Search

Background: The CATNON trial investigated the addition of concurrent, adjuvant, and both current and adjuvant temozolomide to radiotherapy in adults with newly diagnosed 1p/19q non-co-deleted anaplastic gliomas. The benefit of concurrent temozolomide chemotherapy and relevance of mutations in the IDH1 and IDH2 genes remain unclear., Methods: This randomised, open-label, phase 3 study done in 137 institutions across Australia, Europe, and North America included patients aged 18 years or older with newly diagnosed 1p/19q non-co-deleted anaplastic gliomas and a WHO performance status of 0-2. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1:1:1) centrally using a minimisation technique to radiotherapy alone (59·4 Gy in 33 fractions; three-dimensional conformal radiotherapy or intensity-modulated radiotherapy), radiotherapy with concurrent oral temozolomide (75 mg/m 2 per day), radiotherapy with adjuvant oral temozolomide (12 4-week cycles of 150-200 mg/m 2 temozolomide given on days 1-5), or radiotherapy with both concurrent and adjuvant temozolomide. Patients were stratified by institution, WHO performance status score, age, 1p loss of heterozygosity, the presence of oligodendroglial elements on microscopy, and MGMT promoter methylation status. The primary endpoint was overall survival adjusted by stratification factors at randomisation in the intention-to-treat population. A second interim analysis requested by the independent data monitoring committee was planned when two-thirds of total required events were observed to test superiority or futility of concurrent temozolomide. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT00626990., Findings: Between Dec 4, 2007, and Sept 11, 2015, 751 patients were randomly assigned (189 to radiotherapy alone, 188 to radiotherapy with concurrent temozolomide, 186 to radiotherapy and adjuvant temozolomide, and 188 to radiotherapy with concurrent and adjuvant temozolomide). Median follow-up was 55·7 months (IQR 41·0-77·3). The second interim analysis declared futility of concurrent temozolomide (median overall survival was 66·9 months [95% CI 45·7-82·3] with concurrent temozolomide vs 60·4 months [45·7-71·5] without concurrent temozolomide; hazard ratio [HR] 0·97 [99·1% CI 0·73-1·28], p=0·76). By contrast, adjuvant temozolomide improved overall survival compared with no adjuvant temozolomide (median overall survival 82·3 months [95% CI 67·2-116·6] vs 46·9 months [37·9-56·9]; HR 0·64 [95% CI 0·52-0·79], p<0·0001). The most frequent grade 3 and 4 toxicities were haematological, occurring in no patients in the radiotherapy only group, 16 (9%) of 185 patients in the concurrent temozolomide group, and 55 (15%) of 368 patients in both groups with adjuvant temozolomide. No treatment-related deaths were reported., Interpretation: Adjuvant temozolomide chemotherapy, but not concurrent temozolomide chemotherapy, was associated with a survival benefit in patients with 1p/19q non-co-deleted anaplastic glioma. Clinical benefit was dependent on IDH1 and IDH2 mutational status., Funding: Merck Sharpe & Dohme., Competing Interests: Declaration of interests MJvdB reports grants from the Dutch Cancer Foundation, Brain Tumor Charity, Strijd van Salland, and Merck Sharp & Dohme (formerly Schering Plough), during the conduct of the study; and personal fees from Carthera, Nerviano, Bayer, Cellgene, Agios, AbbVie, Karyopharm, Boston Pharmaceuticals, and Genenta, outside the submitted work. PMC reports personal fees from Bristol Meyers Squibb, AbbVie, Merck Serono, Merck Sharp & Dohme, Vifor Pharma, DaNchi Sankyo, LEO Pharma, AstraZeneca, and Takeda, outside the submitted work. MAV reports grants from the US National Cancer Institute, during the conduct of the study, and personal fees from Tocagen and Celgene, outside the submitted work. AKN reports grants and personal fees from AstraZeneca, and Douglas Pharmaceuticals, and personal fees from Bayer Pharmaceuticals, Roche Pharmaceuticals, Boehringer Ingelheim, Merck Sharp & Dohme, Pharmabcine, Atara Biotherapeutics, and Trizell, outside the submitted work. MW reports grants and personal fees from AbbVie, Merck Sharp & Dohme, Merck (EMD); grants from Adastra, Novocure; and personal fees from Basilea, Bristol Myer Squibbs, Celgene, Nerviano, Orbus, Roche, and Tocagen, outside the submitted work. UH reports non-financial support from Medac, and personal fees from Novartis, Daiichi-Sankyo, Noxxon, AbbVie, Bayer, Janssen, and Karyopharm, outside the submitted work. HJD reports personal fees from AbbVie, outside the submitted work. BGB reports