Radiotherapy resources in Africa: an International Atomic Energy Agency update and analysis of projected needs.

The number of patients with cancer in Africa has been predicted to increase from 844 279 in 2012 to more than 1·5 million in 2030. However, many countries in Africa still lack access to radiotherapy as a part of comprehensive cancer care. The objective of this analysis is to present an updated overview of radiotherapy resources in Africa and to analyse the gaps and needs of the continent for 2030 in the context of the UN Sustainable Development Goals. Data from 54 African countries on teletherapy megavoltage units and brachytherapy afterloaders were extracted from the Directory for Radiotherapy Centres, an electronic, centralised, and continuously updated database of radiotherapy centres. Cancer incidence and future predictions were taken from the GLOBOCAN 2018 database of the International Agency for Research on Cancer. Radiotherapy need was estimated using a 64% radiotherapy utilisation rate, while assuming a machine throughput of 500 patients per year. As of March, 2020, 28 (52%) of 54 countries had access to external beam radiotherapy, 21 (39%) had brachytherapy capacity, and no country had a capacity that matched the estimated treatment need. Median income was an important predictor of the availability of megavoltage machines: US$1883 (IQR 914-3269) in countries without any machines versus $4485 (3079-12480) in countries with at least one megavoltage machine (p=0·0003). If radiotherapy expansion continues at the rate observed over the past 7 years, it is unlikely that the continent will meet its radiotherapy needs. This access gap might impact the ability to achieve the Sustainable Development Goals, particularly the target to reduce preventable, premature mortality by a third, and meet the target of the cervical cancer elimination strategy of 90% with access to treatment. Urgent, novel initiatives in financing and human capacity building are needed to change the trajectory and provide comprehensive cancer care to patients in Africa in the next decade.

Effect of Single-Fraction vs Multifraction Radiotherapy on Ambulatory Status Among Patients With Spinal Canal Compression From Metastatic Cancer: The SCORAD Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: Malignant spinal canal compression, a major complication of metastatic cancer, is managed with radiotherapy to maintain mobility and relieve pain, although there is no standard radiotherapy regimen. Objective: To evaluate whether single-fraction radiotherapy is noninferior to 5 fractions of radiotherapy. Design, Setting, and Participants: Multicenter noninferiority randomized clinical trial conducted in 42 UK and 5 Australian radiotherapy centers. Eligible patients (n = 686) had metastatic cancer with spinal cord or cauda equina compression, life expectancy greater than 8 weeks, and no previous radiotherapy to the same area. Patients were recruited between February 2008 and April 2016, with final follow-up in September 2017. Interventions: Patients were randomized to receive external beam single-fraction 8-Gy radiotherapy (n = 345) or 20 Gy of radiotherapy in 5 fractions over 5 consecutive days (n = 341). Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary end point was ambulatory status at week 8, based on a 4-point scale and classified as grade 1 (ambulatory without the use of aids and grade 5 of 5 muscle power) or grade 2 (ambulatory using aids or grade 4 of 5 muscle power). The noninferiority margin for the difference in ambulatory status was -11%. Secondary end points included ambulatory status at weeks 1, 4, and 12 and overall survival. Results: Among 686 randomized patients (median [interquartile range] age, 70 [64-77] years; 503 (73%) men; 44% had prostate cancer, 19% had lung cancer, and 12% had breast cancer), 342 (49.8%) were analyzed for the primary end point (255 patients died before the 8-week assessment). Ambulatory status grade 1 or 2 at week 8 was achieved by 115 of 166 (69.3%) patients in the single-fraction group vs 128 of 176 (72.7%) in the multifraction group (difference, -3.5% [1-sided 95% CI, -11.5% to ∞]; P value for noninferiority = .06). The difference in ambulatory status grade 1 or 2 in the single-fraction vs multifraction group was -0.4% (63.9% vs 64.3%; [1-sided 95% CI, -6.9 to ∞]; P value for noninferiority = .004) at week 1, -0.7% (66.8% vs 67.6%; [1-sided 95% CI, -8.1 to ∞]; P value for noninferiority = .01) at week 4, and 4.1% (71.8% vs 67.7%; [1-sided 95% CI, -4.6 to ∞]; P value for noninferiority = .002) at week 12. Overall survival rates at 12 weeks were 50% in the single-fraction group vs 55% in the multifraction group (stratified hazard ratio, 1.02 [95% CI, 0.74-1.41]). Of the 11 other secondary end points that were analyzed, the between-group differences were not statistically significant or did not meet noninferiority criterion. Conclusions and Relevance: Among patients with malignant metastatic solid tumors and spinal canal compression, a single radiotherapy dose, compared with a multifraction dose delivered over 5 days, did not meet the criterion for noninferiority for the primary outcome (ambulatory at 8 weeks). However, the extent to which the lower bound of the CI overlapped with the noninferiority margin should be considered when interpreting the clinical importance of this finding. Trial Registration: ISRCTN Identifiers: ISRCTN97555949 and ISRCTN97108008.

