Patterns, predictors and prognostic relevance of high-grade hematotoxicity after temozolomide or temozolomide-lomustine in the CeTeG/NOA-09 trial.

PURPOSE: In the randomized phase III trial CeTeG/NOA-09, temozolomide (TMZ)/lomustine (CCNU) combination therapy was superior to TMZ in newly diagnosed MGMT methylated glioblastoma, albeit reporting more frequent hematotoxicity. Here, we analyze high grade hematotoxicity and its prognostic relevance in the trial population. METHODS: Descriptive and comparative analysis of hematotoxicity adverse events ≥ grade 3 (HAE) according to the Common Terminology of Clinical Adverse Events, version 4.0 was performed. The association of HAE with survival was assessed in a landmark analysis. Logistic regression analysis was performed to predict HAE during the concomitant phase of chemotherapy. RESULTS: HAE occurred in 36.4% and 28.6% of patients under CCNU/TMZ and TMZ treatment, respectively. The median onset of the first HAE was during concomitant chemotherapy (i.e. first CCNU/TMZ course or daily TMZ therapy), and 42.9% of patients with HAE receiving further courses experienced repeat HAE. Median HAE duration was similar between treatment arms (CCNU/TMZ 11.5; TMZ 13 days). Chemotherapy was more often discontinued due to HAE in CCNU/TMZ than in TMZ (19.7 vs. 6.3%, p = 0.036). The occurrence of HAE was not associated with survival differences (p = 0.76). Regression analysis confirmed older age (OR 1.08) and female sex (OR 2.47), but not treatment arm, as predictors of HAE. CONCLUSION: Older age and female sex are associated with higher incidence of HAE. Although occurrence of HAE was not associated with shorter survival, reliable prediction of patients at risk might be beneficial to allow optimal management of therapy and allocation of supportive measures. TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT01149109.

Tumor Treating Fields (TTFields) increase the effectiveness of temozolomide and lomustine in glioblastoma cell lines.

PURPOSE: Tumor Treating Fields (TTFields) are electric fields that disrupt cellular processes critical for cancer cell viability and tumor progression, ultimately leading to cell death. TTFields therapy is approved for treatment of newly-diagnosed glioblastoma (GBM) concurrent with maintenance temozolomide (TMZ). Recently, the benefit of TMZ in combination with lomustine (CCNU) was demonstrated in patients with O6-methylguanine DNA methyltransferase (MGMT) promoter methylation. The addition of adjuvant TTFields to TMZ plus CCNU further improved patient outcomes, leading to a CE mark for this regimen. The current in vitro study aimed to elucidate the mechanism underlying the benefit of this treatment protocol. METHODS: Human GBM cell lines with different MGMT promoter methylation statuses were treated with TTFields, TMZ, and CCNU, and effectiveness was tested by cell count, apoptosis, colony formation, and DNA damage measurements. Expression levels of relevant DNA-repair proteins were examined by western blot analysis. RESULTS: TTFields concomitant with TMZ displayed an additive effect, irrespective of MGMT expression levels. TTFields concomitant with CCNU or with CCNU plus TMZ was additive in MGMT-expressing cells and synergistic in MGMT-non-expressing cells. TTFields downregulated the FA-BRCA pathway and increased DNA damage induced by the chemotherapy combination. CONCLUSIONS: The results support the clinical benefit demonstrated for TTFields concomitant with TMZ plus CCNU. Since the FA-BRCA pathway is required for repair of DNA cross-links induced by CCNU in the absence of MGMT, the synergy demonstrated in MGMT promoter methylated cells when TTFields and CCNU were co-applied may be attributed to the BRCAness state induced by TTFields.

Undetected pseudoprogressions in the CeTeG/NOA-09 trial: hints from postprogression survival and MRI analyses.

PURPOSE: In the randomized CeTeG/NOA-09 trial, lomustine/temozolomide (CCNU/TMZ) was superior to TMZ therapy regarding overall survival (OS) in MGMT promotor-methylated glioblastoma. Progression-free survival (PFS) and pseudoprogression rates (about 10%) were similar in both arms. Further evaluating this discrepancy, we analyzed patterns of postprogression survival (PPS) and MRI features at first progression according to modified RANO criteria (mRANO). METHODS: We classified the patients of the CeTeG/NOA-09 trial according to long vs. short PPS employing a cut-off of 18 months and compared baseline characteristics and survival times. In patients with available MRIs and confirmed progression, the increase in T1-enhancing, FLAIR hyperintense lesion volume and the change in ADC mean value of contrast-enhancing tumor upon progression were determined. RESULTS: Patients with long PPS in the CCNU/TMZ arm had a particularly short PFS (5.6 months). PFS in this subgroup was shorter than in the long PPS subgroup of the TMZ arm (11.1 months, p = 0.01). At mRANO-defined progression, patients of the CCNU/TMZ long PPS subgroup had a significantly higher increase of mean ADC values (p = 0.015) and a tendency to a stronger volumetric increase in T1-enhancement (p = 0.22) as compared to long PPS patients of the TMZ arm. CONCLUSION: The combination of survival and MRI analyses identified a subgroup of CCNU/TMZ-treated patients with features that sets them apart from other patients in the trial: short first PFS despite long PPS and significant increase in mean ADC values upon mRANO-defined progression. The observed pattern is compatible with the features commonly observed in pseudoprogression suggesting mRANO-undetected pseudoprogressions in the CCNU/TMZ arm of CeTeG/NOA-09.

T2-Fluid-attenuated inversion recovery (FLAIR) pseudoprogression in patients with anaplastic oligodendrogliomas treated with procarbazine, lomustine and vincristine (PCV) chemotherapy alone.