personal fees and non-financial support from Roche, outside the submitted work. All other authors declare no competing interests., (Copyright © 2021 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Background: In the EORTC 1410/INTELLANCE 2 randomised, phase II study (NCT02343406), with the antibody-drug conjugate depatuxizumab mafodotin (Depatux-M, ABT-414) in patients with recurrent EGFR-amplified glioblastoma, the primary end-point (overall survival) was not met, and the drug had ocular dose-limiting toxicity. This study reports results from the prespecified health-related quality of life (HRQoL) and neurological deterioration-free survival (NDFS) exploratory analysis., Patients and Methods: Patients (n = 260) were randomised 1:1:1 to receive either Depatux-M 1.25 mg/kg or 1.0 mg/kg intravenously every 2 weeks with oral temozolomide (TMZ) 150 mg/m 2 , Depatux-M alone, or TMZ or oral lomustine (CCNU) 110 mg/m 2 (TMZ/CCNU). HRQoL outcomes were recorded using the EORTC core Quality of Life QLQ-C30, and brain cancer-specific QLQ-BN20 questionnaires. Questionnaires were completed at baseline, weeks 8 and 16, and month 6, and changes from baseline to each time point were calculated. NDFS was defined as time to first deterioration in World Health Organisation performance status., Results: Compliance with HRQoL was 88.1% at baseline and decreased to 37.9% at month 6. Differences from baseline between Depatux-M arms and TMZ/CCNU in global health/QoL status throughout treatment did not reach clinical relevance (≥10 points). Self-reported visual disorders deteriorated to a clinically relevant extent with Depatux-M arms versus TMZ/CCNU at all timepoints (mean differences range: 24.6-35.1 points). Changes from baseline for other HRQoL scales and NDFS were generally similar between treatment arms., Conclusions: Depatux-M had no impact on HRQoL and NDFS in patients with EGFR-amplified recurrent glioblastoma, except for more visual disorders, an expected side-effect of the study drug., Clinical Trial Registration: NCT02343406., Competing Interests: Conflict of interest statement Linda Dirven, Sarah Nuyens, Maarten Spruyt, Thierry Gorlia, Corneel Coens and Jaap C. Reijneveld have nothing to disclose. Paul M. J. Clement received study budget funds from AstraZeneca; was an advisory board member for AbbVie, AstraZeneca, BMS, Daiichi-Sankyo, Leo Pharma, Merck Serono, MSD and Vifor Pharma. Marica Eoli received consulting fees from AbbVie. Juan M. Sepulveda-Sanchez reports personal fees and non-financial support from AbbVie; a grant from Pfizer as principal investigator; personal fees and non-financial support from Celgene; non-financial support from Ipsen; and personal fees from Astellas. Annemiek M. E. Walenkamp received research grants from IPSEN and Novartis; was an advisory board member for IPSEN, Karyopharm, Novartis and Polyphor; and received study budget funds from AbbVie, BMS, Genzyme, Karyopharm Therapeutics and Roche. Jean Sebastien Frenel has received consulting fees from AstraZeneca, BIOCAD, Lilly, Novartis, Pfizer and Roche. Enrico Franceschi was an advisory board member for Celgene and Karyopharm. Michael Weller has received research grants from AbbVie, Adastra, Merck, Sharp & Dohme (MSD), Merck (EMD) and Novocure; and honoraria for lectures or advisory board participation or consulting from AbbVie, Basilea, Bristol Myers Squibb (BMS), Celgene, Medac, Merck, Sharp & Dohme (MSD), Merck (EMD), Nerviano Medical Sciences, Novartis, Orbus, Philogen, Roche and Tocagen. Olivier Chinot reports personal fees and non-financial support from Abbvie, during the conduct of the study; personal fees from immatics, non-financial support from BMS, non-financial support from Servier, grants, personal fees and non-financial support from Roche, outside the submitted work. Filip Y. F. L. De Vos received research grants from Novartis. Nicholas Whenham has received consulting fees from Bayer and Janssen. Paul Sanghera was an advisory board member for AbbVie and Roche. Jim Looman, Madan G. Kundu and Jan Peter de Geus are AbbVie employees and may own stock. Vassilis Golfinopoulos received research funding from AbbVie during the conduct of the study. Martin J. van den Bent received consulting fees from AbbVie, Agios, Bayer, Boston Pharmaceuticals, Carthera, Genenta, Karyopharm and Nerviano., (Copyright © 2021 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

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 (nTMRO 2 ) 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 nTMRO 2 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.

