGMT promoter methylation status, analysed by intention to treat. We did a planned interim analysis after 219 (41%) deaths had occurred to test the null hypothesis of no efficacy (threshold for rejection p<0·0084). This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00626990. FINDINGS: At the time of the interim analysis, 745 (99%) of the planned 748 patients had been enrolled. The hazard ratio for overall survival with use of adjuvant temozolomide was 0·65 (99·145% CI 0·45-0·93). Overall survival at 5 years was 55·9% (95% CI 47·2-63·8) with and 44·1% (36·3-51·6) without adjuvant temozolomide. Grade 3-4 adverse events were seen in 8-12% of 549 patients assigned temozolomide, and were mainly haematological and reversible. INTERPRETATION: Adjuvant temozolomide chemotherapy was associated with a significant survival benefit in patients with newly diagnosed non-co-deleted anaplastic glioma. Further analysis of the role of concurrent temozolomide treatment and molecular factors is needed. FUNDING: Schering Plough and MSD.

Is more better? The impact of extended adjuvant temozolomide in newly diagnosed glioblastoma: a secondary analysis of EORTC and NRG Oncology/RTOG.

BACKGROUND: Radiation with concurrent and adjuvant (6 cycles) temozolomide (TMZ) is the established standard of postsurgical care for newly diagnosed glioblastoma (GBM). This regimen has been adopted with variations, including extending TMZ beyond 6 cycles. The optimal duration of maintenance therapy remains controversial. METHODS: We performed pooled analysis of individual patient data from 4 randomized trials for newly diagnosed GBM. All patients who were progression free 28 days after cycle 6 were included. The decision to continue TMZ was per local practice and standards, and at the discretion of the treating physician. Patients were grouped into those treated with 6 cycles and those who continued beyond 6 cycles. Progression-free and overall survival were compared, adjusted by age, performance status, resection extent, and MGMT methylation. RESULTS: A total of 2214 GBM patients were included in the 4 trials. Of these, 624 qualified for analysis 291 continued maintenance TMZ until progression or up to 12 cycles, while 333 discontinued TMZ after 6 cycles. Adjusted for prognostic factors, treatment with more than 6 cycles of TMZ was associated with a somewhat improved progression-free survival (hazard ratio [HR] 0.80 [0.65-0.98], P = .03), in particular for patients with methylated MGMT (n = 342, HR 0.65 [0.50-0.85], P < .01). However, overall survival was not affected by the number of TMZ cycles (HR = 0.92 [0.71-1.19], P = .52), including the MGMT methylated subgroup (HR = 0.89 [0.63-1.26], P = .51). CONCLUSIONS: Continuing TMZ beyond 6 cycles was not shown to increase overall survival for newly diagnosed GBM.

Prospective audit showing improved patient-assessed skin toxicity with use of betamethasone cream for those at high risk of radiation dermatitis.

This audit was conducted before and after introduction of a risk-based skincare policy with prophylactic steroids recommended for those at high risk. Comparison of the two cohorts confirmed results seen in trials with significant reduction in redness, itch, discomfort, sleep disturbance, and use of analgesia with the addition of steroids.

ESTRO-ACROP guideline "target delineation of glioblastomas".

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Target delineation in glioblastoma (GBM) varies substantially between different institutions and several consensus statements are available. This guideline aims to develop a joint European consensus on the delineation of the clinical target volume in patients with a glioblastoma (GBM). MATERIAL AND METHODS: A literature search was conducted in PubMed that evaluated adults with GBM. Both MeSH terms and text words were used and the following search strategy was applied: ("Glioblastoma/radiotherapy" [MeSH] OR "glioblastoma" OR "malignant glioma" OR high-grade glioma) AND ((delineation) OR (target volume) OR (CTV) OR (PTV) OR (margin) OR (recurrence pattern) OR (contouring) OR (organs at risk)). In parallel, abstracts from ESTRO and ASTRO 2010-2015 were analysed and separately reviewed. The ACROP committee identified 14 European experts in close interaction with the ESTRO clinical committee who discussed and analysed the body of evidence concerning GBM target delineation. RESULTS: Several key issues were identified and are discussed including (i) pre-treatment steps and immobilization, (ii) target delineation and the use of standard and novel imaging techniques, and (iii) technical aspects of treatment including planning techniques, and fractionation. Based on the EORTC recommendation focusing on the resection cavity and residual enhancing regions on T1-sequences with the addition of a 20mm margin, special situations are presented with corresponding potential adaptations depending on the specific clinical situation. CONCLUSIONS: Currently, based on the EORTC consensus, a single clinical target volume definition based on postoperative T1/T2 FLAIR abnormalities is recommended, using isotropic margins without the need to cone down. A PTV margin based on the individual mask system and IGRT procedures available is advised, usually of the order of 3-5mm.

Identifying radiotherapy target volumes in brain cancer by image analysis.

To establish the optimal radiotherapy fields for treating brain cancer patients, the tumour volume is often outlined on magnetic resonance (MR) images, where the tumour is clearly visible, and mapped onto computerised tomography images used for radiotherapy planning. This process requires considerable clinical experience and is time consuming, which will continue to increase as more complex image sequences are used in this process. Here, the potential of image analysis techniques for automatically identifying the radiation target volume on MR images, and thereby assisting clinicians with this difficult task, was investigated. A gradient-based level set approach was applied on the MR images of five patients with grades II, III and IV malignant cerebral glioma. The relationship between the target volumes produced by image analysis and those produced by a radiation oncologist was also investigated. The contours produced by image analysis were compared with the contours produced by an oncologist and used for treatment. In 93% of cases, the Dice similarity coefficient was found to be between 60 and 80%. This feasibility study demonstrates that image analysis has the potential for automatic outlining in the management of brain cancer patients, however, more testing and validation on a much larger patient cohort is required.