BACKGROUND: Pseudoprogression in gliomas has been extensively described after radiotherapy with or without chemotherapy, but not after chemotherapy alone. Here we describe the occurrence of pseudoprogression in patients with anaplastic oligodendrogliomas treated with postoperative procarbazine, lomustine and vincristine (PCV) chemotherapy alone. METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed the medical and radiological files of patients with 1p/19q codeleted, IDH-mutant anaplastic oligodendrogliomas treated with PCV chemotherapy alone who presented magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) modifications suggestive of tumour progression and in whom the final diagnosis was a pseudoprogression. RESULTS: We identified six patients. All patients underwent a surgical resection and were treated with PCV chemotherapy without radiotherapy. After a median of 11 months following the initiation of chemotherapy (range: 3-49 months), the patients developed asymptomatic white matter MRI modifications around the surgical cavity leading to the suspicion of a tumour progression. These modifications appeared as hyperintense on T2-fluid-attenuated inversion recovery (FLAIR) sequence, hypointense on T1 sequence, and lacked mass effect (0/6), contrast enhancement (0/6), restriction on diffusion-weighted imaging (0/4), relative cerebral blood volume (rCBV) increase on perfusion MRI (0/4), and hypermetabolism on 18 F-fluoro-L-dopa positron emission tomography (18 F-DOPA PET) scan (0/3). One patient underwent a surgical resection demonstrating no tumour recurrence; the five other patients were considered as having post-therapeutic modifications based on imaging characteristics. After a median follow-up of 4 years all patients were progression-free. CONCLUSIONS: Anaplastic oligodendroglioma patients treated with postoperative PCV chemotherapy alone occasionally develop T2/FLAIR hyperintensities around the surgical cavity that can wrongly suggest tumour progression. Multimodal imaging and close follow-up should be considered in this situation.

Improvement of functional outcome for patients with newly diagnosed grade 2 or 3 gliomas with co-deletion of 1p/19q - IMPROVE CODEL: the NOA-18 trial.

BACKGROUND: Given the young age of patients with CNS WHO grade 2 and 3 oligodendrogliomas and the relevant risk of neurocognitive, functional, and quality-of-life impairment with the current aggressive standard of care treatment, chemoradiation with PCV, of the tumour located in the brain optimizing care is the major challenge. METHODS: NOA-18 aims at improving qualified overall survival (qOS) for adult patients with CNS WHO grade 2 and 3 oligodendrogliomas by randomizing between standard chemoradiation with up to six six-weekly cycles with PCV and six six-weekly cycles with lomustine and temozolomide (CETEG) (n = 182 patients per group accrued over 4 years) thereby delaying radiotherapy and adding the chemoradiotherapy concept at progression after initial radiation-free chemotherapy, allowing for effective salvage treatment and delaying potentially deleterious side effects. QOS represents a new concept and is defined as OS without functional and/or cognitive and/or quality of life deterioration regardless of whether tumour progression or toxicity is the main cause. The primary objective is to show superiority of an initial CETEG treatment followed by partial brain radiotherapy (RT) plus PCV (RT-PCV) at progression over partial brain radiotherapy (RT) followed by procarbazine, lomustine, and vincristine (PCV) chemotherapy (RT-PCV) and best investigators choice (BIC) at progression for sustained qOS. An event concerning a sustained qOS is then defined as a functional and/or cognitive and/or quality of life deterioration after completion of primary therapy on two consecutive study visits with an interval of 3 months, tolerating a deviation of at most 1 month. Assessments are done with a 3-monthly MRI, assessment of the NANO scale, HRQoL, and KPS, and annual cognitive testing. Secondary objectives are evaluation and comparison of the two groups regarding secondary endpoints (short-term qOS, PFS, OS, complete and partial response rate). The trial is planned to be conducted at a minimum of 18 NOA study sites in Germany. DISCUSSION: qOS represents a new concept. The present NOA trial aims at showing the superiority of CETEG plus RT-PCV over RT-PCV plus BIC as determined at the level of OS without sustained functional deterioration for all patients with oligodendroglioma diagnosed according to the most recent WHO classification. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinicaltrials.gov NCT05331521 . EudraCT 2018-005027-16.

CRISPR/Cas9-induced knockout reveals the role of ABCB1 in the response to temozolomide, carmustine and lomustine in glioblastoma multiforme.

Glioblastoma multiforme (GBM) is the most common malignant brain tumor with limited therapeutic options. Besides surgery, chemotherapy using temozolomide, carmustine or lomustine is the main pillar of therapy. However, therapy success is limited and prognosis still is very poor. One restraining factor is drug resistance caused by drug transporters of the ATP-binding cassette family, e.g. ABCB1 and ABCG2, located at the blood-brain barrier and on tumor cells. The active efflux of xenobiotics including drugs, e.g. temozolomide, leads to low intracellular drug concentrations and subsequently insufficient anti-tumor effects. Nevertheless, the role of efflux transporters in GBM is controversially discussed. In the present study, we analyzed the role of ABCB1 and ABCG2 in GBM cells showing that ABCB1, but marginally ABCG2, is relevant. Applying a CRISPR/Cas9-derived ABCB1 knockout, the response to temozolomide was significantly augmented demonstrated by decreased cell number (p < 0.001) and proliferation rate (p = 0.04), while apoptosis was increased (p = 0.04). For carmustine, a decrease of cells in G1-phase was detected pointing to cell cycle arrest in the ABCB1 knockout (p = 0.006). For lomustine, however, loss of ABCB1 did not alter the response to the treatment. Overall, this study shows that ABCB1 is involved in the active transport of temozolomide out of the tumor cells diminishing the response to temozolomide. Interestingly, loss of ABCB1 also affected the response to the lipophilic drug carmustine. These findings show that ABCB1 is not only relevant at the blood-brain barrier, but also in the tumor cells diminishing success of chemotherapy.

Novel "T-Dimension" Therapies for Pediatric Optic Pathway Glioma: A Timely, Targeted, and Tailored Treatment Trend.

INTRODUCTION: Novel targeted and tailored therapies can substantially improve the prognosis for optic pathway glioma (OPG), especially when implemented in a timely manner. However, their tremendous potential remains underestimated. Therefore, in this study, we provide an updated overview of the clinical trials, current trends, and future perspectives for OPG's novel therapeutic strategies. METHODS: We completed an extensive literature review using the PubMed, MEDLINE, and ClinicalTrials.gov databases. We analyzed and reported the data following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. RESULTS: Thioguanine, procarbazine, lomustine, and vincristine/vinblastine, as well as cisplatin-etoposide, provided excellent results in advanced-phase trials. Selumetinib and trametinib, two oral MEK inhibitors, have been approved for recurrent or refractory OPGs in association with the angiogenetic inhibitor bevacizumab. Among the mTOR inhibitors, everolimus and sirolimus showed the best results. Stereotactic radiosurgery and proton beam radiation therapy have advantages over conventional radiotherapy regimens. Timely treatment is imperative for acute visual symptoms with evidence of tumor progression. This latest evidence can help define a novel "T-Dimension" for pediatric OPG therapies. CONCLUSION: The novel "T-Dimension" for pediatric OPGs is based on recent evidence-based treatments, including combination chemotherapy regimens, molecular targeted therapies, stereotactic radiosurgery, and proton beam radiation therapy. Additional clinical trials are essential for validating each of these new therapies.

