Search

Background: H3 K27M-mutant diffuse glioma primarily affects children and young adults, is associated with a poor prognosis, and no effective systemic therapy is currently available. ONC201 (dordaviprone) has previously demonstrated efficacy in patients with recurrent disease. This phase 3 trial evaluates ONC201 in patients with newly diagnosed H3 K27M-mutant glioma., Methods: ACTION (NCT05580562) is a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel-group, international phase 3 study of ONC201 in newly diagnosed H3 K27M-mutant diffuse glioma. Patients who have completed standard frontline radiotherapy are randomized 1:1:1 to receive placebo, once-weekly dordaviprone, or twice-weekly dordaviprone on 2 consecutive days. Primary efficacy endpoints are overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS); PFS is assessed by response assessment in neuro-oncology high-grade glioma criteria (RANO-HGG) by blind independent central review. Secondary objectives include safety, additional efficacy endpoints, clinical benefit, and quality of life. Eligible patients have histologically confirmed H3 K27M-mutant diffuse glioma, a Karnofsky/Lansky performance status ≥70, and completed first-line radiotherapy. Eligibility is not restricted by age; however, patients must be ≥10 kg at time of randomization. Patients with a primary spinal tumor, diffuse intrinsic pontine glioma, leptomeningeal disease, or cerebrospinal fluid dissemination are not eligible. ACTION is currently enrolling in multiple international sites., (© The Author(s) 2024. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the Society for Neuro-Oncology.)

Isocitrate dehydrogenase (IDH) mutant gliomas are the most common adult, malignant primary brain tumors diagnosed in patients younger than 50, constituting an important cause of morbidity and mortality. In recent years, there has been significant progress in understanding the molecular pathogenesis and biology of these tumors, sparking multiple efforts to improve their diagnosis and treatment. In this consensus review from the Society for Neuro-Oncology (SNO), the current diagnosis and management of IDH-mutant gliomas will be discussed. In addition, novel therapies, such as targeted molecular therapies and immunotherapies, will be reviewed. Current challenges and future directions for research will be discussed., (© The Author(s) 2022. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the Society for Neuro-Oncology. All rights reserved. For permissions, please e-mail: journals.permissions@oup.com.)

Background: Addition of temozolomide (TMZ) to radiotherapy (RT) improves overall survival (OS) in patients with glioblastoma (GBM), but previous studies suggest that patients with tumors harboring an unmethylated MGMT promoter derive minimal benefit. The aim of this open-label, phase III CheckMate 498 study was to evaluate the efficacy of nivolumab (NIVO) + RT compared with TMZ + RT in newly diagnosed GBM with unmethylated MGMT promoter., Methods: Patients were randomized 1:1 to standard RT (60 Gy) + NIVO (240 mg every 2 weeks for eight cycles, then 480 mg every 4 weeks) or RT + TMZ (75 mg/m2 daily during RT and 150-200 mg/m2/day 5/28 days during maintenance). The primary endpoint was OS., Results: A total of 560 patients were randomized, 280 to each arm. Median OS (mOS) was 13.4 months (95% CI, 12.6 to 14.3) with NIVO + RT and 14.9 months (95% CI, 13.3 to 16.1) with TMZ + RT (hazard ratio [HR], 1.31; 95% CI, 1.09 to 1.58; P = .0037). Median progression-free survival was 6.0 months (95% CI, 5.7 to 6.2) with NIVO + RT and 6.2 months (95% CI, 5.9 to 6.7) with TMZ + RT (HR, 1.38; 95% CI, 1.15 to 1.65). Response rates were 7.8% (9/116) with NIVO + RT and 7.2% (8/111) with TMZ + RT; grade 3/4 treatment-related adverse event (TRAE) rates were 21.9% and 25.1%, and any-grade serious TRAE rates were 17.3% and 7.6%, respectively., Conclusions: The study did not meet the primary endpoint of improved OS; TMZ + RT demonstrated a longer mOS than NIVO + RT. No new safety signals were detected with NIVO in this study. The difference between the study treatment arms is consistent with the use of TMZ + RT as the standard of care for GBM.ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02617589., (© The Author(s) 2022. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the Society for Neuro-Oncology.)