EGFR and EGFRvIII analysis in glioblastoma as therapeutic biomarkers.

INTRODUCTION: EGFR and EGFRvIII analysis is of current interest because of new EGFRvIII vaccine trials opened in the UK. EGFR activation promotes cellular proliferation via activation of MAPK and PI3K-Akt pathways. EGFRvIII is the most common variant resulting from an in-frame deletion of 801bp, leading to constitutively active EGFR. METHOD: 51 glioblastoma samples from a cohort of 50 patients were tested for EGFR amplification by FISH and immunohistochemistry and EGFRvIII expression by reverse-transcriptase PCR (RT-PCR), and immunohistochemistry. EGFR and EGFRvIII expression was compared with Overall Survival in the cohort. RESULTS: Overall 22/51 samples (43%) were positive for EGFR, 16/51 (31%) were positive for EGFRvIII and 13/51 (25%) were positive for both. 9/51 cases (18%) were positive for EGFR alone, and 3/51 (6%) were positive for EGFRvIII alone. Of the EGFR positive cases, 22/51 (43%) were positive by FISH, 24/51 (47%) were positive by IHC and 2/51 (4%) were discrepant between methods (positive by IHC but non-amplified by FISH). Of the EGFRvIII positive cases, 16/51 (31%) were positive by RT-PCR, 17/51 (33%) were positive by IHC and 1/51 (2%) sample was discrepant (positive by IHC but not by RT-PCR). Neither EGFRvIII or EGFR are predictive of overall survival in this cohort. CONCLUSION: In our cohort, 25/51 (49%) of GBM showed EGFR alterations, including 16/51 (31%) with EGFRvIII. There was high concordance between IHC and FISH (96%) and IHC and RT-PCR (98%) as diagnostic methods. Neither EGFR or EGFRvIII is predictive of overall survival in this cohort. These results are key for selecting patients for novel individualised anti-EGFR therapies.

EANO guideline for the diagnosis and treatment of anaplastic gliomas and glioblastoma.

This guideline provides recommendations for diagnostic and therapeutic procedures for patients with malignant gliomas. We differentiate evidence-based standards from reasonable options or non-evidence-based measures that should no longer be considered. The recommendations herein should provide a framework and assurance for the choice of diagnostic procedures and therapeutic measures and aim to reduce complications from unnecessary treatment and cost. The guideline contributes to a critical appreciation of concurrent drugs with a focus on the controlled use of anticonvulsants and steroids. It should serve as a guideline for all professionals involved in the diagnostics and care of glioma patients and also as a source of knowledge for insurance companies and other institutions involved in the cost regulation of cancer care in Europe. Implementation of the recommendations summarised here will need interdisciplinary structures of care for patients with brain tumours and structured processes of diagnostic and therapeutic procedures.

Prognostic factors for survival and ambulatory status at 8 weeks with metastatic spinal cord compression in the SCORAD randomised trial.