Prolonged Survival Following Treatment of Histiocytic Sarcoma of the Canine Urinary Bladder.

A 9 yr old castrated male miniature schnauzer was diagnosed histopathologically with a mucosal histiocytic sarcoma of the urinary bladder apex, biopsied at the time of surgical cystotomy. Sequential adjuvant chemotherapy, including both lomustine (discontinued because of adverse effects) and then doxorubicin, were employed. A response to both agents was documented. Ultimately, a complete response was achieved following completion of the doxorubicin protocol. A complete response persisted 768 days following diagnosis at last follow-up. Histiocytic sarcoma of the urinary bladder remains a rare diagnosis in veterinary medicine. Only one previous case report is currently published. This case contrasts with the previous case report, which reported a survival of only 2 mo.

MGMT promoter methylation analysis for allocating combined CCNU/TMZ chemotherapy: Lessons learned from the CeTeG/NOA-09 trial.

The CeTeG/NOA-09 trial showed a survival benefit for combined CCNU/TMZ therapy in MGMT-promoter-methylated glioblastoma patients (quantitative methylation-specific PCR [qMSP] ratio > 2). Here, we report on the prognostic value of the MGMT promoter methylation ratio determined by qMSP and evaluate the concordance of MGMT methylation results obtained by qMSP, pyrosequencing (PSQ) or DNA methylation arrays (MGMT-STP27). A potential association of qMSP ratio with survival was analyzed in the CeTeG/NOA-09 trial population (n = 129; log-rank tests, Cox regression analyses). The concordance of MGMT methylation assays (qMSP, PSQ and MGMT-STP27) was evaluated in 76 screened patients. Patients with tumors of qMSP ratio > 4 showed superior survival compared to those with ratios 2-4 (P = .0251, log-rank test). In multivariate analysis, the qMSP ratio was not prognostic across the study cohort (hazard ratio [HR] = 0.88; 95% CI: 0.72-1.08). With different cutoffs for qMSP ratio (4, 9, 12 or 25), the CCNU/TMZ benefit tended to be larger in subgroups with lower ratios (eg, for cutoff 9: HR 0.32 for lower subgroup, 0.73 for higher subgroup). The concordance rates with qMSP were 94.4% (PSQ) and 90.2% (MGMT-STP27). Discordant results were restricted to tumors with qMSP ratios ≤4 and PSQ mean methylation rate ≤25%. Despite a shorter survival in MGMT-promoter-methylated patients with lower methylation according to qMSP, these patients had a benefit from combined CCNU/TMZ therapy, which even tended to be stronger than in patients with higher methylation rates. With acceptable concordance rates, decisions on CCNU/TMZ therapy may also be based on PSQ or MGMT-STP27.

Lomustine and nimustine exert efficient antitumor effects against glioblastoma models with acquired temozolomide resistance.

Glioblastomas (GBM) often acquire resistance against temozolomide (TMZ) after continuous treatment and recur as TMZ-resistant GBM (TMZ-R-GBM). Lomustine (CCNU) and nimustine (ACNU), which were previously used as standard therapeutic agents against GBM before TMZ, have occasionally been used for the salvage therapy of TMZ-R-GBM; however, their efficacy has not yet been thoroughly examined. Therefore, we investigated the antitumor effects of CCNU and ACNU against TMZ-R-GBM. As a model of TMZ-R-GBM, TMZ resistant clones of human GBM cell lines (U87, U251MG, and U343MG) were established (TMZ-R-cells) by the culture of each GBM cells under continuous TMZ treatment, and the antitumor effects of TMZ, CCNU, or ACNU against these cells were analyzed in vitro and in vivo. As a result, although growth arrest and apoptosis were triggered in all TMZ-R-cells after the administration of each drug, the antitumor effects of TMZ against TMZ-R-cells were significantly reduced compared to those of parental cells, whereas CCNU and ACNU demonstrated efficient antitumor effects on TMZ-R-cells as well as parental cells. It was also demonstrated that TMZ resistance of TMZ-R-cells was regulated at the initiation of DNA damage response. Furthermore, survival in mice was significantly prolonged by systemic treatment with CCNU or ACNU but not TMZ after implantation of TMZ-R-cells. These findings suggest that CCNU or ACNU may serve as a therapeutic agent in salvage treatment against TMZ-R-GBM.

Radiotherapy Plus Procarbazine, Lomustine, and Vincristine Versus Radiotherapy Plus Temozolomide for IDH-Mutant Anaplastic Astrocytoma: A Retrospective Multicenter Analysis of the French POLA Cohort.

BACKGROUND: IDH-mutant anaplastic astrocytomas (AAs) are chemosensitive tumors for which the best choice of adjuvant chemotherapy between procarbazine, lomustine, and vincristine (PCV) or temozolomide (TMZ) after radiotherapy (RT) remains unclear. METHODS: In a large cohort of patients with histologically proven 2016 World Health Organization classification AA with IDH1/2 mutations included in the French national POLA cohort (n = 355), the primary objective was to compare progression-free survival (PFS) between the two treatment regimens (n = 311). Secondary endpoints were overall survival (OS), progression type, pseudoprogression rate, and toxicity. RESULTS: The 4-year PFS in the RT + PCV arm was 70.8% versus 53.5% in the RT + TMZ arm, with a hazard ratio (HR) of 0.58 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.38-0.87; p = .0074) in univariable analysis and 0.63 (95% CI, 0.41-0.97; p = .0348) in multivariable analysis. The 4-year OS in the RT + PCV arm was 84.3% versus 76.6% in the RT + TMZ arm, with an HR of 0.57 (95% CI, 0.30-1.05; p = .0675) in univariable analysis. Toxicity was significantly higher in the RT + PCV arm with more grade ≥3 toxicity (46.7% vs. 8.6%, p < .0001). CONCLUSION: RT + PCV significantly improved PFS compared with RT + TMZ for IDH-mutant AA. However, RT + TMZ was better tolerated. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: In the absence of fully conducted randomized trials comparing procarbazine, lomustine, and vincristine (PCV) with temozolomide (TMZ) in adjuvant treatment after radiotherapy (RT) for the management of IDH-mutant anaplastic astrocytoma (AA) and a similar level of evidence, these two chemotherapies are both equally recommended in international guidelines. This study in a national cohort of IDH-mutant AA defined according the 2016 World Health Organization (WHO) classification shows for the first time that the RT + PCV regimen significantly improves progression-free survival in comparison with the RT + TMZ regimen. Even if at the time of analysis the difference in overall survival was not significant, this result provides new evidence for the debate about the chemotherapy regimen to prescribe in adjuvant treatment to RT for WHO 2016 IDH-mutant AA.