Cancer immunotherapy has made remarkable advances with over 50 separate Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approvals as first- or second-line indications since 2015. These include immune checkpoint blocking antibodies, chimeric antigen receptor-transduced T cells, and bispecific T-cell-engaging antibodies. While multiple cancer types now benefit from these immunotherapies, notable exceptions thus far include brain tumors, such as glioblastoma. As such, it seems critical to gain a better understanding of unique mechanistic challenges underlying the resistance of malignant gliomas to immunotherapy, as well as to acquire insights into the development of future strategies. An Immuno-Oncology Think Tank Meeting was held during the 2019 Annual Society for Neuro-Oncology Scientific Conference. Discussants in the fields of neuro-oncology, neurosurgery, neuro-imaging, medical oncology, and cancer immunology participated in the meeting. Sessions focused on topics such as the tumor microenvironment, myeloid cells, T-cell dysfunction, cellular engineering, and translational aspects that are critical and unique challenges inherent with primary brain tumors. In this review, we summarize the discussions and the key messages from the meeting, which may potentially serve as a basis for advancing the field of immune neuro-oncology in a collaborative manner., (© The Author(s) 2020. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the Society for Neuro-Oncology. All rights reserved. For permissions, please e-mail: journals.permissions@oup.com.)

Accurate pathologic diagnoses and molecularly informed treatment decisions for a wide variety of cancers depend on robust clinical molecular testing that uses genomic, epigenomic, and transcriptomic-based tools. Nowhere is this more essential than in the workup of brain tumors, as emphasized by the incorporation of molecular criteria into the 2016 World Health Organization classification of central nervous system tumors and the updated official guidelines of the National Comprehensive Cancer Network. Despite the medical necessity of molecular testing in brain tumors, access to and utilization of molecular diagnostics is still highly variable across institutions, and a lack of reimbursement for such testing remains a significant obstacle. The objectives of this review are (i) to identify barriers to adoption of molecular testing in brain tumors, (ii) to describe the current molecular tools recommended for the clinical evaluation of brain tumors, and (iii) to summarize how molecular data are interpreted to guide clinical care, so as to improve understanding and justification for their coverage in the routine workup of adult and pediatric brain tumor cases., (© The Author(s) 2019. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the Society for Neuro-Oncology. All rights reserved. For permissions, please e-mail: journals.permissions@oup.com.)

Background: Immunotherapies have demonstrated efficacy across a diverse set of tumors supporting further evaluation in glioblastoma. The objective of this study was to evaluate the safety/tolerability and describe immune-mediated effects of nivolumab ± ipilimumab in patients with recurrent glioblastoma. Exploratory efficacy outcomes are also reported., Methods: Patients were randomized to receive nivolumab 3 mg/kg every 2 weeks (Q2W; NIVO3) or nivolumab 1 mg/kg + ipilimumab 3 mg/kg every 3 weeks (Q3W) for 4 doses, then nivolumab 3 mg/kg Q2W (NIVO1+IPI3). An alternative regimen of nivolumab 3 mg/kg + ipilimumab 1 mg/kg Q3W for 4 doses, then nivolumab 3 mg/kg Q2W (NIVO3+IPI1) was investigated in a nonrandomized arm., Results: Forty patients were enrolled (NIVO3, n = 10; NIVO1+IPI3, n = 10; NIVO3+IPI1, n = 20). The most common treatment-related adverse events (AEs) were fatigue (NIVO3, 30%; NIVO1+IPI3, 80%; NIVO3+IPI1, 55%) and diarrhea (10%, 70%, 30%, respectively). AEs leading to discontinuation occurred in 10% (NIVO3), 30% (NIVO1+IPI3), and 20% (NIVO3+IPI1) of patients. Three patients achieved a partial response (NIVO3, n = 1; NIVO3+IPI1, n = 2) and 8 had stable disease for ≥12 weeks (NIVO3, n = 2; NIVO1+IPI3, n = 2; NIVO3+IPI1, n = 4 [Response Assessment in Neuro-Oncology criteria]). Most patients (68%) had tumor-cell programmed death ligand-1 expression ≥1%. Immune-mediated effects mimicking radiographic progression occurred in 2 patients., Conclusions: Nivolumab monotherapy was better tolerated than nivolumab + ipilimumab; the tolerability of the combination was influenced by ipilimumab dose. These safety and exploratory findings merit further investigation of immunotherapies in glioblastoma.