BACKGROUND: Metastatic spinal cord compression (MSCC) carries a poor prognosis and management is based on the likelihood of maintaining mobility and predicted survival. PATIENTS AND METHOD: SCORAD is a randomised trial of 686 patients comparing a single dose of 8 Gy radiotherapy with 20 Gy in 5 fractions. Data was split into a training set (412, 60%) and a validation set (274, 40%). A multivariable Cox regression for overall survival (OS) and a logistic regression for ambulatory status at 8 weeks were performed in the training set using baseline factors and a backward selection regression to identify a parsimonious model with p ≤ 0.10. Receiver Operating Characteristic (ROC) analysis evaluated model prognostic performance in the validation set. Validation of the final survival model was performed in a separate registry dataset (n = 348). RESULTS: The survival Cox model identified male gender, lung, gastrointestinal, and other types of cancer, compression at C1-T12, presence of non-skeletal metastases and poor ambulatory status all significantly associated with worse OS (all p < 0.05). The ROC AUC for the selected model was 75% (95%CI: 69-81) in the SCORAD validation set and 68% (95%CI: 62-74) in the external validation registry data. The logistic model for ambulatory outcome identified primary tumour breast or prostate, ambulatory status grade 1 or 2, bladder function normal and prior chemotherapy all significantly associated with increased odds of ambulation at 8 weeks (all p < 0.05). The ROC AUC for the selected model was 72.3% (95% CI 62.6-82.0) in the validation set. CONCLUSIONS: Primary breast or prostate cancer, and good ambulatory status at presentation, are favourable prognostic factors for both survival and ambulation after treatment.

Estimating the percentage of patients who might benefit from proton beam therapy instead of X-ray radiotherapy.

OBJECTIVES: High-energy Proton Beam Therapy (PBT) commenced in England in 2018 and NHS England commissions PBT for 1.5% of patients receiving radical radiotherapy. We sought expert opinion on the level of provision. METHODS: Invitations were sent to 41 colleagues working in PBT, most at one UK centre, to contribute by completing a spreadsheet. 39 responded: 23 (59%) completed the spreadsheet; 16 (41%) declined, arguing that clinical outcome data are lacking, but joined six additional site-specialist oncologists for two consensus meetings. The spreadsheet was pre-populated with incidence data from Cancer Research UK and radiotherapy use data from the National Cancer Registration and Analysis Service. 'Mechanisms of Benefit' of reduced growth impairment, reduced toxicity, dose escalation and reduced second cancer risk were examined. RESULTS: The most reliable figure for percentage of radical radiotherapy patients likely to benefit from PBT was that agreed by 95% of the 23 respondents at 4.3%, slightly larger than current provision. The median was 15% (range 4-92%) and consensus median 13%. The biggest estimated potential benefit was from reducing toxicity, median benefit to 15% (range 4-92%), followed by dose escalation median 3% (range 0 to 47%); consensus values were 12 and 3%. Reduced growth impairment and reduced second cancer risk were calculated to benefit 0.5% and 0.1%. CONCLUSIONS: The most secure estimate of percentage benefit was 4.3% but insufficient clinical outcome data exist for confident estimates. The study supports the NHS approach of using the evidence base and developing it through randomised trials, non-randomised studies and outcomes tracking. ADVANCES IN KNOWLEDGE: Less is known about the percentage of patients who may benefit from PBT than is generally acknowledged. Expert opinion varies widely. Insufficient clinical outcome data exist to provide robust estimates. Considerable further work is needed to address this, including international collaboration; much is already underway but will take time to provide mature data.

50 years of radiotherapy research: Evolution, trends and lessons for the future.

Rapid and relentless technological advances in an ever-more globalized world have shaped the field of radiation oncology in which we practise today. These developments have drastically modified the habitus1 of health professionals and researchers at an individual and organisational level. In this article we present an analysis of trends in radiation oncology research over the last half a century. To do so, the data from >350,000 scientific publications pertaining to a yearly search of the PubMed database with the keywords cancer radiotherapy was analysed. This analysis revealed that, over the years, radiotherapy research output has declined relative to alternative cancer therapies, representing 64% in 1970 it decreased to 31% in 2019. Also, the pace of research has significantly accelerated with, in the last 15 years, a doubling in the number of articles published by the 10% most productive researchers. Researchers are also facing stronger competition today with a proportion of first authors that will never get to publish as a last author increasing steadily from 58% in 1970 to 84% in 2000. Additionally, radiotherapy research output is extremely unequally distributed in the world, with Africa and South America contributing to ∼3% of radiotherapy articles in 2019 while representing 23% of the world's population. This disparity, reflecting economic situations and radiotherapy capabilities, has a knock-on effect for the provision of routine clinical treatment. Since research activity is inherent to delivery of high quality clinical care, this contributes to the global inequity of radiotherapy services. Learning from these trends is crucial for the future not only of radiation oncology research but also for effective and equitable cancer care.

Can Radiation Therapy Quality Assurance Improve Nasopharyngeal Cancer Outcomes in Low- and Middle-Income Countries: Reporting the First Phase of a Prospective International Atomic Energy Agency Study.