Combination chemotherapy versus temozolomide for patients with methylated MGMT (m-MGMT) glioblastoma: results of computational biological modeling to predict the magnitude of treatment benefit.

BACKGROUND: A randomized trial in glioblastoma patients with methylated-MGMT (m-MGMT) found an improvement in median survival of 16.7 months for combination therapy with temozolomide (TMZ) and lomustine, however the approach remains controversial and relatively under-utilized. Therefore, we sought to determine whether comprehensive genomic analysis can predict which patients would derive large, intermediate, or negligible benefits from the combination compared to single agent chemotherapy. METHODS: Comprehensive genomic information from 274 newly diagnosed patients with methylated-MGMT glioblastoma (GBM) was downloaded from TCGA. Mutation and copy number changes were input into a computational biologic model to create an avatar of disease behavior and the malignant phenotypes representing hallmark behavior of cancers. In silico responses to TMZ, lomustine, and combination treatment were biosimulated. Efficacy scores representing the effect of treatment for each treatment strategy were generated and compared to each other to ascertain the differential benefit in drug response. RESULTS: Differential benefits for each drug were identified, including strong, modest-intermediate, negligible, and deleterious (harmful) effects for subgroups of patients. Similarly, the benefits of combination therapy ranged from synergy, little or negligible benefit, and deleterious effects compared to single agent approaches. CONCLUSIONS: The benefit of combination chemotherapy is predicted to vary widely in the population. Biosimulation appears to be a useful tool to address the disease heterogeneity, drug response, and the relevance of particular clinical trials observations to individual patients. Biosimulation has potential to spare some patients the experience of over-treatment while identifying patients uniquely situated to benefit from combination treatment. Validation of this new artificial intelligence tool is needed.

PCV chemotherapy alone for WHO grade 2 oligodendroglioma: prolonged disease control with low risk of malignant progression.

INTRODUCTION: The role of chemotherapy alone in newly diagnosed WHO grade 2 oligodendroglioma after biopsy, incomplete or gross total resection remains controversial. We here analyze the clinical outcome of four patient cohorts being treated with either procarbazine, CCNU and vincristine (PCV) or temozolomide (TMZ) after biopsy, resection only, or wait-and-scan after biopsy. METHODS: Patients (n = 142) with molecularly defined oligodendroglioma (WHO 2016) were assigned to four cohorts: W&S, wait-and-scan after stereotactic biopsy (n = 59); RES, surgical resection only (n = 27); TMZ, temozolomide after biopsy (n = 26) or PCV (n = 30) after biopsy. Presurgical MRI T2 tumor volumes were obtained by manual segmentation. Progression-free survival (PFS), post-recurrence PFS (PR-PFS) and rate of histological progression to grade 3 were analyzed. RESULTS: PFS was longest after PCV (9.1 years), compared to 5.1 years after W&S, 4.4 years after RES and 3.6 years after TMZ. The rate of histological progression from grade 2 to 3 within 10 years was 9% for the PCV, 29% for the W&S, 67% for the RES and 75% for the TMZ group (p = 0.01). In the W&S group, patients treated with PCV at first relapse had a longer PFS from intervention than those treated with TMZ (7.2 vs 4.0 years, p = 0.04). Multivariate analysis identified smaller tumor volume prior to any intervention (p = 0.02) to be prognostic for PFS. CONCLUSIONS: PCV chemotherapy alone is an effective treatment for WHO grade 2 oligodendroglioma, with long PFS and low rate of histological progression.