Radiotherapy staffing in the European countries: final results from the ESTRO-HERO survey.

BACKGROUND: The ESTRO Health Economics in Radiation Oncology (HERO) project has the overall aim to develop a knowledge base of the provision of radiotherapy in Europe and build a model for health economic evaluation of radiation treatments at the European level. The first milestone was to assess the availability of radiotherapy resources within Europe. This paper presents the personnel data collected in the ESTRO HERO database. MATERIALS AND METHODS: An 84-item questionnaire was sent out to European countries, through their national scientific and professional radiotherapy societies. The current report includes a detailed analysis of radiotherapy staffing (questionnaire items 47-60), analysed in relation to the annual number of treatment courses and the socio-economic status of the countries. The analysis was conducted between February and July 2014, and is based on validated responses from 24 of the 40 European countries defined by the European Cancer Observatory (ECO). RESULTS: A large variation between countries was found for most parameters studied. Averages and ranges for personnel numbers per million inhabitants are 12.8 (2.5-30.9) for radiation oncologists, 7.6 (0-19.7) for medical physicists, 3.5 (0-12.6) for dosimetrists, 26.6 (1.9-78) for RTTs and 14.8 (0.4-61.0) for radiotherapy nurses. The combined average for physicists and dosimetrists is 9.8 per million inhabitants and 36.9 for RTT and nurses. Radiation oncologists on average treat 208.9 courses per year (range: 99.9-348.8), physicists and dosimetrists conjointly treat 303.3 courses (range: 85-757.7) and RTT and nurses 76.8 (range: 25.7-156.8). In countries with higher GNI per capita, all personnel categories treat fewer courses per annum than in less affluent countries. This relationship is most evident for RTTs and nurses. Different clusters of countries can be distinguished on the basis of available personnel resources and socio-economic status. CONCLUSIONS: The average personnel figures in Europe are now consistent with, or even more favourable than the QUARTS recommendations, probably reflecting a combination of better availability as such, in parallel with the current use of more complex treatments than a decade ago. A considerable variation in available personnel and delivered courses per year however persists among the highest and lowest staffing levels. This not only reflects the variation in cancer incidence and socio-economic determinants, but also the stage in technology adoption along with treatment complexity and the different professional roles and responsibilities within each country. Our data underpin the need for accurate prediction models and long-term education and training programmes.

Cilengitide combined with standard treatment for patients with newly diagnosed glioblastoma with methylated MGMT promoter (CENTRIC EORTC 26071-22072 study): a multicentre, randomised, open-label, phase 3 trial.

BACKGROUND: Cilengitide is a selective αvß3 and αvß5 integrin inhibitor. Data from phase 2 trials suggest that it has antitumour activity as a single agent in recurrent glioblastoma and in combination with standard temozolomide chemoradiotherapy in newly diagnosed glioblastoma (particularly in tumours with methylated MGMT promoter). We aimed to assess cilengitide combined with temozolomide chemoradiotherapy in patients with newly diagnosed glioblastoma with methylated MGMT promoter. METHODS: In this multicentre, open-label, phase 3 study, we investigated the efficacy of cilengitide in patients from 146 study sites in 25 countries. Eligible patients (newly diagnosed, histologically proven supratentorial glioblastoma, methylated MGMT promoter, and age ≥18 years) were stratified for prognostic Radiation Therapy Oncology Group recursive partitioning analysis class and geographic region and centrally randomised in a 1:1 ratio with interactive voice response system to receive temozolomide chemoradiotherapy with cilengitide 2000 mg intravenously twice weekly (cilengitide group) or temozolomide chemoradiotherapy alone (control group). Patients and investigators were unmasked to treatment allocation. Maintenance temozolomide was given for up to six cycles, and cilengitide was given for up to 18 months or until disease progression or unacceptable toxic effects. The primary endpoint was overall survival. We analysed survival outcomes by intention to treat. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00689221. FINDINGS: Overall, 3471 patients were screened. Of these patients, 3060 had tumour MGMT status tested; 926 patients had a methylated MGMT promoter, and 545 were randomly assigned to the cilengitide (n=272) or control groups (n=273) between Oct 31, 2008, and May 12, 2011. Median overall survival was 26·3 months (95% CI 23·8-28·8) in the cilengitide group and 26·3 months (23·9-34·7) in the control group (hazard ratio 1·02, 95% CI 0·81-1·29, p=0·86). None of the predefined clinical subgroups showed a benefit from cilengitide. We noted no overall additional toxic effects with cilengitide treatment. The most commonly reported adverse events of grade 3 or worse in the safety population were lymphopenia (31 [12%] in the cilengitide group vs 26 [10%] in the control group), thrombocytopenia (28 [11%] vs 46 [18%]), neutropenia (19 [7%] vs 24 [9%]), leucopenia (18 [7%] vs 20 [8%]), and convulsion (14 [5%] vs 15 [6%]). INTERPRETATION: The addition of cilengitide to temozolomide chemoradiotherapy did not improve outcomes; cilengitide will not be further developed as an anticancer drug. Nevertheless, integrins remain a potential treatment target for glioblastoma. FUNDING: Merck KGaA, Darmstadt, Germany.