PURPOSE: Most new nasopharyngeal cancer cases occur in low-income and middle-income countries, and these patients experience poorer overall survival than that of new nasopharyngeal cancer cases in high-income countries. The goal of this research project is to determine whether the introduction of a radiation therapy quality assurance program can ultimately improve outcomes for nasopharyngeal cancer patients in lower-income and middle-income countries. This study reports the results of the first phase of the International Atomic Energy Agency Coordinated Research Project (325-E3-TM-47712). METHODS AND MATERIALS: This prospective study has 2 phases. Phase 1 is a survey of radiation therapy resources, patient characteristics and treatment, and results of radiation therapy quality assurance performed by the expert panel. An educational workshop reviewing phase 1 results for each center was completed before accrual of patients for phase 2. The ultimate aim of the study is to compare the first and second cohort of patients to see if quality assurance can result in fewer major protocol deviations and a 15% improvement in patients' 3-year progression-free survival. RESULTS: Of 14 participating centers, 13 (93%) had computed tomography simulators and linear accelerators (LINAC) with intensity modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) capacity, median 3 LINAC (range, 1-13), and median 10 radiation oncologists (range, 5-51). The annual number of nasopharyngeal cancer cases irradiated was median 54 (range, 10-627). Five of 14 centers (36%) had no local radiation therapy quality assurance. For the current phase 1 study, 134 patients were evaluated, 82.1% had MRI staging, 99.3% had metastatic workup, 65.6% undifferentiated histology, 51% stage 3 and 49% stage 4. Radiation therapy quality assurance revealed 81 (60.4%) of 134 patients had major protocol violations in gross tumor volume and high dose planning target volume contours and/or dosimetry, 28.4% patients had borderline plans, 15 (11.2%) acceptable, and only 6 (4.2%) had inevitable compromise due to tumor extent. CONCLUSIONS: This is the first International Atomic Energy Agency study to address the fundamental issue of treatment quality rather than altered treatment regimens. The high rate of unacceptable radiation therapy plans is a major concern, and we hope phase 2 will show a significant reduction and improved patient outcomes.

Investigating the Effect of Reirradiation or Systemic Therapy in Patients With Glioblastoma After Tumor Progression: A Secondary Analysis of NRG Oncology/Radiation Therapy Oncology Group Trial 0525.

PURPOSE: To determine the impact on overall survival with different salvage therapies, including no treatment, reirradiation, systemic therapy, or radiation and systemic therapy, in participants of a phase 3 clinical trial evaluating dose-dense versus standard-dose temozolomide for patients with newly diagnosed glioblastoma. METHODS AND MATERIALS: This analysis of patients from Trial RTOG 0525 investigated the effect of reirradiation or systemic treatment after tumor progression. Survival from first progression was compared between patients receiving no therapy, systemic therapy alone, radiation alone, and both modalities. The Cox proportional hazards model was used to compare the mortality hazard, controlling for potential confounders. RESULTS: The analysis included 637 patients who progressed and had information on their management, excluding those who died less than half a month after progression. A total of 267 patients (42%) received neither reirradiation nor systemic treatment at progression, 24 (4%) received radiation alone, 282 (44%) received systemic treatment only, and 64 (10%) received both radiation and systemic therapy. Patients who received no treatment had a median survival of 4.8 months, lower than with radiation treatment alone (8.2 months), systemic therapy alone (10.6 months), and both radiation and systemic therapy (12.2 months). In survival models controlling for potential confounders, those who received radiation alone had modestly better survival (hazard ratio HR 0.74, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.43-1.28), whereas those who underwent systemic therapy either without (HR 0.42, 95% CI 0.34-0.53) or with radiation therapy (HR 0.44, 95% CI 0.30-0.63) had better survival. There was no significant survival difference between patients who received radiation only and those who received systemic therapy (either with radiation or alone). CONCLUSIONS: Patients who received no salvage treatment had poorer survival than those who received radiation, chemotherapy, or the combination. However, patient selection for no treatment likely reflects poorer expected prognosis. There was no significant survival difference among those receiving radiation therapy, systemic therapy, or both. Ongoing clinical trials will help define the role of reirradiation after glioblastoma progression.

Short delay in initiation of radiotherapy for patients with glioblastoma-effect of concurrent chemotherapy: a secondary analysis from the NRG Oncology/Radiation Therapy Oncology Group database.