Treatment options for progression or recurrence of glioblastoma: a network meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Glioblastoma (GBM) is a highly malignant brain tumour that almost inevitably progresses or recurs after first line standard of care. There is no consensus regarding the best treatment/s to offer people upon disease progression or recurrence. For the purposes of this review, progression and recurrence are considered as one entity. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the effectiveness of further treatment/s for first and subsequent progression or recurrence of glioblastoma (GBM) among people who have received the standard of care (Stupp protocol) for primary treatment of the disease; and to prepare a brief economic commentary on the available evidence. SEARCH METHODS: We searched MEDLINE and Embase electronic databases from 2005 to December 2019 and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL, in the Cochrane Library; Issue 12, 2019). Economic searches included the National Health Service Economic Evaluation Database (NHS EED) up to 2015 (database closure) and MEDLINE and Embase from 2015 to December 2019. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and comparative non-randomised studies (NRSs) evaluating effectiveness of treatments for progressive/recurrent GBM. Eligible studies included people with progressive or recurrent GBM who had received first line radiotherapy with concomitant and adjuvant temozolomide (TMZ). DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently selected studies and extracted data to a pre-designed data extraction form. We conducted network meta-analyses (NMA) and ranked treatments according to effectiveness for each outcome using the random-effects model and Stata software (version 15). We rated the certainty of evidence using the GRADE approach. MAIN RESULTS: We included 42 studies: these comprised 34 randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and 8 non-randomised studies (NRSs) involving 5236 participants. We judged most RCTs to be at a low risk of bias and NRSs at high risk of bias. Interventions included chemotherapy, re-operation, re-irradiation and novel therapies either used alone or in combination. For first recurrence, we included 11 interventions in the network meta-analysis (NMA) for overall survival (OS), and eight in the NMA for progression-free survival (PFS). Lomustine (LOM; also known as CCNU) was the most common comparator and was used as the reference treatment. No studies in the NMA evaluated surgery, re-irradiation, PCV (procarbazine, lomustine, vincristine), TMZ re-challenge or best supportive care. We could not perform NMA for second or later recurrence due to insufficient data. Quality-of-life data were sparse. First recurrence (NMA findings) Median OS across included studies in the NMA ranged from 5.5 to 12.6 months and median progression-free survival (PFS) ranged from 1.5 months to 4.2 months. We found no high-certainty evidence that any treatments tested were better than lomustine. These treatments included the following. Bevacizumab plus lomustine: Evidence suggested probably little or no difference in OS between bevacizumab (BEV) combined with lomustine (LOM) and LOM monotherapy (hazard ratio (HR) 0.91, 0.75 to 1.10; moderate-certainty evidence), although BEV + LOM may improve PFS (HR 0.57, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.44 to 0.74; low-certainty evidence). Bevacizumab monotherapy: Low-certainty evidence suggested there may be little or no difference in OS (HR 1.22, 95% CI 0.84 to 1.76) and PFS (HR 0.90, 95% CI 0.58 to 1.38; low-certainty evidence) between BEV and LOM monotherapies; more evidence on BEV is needed. Regorafenib (REG): REG may improve OS compared with LOM (HR 0.50, 95% CI 0.33 to 0.76; low-certainty evidence). Evidence on PFS was very low certainty and more evidence on REG is needed. Temozolomide (TMZ) plus Depatux-M (ABT414): For OS, low-certainty evidence suggested that TMZ plus ABT414 may be more effective than LOM (HR 0.66, 95% CI 0.47 to 0.92) and may be more effective than BEV (HR 0.54, 95% CI 0.33 to 0.89; low-certainty evidence). This may be due to the TMZ component only and more evidence is needed. Fotemustine (FOM): FOM and LOM may have similar effects on OS (HR 0.89, 95% CI 0.51 to 1.57, low-certainty evidence). Bevacizumab and irinotecan (IRI): Evidence on BEV + irinotecan (IRI) versus LOM for both OS and PFS is very uncertain and there is probably little or no difference between BEV + IRI versus BEV monotherapy (OS: HR 0.95, 95% CI 0.70 to 1.30; moderate-certainty evidence). When treatments were ranked for OS, FOM ranked first, BEV + LOM second, LOM third, BEV + IRI fourth, and BEV fifth. Ranking does not take into account the certainty of the evidence, which also suggests there may be little or no difference between FOM and LOM. Other treatments Three studies evaluated re-operation versus no re-operation, with or without re-irradiation and chemotherapy, and these suggested possible survival advantages with re-operation within the context of being able to select suitable candidates for re-operation. A cannabinoid treatment in the early stages of evaluation, in combination with TMZ, merits further evaluation. Second or later recurrence Limited evidence from three heterogeneous studies suggested that radiotherapy with or without BEV may have a beneficial effect on survival but more evidence is needed. Evidence was insufficient to draw conclusions about the best radiotherapy dosage. Other evidence suggested that there may be little difference in survival with tumour-treating fields compared with physician's best choice of treatment. We found no reliable evidence on best supportive care. Severe adverse events (SAEs) The BEV+LOM combination was associated with significantly greater risk of SAEs than LOM monotherapy (RR 2.51, 95% CI 1.72 to 3.66, high-certainty evidence), and ranked joint worst with cediranib + LOM (RR 2.51, 95% CI 1.29 to 4.90; high-certainty evidence). LOM ranked best and REG ranked second best. Adding novel treatments to BEV was generally associated with a higher risk of severe adverse events compared with BEV alone. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: For treatment of first recurrence of GBM, among people previously treated with surgery and standard chemoradiotherapy, the combination treatments evaluated did not improve overall survival compared with LOM monotherapy and were often associated with a higher risk of severe adverse events. Limited evidence suggested that re-operation with or without re-irradiation and chemotherapy may be suitable for selected candidates. Evidence on second recurrence is sparse. Re-irradiation with or without bevacizumab may be of value in selected individuals, but more evidence is needed.

