Search

Purpose: Symptomatic epilepsy is a common complication of glioblastoma and requires pharmacotherapy. Several uncontrolled retrospective case series and a post hoc analysis of the registration trial for temozolomide indicated an association between valproic acid (VPA) use and improved survival outcomes in patients with newly diagnosed glioblastoma., Patients and Methods: To confirm the hypothesis suggested above, a combined analysis of survival association of antiepileptic drug use at the start of chemoradiotherapy with temozolomide was performed in the pooled patient cohort (n = 1,869) of four contemporary randomized clinical trials in newly diagnosed glioblastoma: AVAGlio (Avastin in Glioblastoma; NCT00943826), CENTRIC (Cilengitide, Temozolomide, and Radiation Therapy in Treating Patients With Newly Diagnosed Glioblastoma and Methylated Gene Promoter Status; NCT00689221), CORE (Cilengitide, Temozolomide, and Radiation Therapy in Treating Patients With Newly Diagnosed Glioblastoma and Unmethylated Gene Promoter Status; NCT00813943), and Radiation Therapy Oncology Group 0825 (NCT00884741). Progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) were compared between: (1) any VPA use and no VPA use at baseline or (2) VPA use both at start of and still after chemoradiotherapy. Results of Cox regression models stratified by trial and adjusted for baseline prognostic factors were analyzed. The same analyses were performed with levetiracetam (LEV)., Results: VPA use at start of chemoradiotherapy was not associated with improved PFS or OS compared with all other patients pooled (PFS: hazard ratio [HR], 0.91; 95% CI, 0.77 to 1.07; P = .241; OS: HR, 0.96; 95% CI, 0.80 to 1.15; P = .633). Furthermore, PFS and OS of patients taking VPA both at start of and still after chemoradiotherapy were not different from those without antiepileptic drug use at both time points (PFS: HR, 0.92; 95% CI, 0.74 to 1.15; P = .467; OS: HR, 1.10; 95% CI, 0.86 to 1.40; P = .440). Similarly, no association with improved outcomes was observed for LEV use., Conclusion: The results of this analysis do not justify the use of VPA or LEV for reasons other than seizure control in patients with newly diagnosed glioblastoma outside clinical trials., Competing Interests: Authors' disclosures of potential conflicts of interest are found in the article online at www.jco.org. Author contributions are found at the end of this article., (© 2016 by American Society of Clinical Oncology.)

Purpose: The AVAglio (Avastin in Glioblastoma) and RTOG-0825 randomized, placebo-controlled phase III trials in newly diagnosed glioblastoma reported prolonged progression-free survival (PFS), but not overall survival (OS), with the addition of bevacizumab to radiotherapy plus temozolomide. To establish whether certain patient subgroups derived an OS benefit from the addition of bevacizumab to first-line standard-of-care therapy, AVAglio patients were retrospectively evaluated for molecular subtype, and bevacizumab efficacy was assessed for each patient subgroup., Patients and Methods: A total of 349 pretreatment specimens (bevacizumab arm, n = 171; placebo arm, n = 178) from AVAglio patients (total, N = 921) were available for biomarker analysis. Samples were profiled for gene expression and isocitrate dehydrogenase 1 (IDH1) mutation status and classified into previously identified molecular subtypes. PFS and OS were assessed within each subtype., Results: A multivariable analysis accounting for prognostic covariates revealed that bevacizumab conferred a significant OS advantage versus placebo for patients with proneural IDH1 wild-type tumors (17.1 v 12.8 months, respectively; hazard ratio, 0.43; 95% CI, 0.26 to 0.73; P = .002). This analysis also revealed an interaction between the proneural subtype biomarker and treatment arm (P = .023). The group of patients with mesenchymal and proneural tumors derived a PFS benefit from bevacizumab compared with placebo; however, this translated to an OS benefit in the proneural subset only., Conclusion: Retrospective analysis of AVAglio data suggests that patients with IDH1 wild-type proneural glioblastoma may derive an OS benefit from first-line bevacizumab treatment. The predictive value of the proneural subtype observed in AVAglio should be validated in an independent data set., Competing Interests: Authors' disclosures of potential conflicts of interest are found in the article online at www.jco.org. Author contributions are found at the end of this article., (© 2015 by American Society of Clinical Oncology.)

Purpose: As glioblastoma progresses, patients experience a decline in health-related quality of life (HRQoL). Delaying this decline is an important treatment goal. In newly diagnosed glioblastoma, progression-free survival was prolonged when bevacizumab was added to radiotherapy plus temozolomide (RT/TMZ) versus placebo plus RT/TMZ (phase III AVAglio study; hazard ratio, 0.64; 95% CI, 0.55 to 0.74; P < .001). To ensure that addition of bevacizumab to standard-of-care therapy was not associated with HRQoL detriment, HRQoL assessment was a secondary objective., Patients and Methods: Patients completed European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaires C30 and BN20 at each tumor assessment (Appendix Table A1, online only). Raw scores were converted to a 100-point scale and mean changes from baseline scores were evaluated (stable: < 10-point change; clinically relevant deterioration/improvement: ≥ 10-point change). Deterioration-free survival was the time to deterioration/progression/death; time to deterioration was the time to deterioration/death., Results: Most evaluable patients who had not progressed (> 74%) completed all HRQoL assessments for at least 1 year of treatment, and almost all completed at least one HRQoL assessment at baseline (98.3% and 97.6%, bevacizumab and placebo arms, respectively). Mean changes from baseline did not reach a clinically relevant difference between arms for most items. HRQoL declined at progression in both arms. The addition of bevacizumab to RT/TMZ resulted in statistically longer (P < .001) deterioration-free survival across all items. Time to deterioration was not statistically longer in the placebo plus RT/TMZ arm (v bevacizumab) for any HRQoL item., Conclusion: The addition of bevacizumab to standard-of-care treatment for newly diagnosed glioblastoma had no impact on HRQoL during the progression-free period., (© 2015 by American Society of Clinical Oncology.)

Background: This study's primary objective was evaluation of the progression-free survival rate at 6 months (PFS-6) in patients with newly diagnosed glioblastoma without O(6)-methylguanine-DNA-methyltransferase (MGMT) promoter hypermethylation postsurgically treated with enzastaurin before and concomitantly with radiation therapy, followed by enzastaurin maintenance therapy. PFS-6 of at least 55% was set to be relevant compared with the data of the EORTC 26981/22981 NCIC CE.3 trial., Methods: Adult patients with a life expectancy of at least 12 weeks who were newly diagnosed with a histologically proven supratentorial glioblastoma without MGMT promoter hypermethylation were eligible. Patients were treated with enzastaurin prior to, concomitantly with, and after standard partial brain radiotherapy. Here we report on a multicenter, open-label, uncontrolled phase II study of patients with newly diagnosed glioblastoma without MGMT promoter hypermethylation treated with enzastaurin and radiation therapy within 4 study periods., Results: PFS-6 was 53.6% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 39.8-65.6). The median overall survival was 15.0 months (95% CI: 11.9-17.9) for all patients, 3.9 months (95% CI: 0.8-9.0) for patients with biopsy, 15.4 months (95% CI: 10.1-17.9) for patients with partial resection, and 18.9 months (95% CI: 13.9-28.5) for patients with complete resection. The safety profile in this study was as expected from previous trials, and the therapy was well tolerated., Conclusions: PFS-6 missed the primary planned outcome of 55%. The secondary exploratory analysis according to resection status of the different subgroups of patients with biopsies, partial resection, and complete resection demonstrates the strong prognostic influence of resection on overall survival.