Background: We previously reported the unexpected finding of significantly improved survival for newly diagnosed glioblastoma in patients when radiation therapy (RT) was initiated later (>4 wk post-op) compared with earlier (≤2 wk post-op). In that analysis, data were analyzed from 2855 patients from 16 NRG Oncology/Radiotherapy Oncology Group (RTOG) trials conducted prior to the era of concurrent temozolomide (TMZ) with RT. We now report on 1395 newly diagnosed glioblastomas from 2 studies, treated with RT and concurrent TMZ followed by adjuvant TMZ. Our hypothesis was that concurrent TMZ has a synergistic/radiosensitizing mechanism, making RT timing less significant. Methods: Data from patients treated with TMZ-based chemoradiation from NRG Oncology/RTOG 0525 and 0825 were analyzed. An analysis comparable to our prior study was performed to determine whether there was still an impact on survival by delaying RT. Overall survival (OS) was investigated using the Kaplan-Meier method and Cox proportional hazards model. Early progression (during time of diagnosis to 30 days after RT completion) was analyzed using the chi-square test. Results: Given the small number of patients who started RT early following surgery, comparisons were made between >4 and ≤4 weeks delay of radiation from time of operation. There was no statistically significant difference in OS (hazard ratio = 0.93; P = 0.29; 95% CI: 0.80-1.07) after adjusting for known prognostic factors (recursive partitioning analysis and O6-methylguanine-DNA methyltransferase methylation status). Similarly, the rate of early progression did not differ significantly (P = 0.63). Conclusions: We did not observe a significant prognostic influence of delaying radiation when given concurrently with TMZ for newly diagnosed glioblastoma. The effects of early (1-3 wk post-op) or late (>5 wk) initiation of radiation tested in our prior study could not be replicated.

Randomized, Double-Blind, Placebo-Controlled, Multicenter Phase II Study of Onartuzumab Plus Bevacizumab Versus Placebo Plus Bevacizumab in Patients With Recurrent Glioblastoma: Efficacy, Safety, and Hepatocyte Growth Factor and O6-Methylguanine-DNA Methyltransferase Biomarker Analyses.

Purpose Bevacizumab regimens are approved for the treatment of recurrent glioblastoma in many countries. Aberrant mesenchymal-epithelial transition factor (MET) expression has been reported in glioblastoma and may contribute to bevacizumab resistance. The phase II study GO27819 investigated the monovalent MET inhibitor onartuzumab plus bevacizumab (Ona + Bev) versus placebo plus bevacizumab (Pla + Bev) in recurrent glioblastoma. Methods At first recurrence after chemoradiation, bevacizumab-naïve patients with glioblastoma were randomly assigned 1:1 to receive Ona (15 mg/kg, once every 3 weeks) + Bev (15 mg/kg, once every 3 weeks) or Pla + Bev until disease progression. The primary end point was progression-free survival by response assessment in neuro-oncology criteria. Secondary end points were overall survival, objective response rate, duration of response, and safety. Exploratory biomarker analyses correlated efficacy with expression levels of MET ligand hepatocyte growth factor, O6-methylguanine-DNA methyltransferase promoter methylation, and glioblastoma subtype. Results Among 129 patients enrolled (Ona + Bev, n = 64; Pla + Bev, n = 65), baseline characteristics were balanced. The median progression-free survival was 3.9 months for Ona + Bev versus 2.9 months for Pla + Bev (hazard ratio, 1.06; 95% CI, 0.72 to 1.56; P = .7444). The median overall survival was 8.8 months for Ona + Bev and 12.6 months for Pla + Bev (hazard ratio, 1.45; 95% CI, 0.88 to 2.37; P = .1389). Grade ≥ 3 adverse events were reported in 38.5% of patients who received Ona + Bev and 35.9% of patients who received Pla + Bev. Exploratory biomarker analyses suggested that patients with high expression of hepatocyte growth factor or unmethylated O6-methylguanine-DNA methyltransferase may benefit from Ona + Bev. Conclusion There was no evidence of further clinical benefit with the addition of onartuzumab to bevacizumab compared with bevacizumab plus placebo in unselected patients with recurrent glioblastoma in this phase II study; however, further investigation into biomarker subgroups is warranted.

The International Atomic Energy Agency global initiatives on nasopharyngeal cancer treatment.