ANTECEDENTES: El glioblastoma (GBM) es un tumor cerebral altamente maligno que casi inevitablemente progresa o recidiva después de un tratamiento de primera línea. No hay consenso sobre el mejor o los mejores tratamientos que se pueden ofrecer a las personas que presentan progresión o recidiva de la enfermedad. A los efectos de la presente revisión, la progresión y la recidiva se consideran como una sola entidad. OBJETIVOS: Evaluar la efectividad de los tratamientos adicionales para la primera y subsiguiente progresión o recidiva del glioblastoma (GBM) entre las personas que han recibido atención estándar (protocolo Stupp) para el tratamiento primario de la enfermedad, así como preparar un breve comentario económico sobre la evidencia disponible. MÉTODOS DE BÚSQUEDA: Se realizaron búsquedas en las bases de datos electrónicas de MEDLINE y Embase desde 2005 hasta diciembre de 2019 y en el Registro Cochrane central de ensayos controlados (Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials) (CENTRAL, en la Cochrane Library; Número 12, 2019). Las búsquedas económicas incluyeron la National Health Service Economic Evaluation Database (NHS EED) hasta 2015 (cierre de la base de datos) y MEDLINE y Embase desde 2015 hasta diciembre de 2019. CRITERIOS DE SELECCIÓN: Ensayos controlados aleatorizados (ECA) y estudios comparativos no aleatorizados (no ECA) que evaluaron la efectividad de los tratamientos para el GBM progresivo/recidivante. Los estudios elegibles incluyeron personas con GBM progresivo o recidivante que habían recibido radioterapia de primera línea con temozolomida (TMZ) concomitante y adyuvante. OBTENCIÓN Y ANÁLISIS DE LOS DATOS: Dos autores de la revisión de forma independiente seleccionaron los estudios y extrajeron los datos en un formulario de extracción de datos prediseñado. Se realizaron metanálisis en red (MAR) y los tratamientos se clasificaron según la efectividad de cada desenlace, mediante el modelo de efectos aleatorios y el software Stata (versión 15). La certeza de la evidencia se evaluó mediante los criterios GRADE. RESULTADOS PRINCIPALES: Se incluyeron 42 estudios, que comprendieron 34 ensayos controlados aleatorizados (ECA) y ocho estudios no aleatorizados (no ECA), con 5236 participantes. Se consideró que la mayoría de los ECA tuvieron bajo riesgo de sesgo y que los no ECA tuvieron alto riesgo de sesgo. Las intervenciones incluyeron quimioterapia, reoperación, reirradiación y tratamientos nuevos, ya sea utilizadas solos o en combinación. Para la primera recidiva se incluyeron 11 intervenciones en el metanálisis en red (MAR) para la supervivencia general (SG), y ocho para la supervivencia sin progresión (SSP). La lomustina (LOM; también conocida como CCNU) fue el comparador más frecuente y se utilizó como tratamiento de referencia. Ningún estudio en el MAR evaluó la cirugía, la reirradiación, la PCV (procarbazina, lomustina, vincristina), la reexposición a TMZ o el mejor tratamiento de apoyo. No fue posible realizar un MAR para una segunda o posterior recidiva debido a que los datos no fueron suficientes. Los datos de calidad de vida fueron escasos. Primera recidiva (hallazgos del MAR) La mediana de la SG en los estudios incluidos en el MAR varió entre 5,5 y 12,6 meses y la mediana de la supervivencia sin progresión (SSP) varió entre 1,5 y 4,2 meses. No se encontró evidencia de certeza alta de que los tratamientos probados fueran mejores que la lomustina. Estos tratamientos incluyeron los siguientes. Bevacizumab más lomustina: La evidencia indicó probablemente poca o ninguna diferencia en la SG entre el bevacizumab (BEV) combinado con lomustina (LOM) y la monoterapia con LOM (cociente de riesgos instantáneo [CRI] 0,91; 0,75 a 1,10; evidencia de certeza moderada), aunque BEV + LOM puede mejorar la SSP (CRI 0,57; intervalo de confianza [IC] del 95%: 0,44 a 0,74; evidencia de certeza baja). Monoterapia con bevacizumab: La evidencia de certeza baja indicó que puede haber poca o ninguna diferencia en la SG (CRI 1,22; IC del 95%: 0,84 a 1,76) y la SSP (CRI 0,90; IC del 95%: 0,58 a 1,38; evidencia de certeza baja) entre las monoterapias con BEV y LOM; se necesita más evidencia sobre el BEV. Regorafenib (REG): El REG puede mejorar la SG en comparación con la LOM (CRI 0,50; IC del 95%: 0,33 a 0,76; evidencia de certeza baja). La evidencia sobre la SSP fue de certeza muy baja y se necesita más evidencia sobre el REG. Temozolomida (TMZ) más Depatux­M (ABT414): En cuanto a la SG, evidencia de certeza baja indicó que TMZ más ABT414 puede ser más efectiva que LOM (CRI 0,66; IC del 95%: 0,47 a 0,92) y puede ser más efectiva que BEV (CRI 0,54; IC del 95%: 0,33 a 0,89; evidencia de certeza baja). Lo anterior se puede deber solamente al componente de TMZ, y se necesita más evidencia. Fotemustina (FOM): FOM y LOM pueden tener efectos similares sobre la SG (CRI 0,89; IC del 95%: 0,51 a 1,57, evidencia de certeza baja). Bevacizumab e irinotecan (IRI): La evidencia sobre BEV + irinotecan (IRI) versus LOM para la SG y la SSP no está clara y probablemente hay poca o ninguna diferencia entre BEV + IRI versus la monoterapia con BEV (SG: CRI 0,95; IC del 95%: 0,70 a 1,30; evidencia de certeza moderada). Cuando los tratamientos se clasificaron según la SG, FOM se clasificó primero, BEV + LOM segundo, LOM tercero, BEV + IRI cuarto, y BEV quinto. La clasificación no tiene en cuenta la certeza de la evidencia, lo que también indica que puede haber poca o ninguna diferencia entre FOM y LOM. Otros tratamientos Tres estudios evaluaron la reoperación versus ninguna reoperación, con o sin reirradiación y quimioterapia, e indicaron posibles ventajas en la supervivencia con la reoperación, en el contexto de poder seleccionar candidatos adecuados para esta intervención. Un tratamiento con cannabinoides en las primeras etapas de evaluación, en combinación con TMZ, merece evaluación adicional. Segunda o posterior recidiva La evidencia limitada de tres estudios heterogéneos indicó que la radioterapia con o sin BEV puede tener un efecto beneficioso sobre la supervivencia, pero se necesita más evidencia. La evidencia no fue suficiente para establecer conclusiones sobre la mejor dosis de radioterapia. Otra evidencia indicó que puede haber poca diferencia en la supervivencia con los campos de tratamiento del tumor en comparación con la mejor opción de tratamiento del médico. No se encontró evidencia fiable sobre el mejor tratamiento de apoyo. Eventos adversos graves (EAG) La combinación BEV + LOM se asoció con un riesgo significativamente mayor de EAG que la monoterapia con LOM (RR 2,51; IC del 95%: 1,72 a 3,66; evidencia de certeza alta), y se clasificó peor junto con cediranib + LOM (RR 2,51; IC del 95%: 1,29 a 4,90; evidencia de certeza alta). LOM se clasificó como el mejor y REG como el segundo mejor. Agregar nuevos tratamientos al BEV se asoció generalmente con un mayor riesgo de eventos adversos graves, en comparación con BEV solo. CONCLUSIONES DE LOS AUTORES: Para el tratamiento de la primera recidiva del GBM en personas tratadas previamente con cirugía y quimiorradioterapia estándar, los tratamientos combinados evaluados no mejoraron la supervivencia general en comparación con la monoterapia con LOM, y a menudo se asociaron con un mayor riesgo de eventos adversos graves. Hay evidencia limitada que indica que la reoperación con o sin reirradiación y quimioterapia puede ser adecuada para candidatos seleccionados. La evidencia sobre la segunda recidiva es escasa. La reirradiación con o sin bevacizumab puede ser de valor en determinados individuos, pero se necesita más evidencia.

Is chemotherapy alone an option as initial treatment for low-grade oligodendrogliomas?