The European Association of Neuro-Oncology (EANO) and EUropean RAre CANcer (EURACAN) guideline provides recommendations for the diagnosis, treatment, and follow-up of post-pubertal and adult patients with medulloblastoma. The guideline is based on the 2016 WHO classification of tumours of the CNS and on scientific developments published since 1980. It aims to provide direction for diagnostic and management decisions, and for limiting unnecessary treatments and cost. In view of the scarcity of data in adults with medulloblastoma, we base our recommendations on adult data when possible, but also include recommendations derived from paediatric data if justified. Our recommendations are a resource for professionals involved in the management of post-pubertal and adult patients with medulloblastoma, for patients and caregivers, and for health-care providers in Europe. The implementation of this guideline requires multidisciplinary structures of care, and defined processes of diagnosis and treatment., (Copyright © 2019 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Background: Bevacizumab is frequently used in the treatment of recurrent WHO grade II and III glioma, but without supporting evidence from randomised trials. Therefore, we assessed the use of bevacizumab in patients with first recurrence of grade II or III glioma who did not have 1p/19q co-deletion., Methods: The TAVAREC trial was a randomised, open-label phase 2 trial done at 32 centres across Europe in patients with locally diagnosed grade II or III glioma without 1p/19q co-deletion, with a first and contrast-enhancing recurrence after initial radiotherapy or chemotherapy, or both. Previous chemotherapy must have been stopped at least 6 months before enrolment and radiotherapy must have been stopped at least 3 months before enrolment. Random group assignment was done electronically through the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer web-based system, stratified by a minimisation procedure using institution, initial histology (WHO grade II vs III), WHO performance status (0 or 1 vs 2), and previous treatment (radiotherapy, chemotherapy, or both). Patients were assigned to receive either temozolomide (150-200 mg/m 2 , orally) monotherapy on days 1-5 every 4 weeks for a maximum of 12 cycles, or the same temozolomide regimen in combination with bevacizumab (10 mg/kg, intravenously) every 2 weeks until progression. The primary endpoint was overall survival at 12 months in the per-protocol population. Safety analyses were done in all patients who started their allocated treatment. The study is registered at EudraCT (2009-017422-39) and ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT01164189), and is complete., Findings: Between Feb 8, 2011, and July 31, 2015, 155 patients were enrolled and randomly assigned to receive either monotherapy (n=77) or combination therapy (n=78). Overall survival in the per-protocol population at 12 months was achieved by 44 (61% [80% CI 53-69]) of 72 patients in the temozolomide group and 38 (55% [47-69]) of 69 in the combination group. The most frequent toxicity was haematological: 17 (23%) of 75 patients in the monotherapy group and 25 (33%) of 76 in the combination group developed grade 3 or 4 haematological toxicity. Other than haematological toxicities, the most common adverse events were nervous system disorders (59 [79%] of 75 patients in the monotherapy group vs 65 [86%] of 76 in the combination group), fatigue (53 [70%] vs 61 [80%]), and nausea (39 [52%] vs 43 [56%]). Infections were more frequently reported in the combination group (29 [38%] of 76 patients) than in the monotherapy group (17 [23%] of 75). One treatment-related death was reported in the combination group (infection after intratumoral haemorrhage during a treatment-related grade 4 thrombocytopenia)., Interpretation: We found no evidence of improved overall survival with bevacizumab and temozolomide combination treatment versus temozolomide monotherapy. The findings from this study provide no support for further phase 3 studies on the role of bevacizumab in this disease., Funding: Roche Pharmaceuticals., (Copyright © 2018 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

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 O 6 -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 → TMZ vs. RT + CIL + TMZ → 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.

The management of primary CNS lymphoma is one of the most controversial topics in neuro-oncology because of the complexity of the disease and the very few controlled studies available. In 2013, the European Association of Neuro-Oncology created a multidisciplinary task force to establish evidence-based guidelines for immunocompetent adults with primary CNS lymphoma. In this Review, we present these guidelines, which provide consensus considerations and recommendations for diagnosis, assessment, staging, and treatment of primary CNS lymphoma. Specifically, we address aspects of care related to surgery, systemic and intrathecal chemotherapy, intensive chemotherapy with autologous stem-cell transplantation, radiotherapy, intraocular manifestations, and management of elderly patients. The guidelines should aid clinicians in their daily practice and decision making, and serve as a basis for future investigations in neuro-oncology., (Copyright © 2015 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

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., (Copyright © 2014 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)