Since its establishment in 1957, the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) has striven to promote global access to reliable and affordable radiotherapy, with much of its latest focus being in developing countries. While nasopharyngeal cancer (NPC) is highly curable by radiotherapy with excellent outcomes in developed countries, the outcomes in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) are disappointing. Although the reasons for this are complex and multifactorial, improving the accessibility and quality of radiotherapy in these countries is fundamental. With concerted effort from experts and advocates around the world, ongoing initiatives are supported by the IAEA to combat the challenges in LMICs.

Global Pattern of Nasopharyngeal Cancer: Correlation of Outcome With Access to Radiation Therapy.

PURPOSE: This study aimed to estimate the treatment outcome of nasopharyngeal cancer (NPC) across the world and its correlation with access to radiation therapy (RT). METHODS AND MATERIALS: The age-standardized mortality (ASM) and age-standardized incidence (ASI) rates of NPC from GLOBOCAN (2012) were summarized, and [1-(ASM/ASI)] was computed to give the proxy relative survival (RS). Data from the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) and the World Bank were used to assess the availability of RT in surrogate terms: the number of RT equipment units and radiation oncologists per million population. RESULTS: A total of 112 countries with complete valid data were analyzed, and the proxy RS varied widely from 0% to 83% (median, 50%). Countries were categorized into Good, Median, and Poor outcome groups on the basis of their proxy RS (<45%, 45%-55%, and >55%). Eighty percent of new cases occurred in the Poor outcome group. Univariable linear regression showed a significant correlation between outcome and the availability of RT: proxy RS increased at 3.4% (P<.001) and 1.5% (P=.001) per unit increase in RT equipment and oncologist per million population, respectively. The median number of RT equipment units per million population increased significantly from 0.5 in the Poor, to 1.5 in the Median, to 4.6 in the Good outcome groups, and the corresponding number of oncologists increased from 1.1 to 3.3 to 7.1 (P<.001). CONCLUSIONS: Nasopharyngeal cancer is a highly treatable disease, but the outcome varies widely across the world. The current study shows a significant correlation between survival and access to RT based on available surrogate indicators. However, the possible reasons for poor outcome are likely to be multifactorial and complex. Concerted international efforts are needed not only to address the fundamental requirement for adequate RT access but also to obtain more comprehensive and accurate data for research to improve cancer outcome.

A novel implantable catheter system with transcutaneous port for intermittent convection-enhanced delivery of carboplatin for recurrent glioblastoma.

CONTEXT: Inadequate penetration of the blood-brain barrier (BBB) by systemically administered chemotherapies including carboplatin is implicated in their failure to improve prognosis for patients with glioblastoma. Convection-enhanced delivery (CED) of carboplatin has the potential to improve outcomes by facilitating bypass of the BBB. OBJECTIVE: We report the first use of an implantable CED system incorporating a novel transcutaneous bone-anchored port (TBAP) for intermittent CED of carboplatin in a patient with recurrent glioblastoma. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The CED catheter system was implanted using a robot-assisted surgical method. Catheter targeting accuracy was verified by performing intra-operative O-arm imaging. The TBAP was implanted using a skin-flap dermatome technique modeled on bone-anchored hearing aid surgery. Repeated infusions were performed by attaching a needle administration set to the TBAP. Drug distribution was monitored with serial real-time T2-weighted magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). RESULTS: All catheters were implanted to within 1.5 mm of their planned target. Intermittent infusions of carboplatin were performed on three consecutive days and repeated after one month without the need for further surgical intervention. Infused volumes of 27.9 ml per day were well tolerated, with the exception of a single seizure episode. Follow-up MRI at eight weeks demonstrated a significant reduction in the volume of tumor enhancement from 42.6 ml to 24.6 ml, and was associated with stability of the patient's clinical condition. CONCLUSION: Reduction in the volume of tumor enhancement indicates that intermittent CED of carboplatin has the potential to improve outcomes in glioblastoma. The novel technology described in this report make intermittent CED infusion regimes an achievable treatment strategy.

Multi-Center Randomized Phase II Study Comparing Cediranib plus Gefitinib with Cediranib plus Placebo in Subjects with Recurrent/Progressive Glioblastoma.