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: The management of low-grade (grade II) oligodendrogliomas is still controversial, due to their rarity and long-term survival. According to recent WHO 2016 Classification of central nervous system tumors oligodendrogliomas are defined by the coexistence of molecular alterations, such as isocitrate dehydrogenase (IDH)1/2 mutations and 1p/19q codeletion. These tumors have better outcome and higher response to chemotherapy compared with diffuse astrocytomas. RECENT FINDINGS: The association of radiotherapy and procarbazine, lomustine (CCNU), vincristine chemotherapy in low-grade oligodendrogliomas is definitely superior over radiotherapy alone, and yields median progression-free survival and overall survival values exceeding by far 10 years. Chemotherapy alone yields results that are inferior compared with radiotherapy + procarbazine, CCNU, vincristine but may better preserve cognitive functions from radiotherapy-induced damage. Chemosensitivity of oligodendrogliomas is related to a high percentage of O6-methylguanine-DNA methyltransferase methylation and low expression of DNA repair genes. Recurrent defects in mismatch repair pathways may induce hypermutation and secondary resistance to temozolomide, but not to nitrosoureas. SUMMARY: Reoperation at progression following initial chemotherapy is increasingly adopted, thus allowing a further delay of radiotherapy. In the future targeting IDH1/2 mutations following incomplete surgery may represent a new innovative option.

Noninvasive Characterization of Tumor Angiogenesis and Oxygenation in Bevacizumab-treated Recurrent Glioblastoma by Using Dynamic Susceptibility MRI: Secondary Analysis of the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer 26101 Trial.

Background Relevance of antiangiogenic treatment with bevacizumab in patients with glioblastoma is controversial because progression-free survival benefit did not translate into an overall survival (OS) benefit in randomized phase III trials. Purpose To perform longitudinal characterization of intratumoral angiogenesis and oxygenation by using dynamic susceptibility contrast agent-enhanced (DSC) MRI and evaluate its potential for predicting outcome from administration of bevacizumab. Materials and Methods In this secondary analysis of the prospective randomized phase II/III European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer 26101 trial conducted between October 2011 and December 2015 in 596 patients with first recurrence of glioblastoma, the subset of patients with availability of anatomic MRI and DSC MRI at baseline and first follow-up was analyzed. Patients were allocated into those administered bevacizumab (hereafter, the BEV group; either bevacizumab monotherapy or bevacizumab with lomustine) and those not administered bevacizumab (hereafter, the non-BEV group with lomustine monotherapy). Contrast-enhanced tumor volume, noncontrast-enhanced T2 fluid-attenuated inversion recovery (FLAIR) signal abnormality volume, Gaussian-normalized relative cerebral blood volume (nrCBV), Gaussian-normalized relative blood flow (nrCBF), and tumor metabolic rate of oxygen (nTMRO2) was quantified. The predictive ability of these imaging parameters was assessed with multivariable Cox regression and formal interaction testing. Results A total of 254 of 596 patients were evaluated (mean age, 57 years ± 11; 155 men; 161 in the BEV group and 93 in non-BEV group). Progression-free survival was longer in the BEV group (3.7 months; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 3.0, 4.2) compared with the non-BEV group (2.5 months; 95% CI: 1.5, 2.9; P = .01), whereas OS was not different (P = .15). The nrCBV decreased for the BEV group (-16.3%; interquartile range [IQR], -39.5% to 12.0%; P = .01), but not for the non-BEV group (1.2%; IQR, -17.9% to 23.3%; P = .19) between baseline and first follow-up. An identical pattern was observed for both nrCBF and nTMRO2 values. Contrast-enhanced tumor and noncontrast-enhanced T2 FLAIR signal abnormality volumes decreased for the BEV group (-66% [IQR, -83% to -35%] and -33% [IQR, -71% to -5%], respectively; P < .001 for both), whereas they increased for the non-BEV group (30% [IQR, -17% to 98%], P = .001; and 10% [IQR, -13% to 82%], P = .02, respectively) between baseline and first follow-up. None of the assessed MRI parameters were predictive for OS in the BEV group. Conclusion Bevacizumab treatment decreased tumor volumes, angiogenesis, and oxygenation, thereby reflecting its effectiveness for extending progression-free survival; however, these parameters were not predictive of overall survival (OS), which highlighted the challenges of identifying patients that derive an OS benefit from bevacizumab. © RSNA, 2020 Online supplemental material is available for this article. See also the editorial by Dillon in this issue.

Regorafenib compared with lomustine in patients with relapsed glioblastoma (REGOMA): a multicentre, open-label, randomised, controlled, phase 2 trial.

BACKGROUND: Glioblastoma is a highly vascularised tumour and there are few treatment options after disease recurrence. Regorafenib is an oral multikinase inhibitor of angiogenic, stromal, and oncogenic receptor tyrosine kinases. We aimed to assess the efficacy and safety of regorafenib in the treatment of recurrent glioblastoma. METHODS: REGOMA is a randomised, multicentre, open-label phase 2 trial done in ten centres in Italy. Eligible patients (aged ≥18 years) with histologically confirmed glioblastoma, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status 0 or 1, and documented disease progression after surgery followed by radiotherapy and temozolomide chemoradiotherapy were randomly assigned (1:1) by a web-based system, stratified by centre and surgery at recurrence (yes vs no), to receive regorafenib 160 mg once daily for the first 3 weeks of each 4-week cycle or lomustine 110 mg/m2 once every 6 weeks until disease progression, death, unacceptable toxicity, or consent withdrawal. The primary endpoint was overall survival in the intention-to-treat population. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02926222, and is currently in follow-up. FINDINGS: Between Nov 27, 2015, and Feb 23, 2017, 124 patients were screened and 119 eligible patients were randomly assigned to receive regorafenib (n=59) or lomustine (n=60). Median follow-up was 15·4 months (IQR 13·8-18·1). At the analysis cutoff date, 99 (83%) of 119 patients had died: 42 (71%) of 59 in the regorafenib group and 57 (95%) of 60 in the lomustine group. Overall survival was significantly improved in the regorafenib group compared with the lomustine group, with a median overall survival of 7·4 months (95% CI 5·8-12·0) in the regorafenib group and 5·6 months (4·7-7·3) in the lomustine group (hazard ratio 0·50, 95% CI 0·33-0·75; log-rank p=0·0009). Grade 3-4 treatment-related adverse events occurred in 33 (56%) of 59 patients treated with regorafenib and 24 (40%) of 60 with lomustine. The most frequent grade 3 or 4 adverse events related to regorafenib were hand-foot skin reaction, increased lipase, and blood bilirubin increased (in six [10%] of 59 patients each). In the lomustine group, the most common grade 3 or 4 adverse events were decreased platelet count (eight [13%] of 60 patients), decreased lymphocyte count (eight [13%]), and neutropenia (seven [12%]). No death was considered by the investigators to be drug related. INTERPRETATION: REGOMA showed an encouraging overall survival benefit of regorafenib in recurrent glioblastoma. This drug might be a new potential treatment for these patients and should be investigated in an adequately powered phase 3 study. FUNDING: Veneto Institute of Oncology and Bayer Italy.

Early treatment response evaluation using FET PET compared to MRI in glioblastoma patients at first progression treated with bevacizumab plus lomustine.

BACKGROUND: The goal of this prospective study was to compare the value of both conventional MRI and O-(2-18F-fluoroethyl)-L-tyrosine (FET) PET for response evaluation in glioblastoma patients treated with bevacizumab plus lomustine (BEV/LOM) at first progression. METHODS: After chemoradiation with concomitant and adjuvant temozolomide, 21 IDH wild-type glioblastoma patients at first progression (age range, 33-75 years; MGMT promoter unmethylated, 81%) were treated with BEV/LOM. Contrast-enhanced MRI and FET-PET scans were performed at baseline and after 8-10 weeks. We obtained FET metabolic tumor volumes (MTV) and tumor/brain ratios. Threshold values of FET-PET parameters for treatment response were established by ROC analyses using the post-progression overall survival (OS) ≤/>9 months as the reference. MRI response assessment was based on RANO criteria. The predictive ability of FET-PET thresholds and MRI changes on early response assessment was evaluated subsequently concerning OS using uni- and multivariate survival estimates. RESULTS: Early treatment response as assessed by RANO criteria was not predictive for an OS>9 months (P = 0.203), whereas relative reductions of all FET-PET parameters significantly predicted an OS>9 months (P < 0.05). The absolute MTV at follow-up enabled the most significant OS prediction (sensitivity, 85%; specificity, 88%; P = 0.001). Patients with an absolute MTV below 5 ml at follow-up survived significantly longer (12 vs. 6 months, P < 0.001), whereas early responders defined by RANO criteria lived only insignificantly longer (9 vs. 6 months; P = 0.072). The absolute MTV at follow-up remained significant in the multivariate survival analysis (P = 0.006). CONCLUSIONS: FET-PET appears to be useful for identifying responders to BEV/LOM early after treatment initiation.

Randomized phase II trial comparing axitinib with the combination of axitinib and lomustine in patients with recurrent glioblastoma.

Axitinib is a small molecule tyrosine kinase inhibitor with high affinity and specificity for the family of vascular endothelial growth factor receptors. It has previously demonstrated anti-tumor activity in a small cohort of patients with recurrent glioblastoma (rGB). We conducted a non-comparative randomized phase II clinical trial investigating axitinib monotherapy versus axitinib plus lomustine (LOM) in patients with rGB. Primary endpoint was 6 month progression-free survival (6mPFS). Patients who progressed on axitinib-monotherapy were allowed to cross-over. Between August 2011 and July 2015, 79 patients were randomized and initiated axitinib monotherapy (n = 50; AXI) or axitinib plus lomustine (n = 29; AXILOM). Median age was 55y [range 18-80], 50M/28F. Baseline characteristics were well balanced between study arms. Nineteen patients in the AXI-arm crossed-over at the time of progression. Treatment was generally well tolerated. AXILOM patients were at higher risk for grade 3/4 neutropenia (0 vs. 21%) and thrombocytopenia (4 vs. 29%). Best Overall Response Rate (BORR) in the AXI-arm was 28 vs. 38% in the AXILOM-arm. 6mPFS was 26% (95% CI 14-38) versus 17% (95% CI 2-32) for patients treated in the AXI versus AXILOM-arms, respectively. Median overall survival was 29 weeks (95% CI 20-38) in the AXI-arm and 27.4 weeks (95% CI 18.4-36.5) in the AXILOM-arm. MGMT-promoter hypermethylation and steroid treatment at baseline correlated significantly with PFS and OS. We conclude from these results that axitinib improves response rate and progression-free survival in patients with rGB compared to historical controls. There is no indication that upfront combination of axitinib with LOM improves results (European Clinical Trials Database (EudraCT) Study Number: 2011-000900-16).

Toxicity and efficacy of lomustine and bevacizumab in recurrent glioblastoma patients.

The combination of lomustine and bevacizumab is a commonly used salvage treatment for recurrent glioblastoma (GBM). We investigated the toxicity and efficacy of lomustine plus bevacizumab (lom-bev) in a community-based patient cohort and made a comparison to another frequently used combination therapy consisting of irinotecan plus bevacizumab (iri-bev). Seventy patients with recurrent GBM were treated with lomustine 90 mg/m2 every 6 weeks and bevacizumab 10 mg/kg every 2 weeks. Toxicity was registered and compared to the toxicity observed in 219 recurrent GBM patients who had previously been treated with irinotecan 125 mg/m2 and bevacizumab 10 mg/kg every 2 weeks. The response rate was 37.1% for lom-bev and 30.1% for iri-bev. Median progression-free survival (PFS) was 23 weeks for lom-bev and 21 weeks for iri-bev (p = 0.9). Overall survival (OS) was 37 weeks for lom-bev and 32 weeks for iri-bev (p = 0.5). Lom-bev caused a significantly higher frequency of thrombocytopenia (11.4% grade 3-4) compared to iri-bev (3.5% grade 3-4). Iri-bev patients had more gastrointestinal toxicity with regard to nausea, vomiting, diarrhea, constipation and stomatitis. Within the limitations of the study lom-bev is a well-tolerated treatment for recurrent GBM, although hematological toxicity may be a dose limiting factor. No significant differences between lom-bev and iri-bev were observed with regard to PFS or OS. The differences in toxicity profiles between lom-bev and iri-bev could guide treatment decision in recurrent GBM therapy as efficacy is equal and no predictive factors for efficacy exist.