BACKGROUND: Cediranib, an oral pan-vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) receptor tyrosine kinase inhibitor, failed to show benefit over lomustine in relapsed glioblastoma. One resistance mechanism for cediranib is up-regulation of epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR). This study aimed to determine if dual therapy with cediranib and the oral EGFR inhibitor gefitinib improved outcome in recurrent glioblastoma. METHODS AND FINDINGS: This was a multi-center randomized, two-armed, double-blinded phase II study comparing cediranib plus gefitinib versus cediranib plus placebo in subjects with first relapse/first progression of glioblastoma following surgery and chemoradiotherapy. The primary outcome measure was progression free survival (PFS). Secondary outcome measures included overall survival (OS) and radiologic response rate. Recruitment was terminated early following suspension of the cediranib program. 38 subjects (112 planned) were enrolled with 19 subjects in each treatment arm. Median PFS with cediranib plus gefitinib was 3.6 months compared to 2.8 months for cediranib plus placebo (HR; 0.72, 90% CI; 0.41 to 1.26). Median OS was 7.2 months with cediranib plus gefitinib and 5.5 months with cediranib plus placebo (HR; 0.68, 90% CI; 0.39 to 1.19). Eight subjects (42%) had a partial response in the cediranib plus gefitinib arm versus five patients (26%) in the cediranib plus placebo arm. CONCLUSIONS: Cediranib and gefitinib in combination is tolerated in patients with glioblastoma. Incomplete recruitment led to the study being underpowered. However, a trend towards improved survival and response rates with the addition of gefitinib to cediranib was observed. Further studies of the combination incorporating EGFR and VEGF inhibition are warranted. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT01310855.

Phase II Study of Radiotherapy and Temsirolimus versus Radiochemotherapy with Temozolomide in Patients with Newly Diagnosed Glioblastoma without MGMT Promoter Hypermethylation (EORTC 26082).

PURPOSE: EORTC 26082 assessed the activity of temsirolimus in patients with newly diagnosed glioblastoma harboring an unmethylated O6 methylguanine-DNA-methyltransferase (MGMT) promoter. EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN: Patients (n = 257) fulfilling eligibility criteria underwent central MGMT testing. Patients with MGMT unmethylated glioblastoma (n = 111) were randomized 1:1 between standard chemo-radiotherapy with temozolomide or radiotherapy plus weekly temsirolimus (25 mg). Primary endpoint was overall survival at 12 months (OS12). A positive signal was considered >38 patients alive at 12 months in the per protocol population. A noncomparative reference arm of 54 patients evaluated the assumptions on OS12 in a standard-treated cohort of patients. Prespecified post hoc analyses of markers reflecting target activation were performed. RESULTS: Both therapies were administered per protocol with a median of 13 cycles of maintenance temsirolimus. Median age was 55 and 58 years in the temsirolimus and standard arms, the WHO performance status 0 or 1 for most patients (95.5%). In the per protocol population, 38 of 54 patients treated with temsirolimus reached OS12. The actuarial 1-year survival was 72.2% [95% confidence interval (CI), 58.2-82.2] in the temozolomide arm and 69.6% (95% CI, 55.8-79.9) in the temsirolimus arm [hazard ratio (HR) 1.16; 95% CI, 0.77-1.76; P = 0.47]. In multivariable prognostic analyses of clinical and molecular factors, phosphorylation of mTORSer2448 in tumor tissue (HR 0.13; 95% CI, 0.04-0.47; P = 0.002), detected in 37.6%, was associated with benefit from temsirolimus. CONCLUSIONS: Temsirolimus was not superior to temozolomide in patients with an unmethylated MGMT promoter. Phosphorylation of mTORSer2448 in the pretreatment tumor tissue may define a subgroup benefitting from mTOR inhibition. Clin Cancer Res; 22(19); 4797-806. ©2016 AACR.

A phase I trial of carboplatin administered by convection-enhanced delivery to patients with recurrent/progressive glioblastoma multiforme.

Glioblastoma multiforme (GBM) is the commonest primary malignant brain tumour in adults. Standard treatment comprises surgery, radiotherapy and chemotherapy; however this condition remains incurable as these tumours are highly invasive and involve critical areas of the brain making it impossible to remove them surgically or cure them with radiotherapy. In the majority of cases the tumour recurs within 2 to 3 cm of the original site of tumour resection. Furthermore, the blood-brain barrier profoundly limits the access of many systemically administered chemotherapeutics to the tumour. Convection-enhanced delivery (CED) is a promising technique of direct intracranial drug delivery involving the implantation of microcatheters into the brain. Carboplatin represents an ideal chemotherapy to administer using this technique as glioblastoma cells are highly sensitive to carboplatin in vitro at concentrations that are not toxic to normal brain in vivo. This protocol describes a single-centre phase I dose-escalation study of carboplatin administered by CED to patients with recurrent or progressive GBM despite full standard treatment. This trial will incorporate 6 cohorts of 3 patients each. Cohorts will be treated in a sequential manner with increasing doses of carboplatin, subject to dose-limiting toxicity not being observed. This protocol should facilitate the identification of the maximum-tolerated infused concentration of carboplatin by CED into the supratentorial brain. This should facilitate the safe application of this technique in a phase II trial, treating patients with GBM, as well as for the treatment of other forms of malignant brain tumours, including metastases.

Temozolomide versus procarbazine, lomustine, and vincristine in recurrent high-grade glioma.

PURPOSE: Temozolomide (TMZ) is an alkylating agent licensed for treatment of high-grade glioma (HGG). No prospective comparison with nitrosourea-based chemotherapy exists. We report, to our knowledge, the first randomized trial of procarbazine, lomustine, and vincristine (PCV) versus TMZ in chemotherapy-naive patients with recurrent HGG. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Four hundred forty-seven patients were randomly assigned to PCV (224 patients) or TMZ (sub-random assignment: TMZ-5 [200 mg/m(2) for 5 days, 112 patients] or TMZ-21 [100 mg/m(2) for 21 days, 111 patients]) for up to 9 months or until progression. The primary outcomes were survival (PCV v TMZ) and 12-week progression-free survival (PFS; TMZ-5 v TMZ-21). This study is registered as ISRCTN83176944. RESULTS: Percentages of patients completing 9 months of treatment in the PCV, TMZ-5, and TMZ-21 arms were 17%, 26%, and 13%, respectively. Major toxicity was similar across all three groups. With a median follow-up time of 12 months and 382 deaths, there was no clear survival benefit when comparing PCV with TMZ (hazard ratio [HR], 0.91; 95% CI, 0.74 to 1.11; P = .350). For TMZ-5 versus TMZ-21, 12-week PFS rates were similar (63.6% and 65.7%, respectively; P = .745), but TMZ-5 improved overall PFS (HR, 1.38; 95% CI, 1.05 to 1.82; P = .023), survival (HR, 1.32; 95% CI, 0.99 to 1.75; P = .056), and global quality of life (49% v 19% improved > 10 points at 6 months, respectively; P = .005). CONCLUSION: Although TMZ (both arms combined) did not show a clear benefit compared with PCV, comparison of the TMZ schedules demonstrated that the 21-day schedule was inferior to the 5-day schedule in this setting. This challenges the current understanding of increasing TMZ dose-intensity by prolonged scheduling.

Extended survival in women with brain metastases from HER2 overexpressing breast cancer.

OBJECTIVES: Brain metastases (BM) are a significant complication of metastatic breast cancer (MBC). The high incidence of BM in HER2 overexpressing MBC is now well recognized, however, the optimal management of such patients is not yet clearly defined. We aimed to analyze factors affecting survival after diagnosis of BM in patients treated in our center. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Retrospective analysis of survival in all patients treated with antineoplastic therapy for BM from MBC in our institution between May 1st 2002 and April 30th 2005, according to HER2 expression and use of trastuzumab after diagnosis of BM. RESULTS: The median survival of the 26 patients with HER2 overexpressing disease after diagnosis of BM was significantly longer than that of the 60 patients with HER2 nonoverexpressing disease (6.2 vs. 3.8 months, P = 0.027). Further analysis revealed that this seems to be due to the favorable outcome of the 70% (n = 18) of HER2 overexpressing patients who received trastuzumab after BM were diagnosed. Median survival of this group was 11.9 months, compared with 3.8 months (HER2 nonoverexpressing disease, P = 0.002) and 3.0 months (HER2 overexpressing disease not treated with trastuzumab after development of BM, P = 0.05). CONCLUSION: Patients with HER2 overexpressing MBC who received trastuzumab after diagnosis of BM survived longer than expected. This finding justifies an active therapeutic approach: disease progression within central nervous system does not preclude benefit from trastuzumab treatment.