Background: The Macdonald criteria and the Response Assessment in Neuro-Oncology (RANO) criteria define radiologic parameters to classify therapeutic outcome among patients with malignant glioma and specify that clinical status must be incorporated and prioritized for overall assessment. But neither provides specific parameters to do so. We hypothesized that a standardized metric to measure neurologic function will permit more effective overall response assessment in neuro-oncology., Methods: An international group of physicians including neurologists, medical oncologists, radiation oncologists, and neurosurgeons with expertise in neuro-oncology drafted the Neurologic Assessment in Neuro-Oncology (NANO) scale as an objective and quantifiable metric of neurologic function evaluable during a routine office examination. The scale was subsequently tested in a multicenter study to determine its overall reliability, inter-observer variability, and feasibility., Results: The NANO scale is a quantifiable evaluation of 9 relevant neurologic domains based on direct observation and testing conducted during routine office visits. The score defines overall response criteria. A prospective, multinational study noted a >90% inter-observer agreement rate with kappa statistic ranging from 0.35 to 0.83 (fair to almost perfect agreement), and a median assessment time of 4 minutes (interquartile range, 3-5)., Conclusion: The NANO scale provides an objective clinician-reported outcome of neurologic function with high inter-observer agreement. It is designed to combine with radiographic assessment to provide an overall assessment of outcome for neuro-oncology patients in clinical trials and in daily practice. Furthermore, it complements existing patient-reported outcomes and cognition testing to combine for a global clinical outcome assessment of well-being among brain tumor patients., (© The Author(s) 2017. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the Society for Neuro-Oncology. All rights reserved. For permissions, please e-mail: journals.permissions@oup.com)

Background: Promoter mutation in the human telomerase reverse transcriptase gene (hTERT) occurs in ~75% of primary glioblastoma (GBM). Although the mutation appears to upregulate telomerase expression and contributes to the maintenance of telomere length, its clinical significance remains unclear., Methods: We performed hTERT promoter genotyping on 303 isocitrate dehydrogenase 1 wild-type GBM tumors treated with standard chemoradiotherapy. We also stratified 190 GBM patients from the database of The Cancer Genome Atlas (TCGA) by hTERT gene expression. We analyzed overall and progression-free survival by Kaplan-Meier and Cox regression., Results: We detected hTERT promoter mutation in 75% of the patients. When included as the only biomarker, hTERT mutation was not prognostic in our patient cohort by Cox regression analysis. However, when hTERT and O6-DNA methylguanine-methyltransferase (MGMT) were included together, we observed an interaction between these 2 factors. To further investigate this interaction, we performed pairwise comparison of the 4 patient subcohorts grouped by hTERT-MGMT status (MUT-M, WT-M, MUT-U, and WT-U). MGMT methylated patients showed improved survival only in the presence of hTERT promoter mutation: MUT-M versus MUT-U (overall survival of 28.3 vs 15.9 mos, log-rank P < .0001 and progression-free survival of 15.4 vs 7.86 mo, log-rank P < .0001). These results were confirmed by Cox analyses. Analogously, the cohort from TCGA demonstrated survival benefit of MGMT promoter methylation only in patients with high hTERT expression. In addition, hTERT mutation was negatively prognostic in our MGMT unmethylated patients, while the analogous association with high expression was not observed in the cohort from TCGA., Conclusion: The prognostic influence of MGMT promoter methylation depends on hTERT promoter mutation. This interaction warrants further mechanistic investigation., (© The Author(s) 2017. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the Society for Neuro-Oncology. All rights reserved. For permissions, please e-mail: journals.permissions@oup.com)

Background: Evaluation of glioblastoma disease status may be complicated by treatment-induced changes and discordance between enhancing and nonenhancing MRI. Exploratory analyses are presented (prospectively assessed pseudoprogression and therapy-related tumor pattern changes) from the AVAglio trial (bevacizumab or placebo plus radiotherapy/temozolomide for newly diagnosed glioblastoma)., Methods: MRI was done every 8 weeks (beginning 4 wk after chemoradiotherapy) using prespecified and standardized T1 and T2 protocols. Progressive disease (PD) at 10 weeks was reconfirmed at 18 weeks to distinguish pseudoprogression. Progression-free survival (PFS), excluding cases of confirmed pseudoprogression, was assessed (post-hoc/exploratory). Tumor progression patterns were determined at each disease assessment/PD (prespecified/exploratory)., Results: Of patients with PD in the bevacizumab and placebo arms, 143/354 (40.4%) and 155/387 (40.1%), respectively, had PD due to contrast-enhancing lesions, and 51/354 (14.4%) and 53/387 (13.7%) had PD due to nonenhancing lesions. Of all patients in the bevacizumab arm (n = 458), 2.2% had confirmed pseudoprogression versus 9.3% in the placebo arm (n = 463). Baseline characteristics did not differ between patients with/without pseudoprogression (including for MGMT status). Excluding confirmed pseudoprogression, PFS (hazard ratio: 0.65, 95% CI: 0.56-0.75; P < .0001, bevacizumab vs placebo) was comparable to the intent-to-treat population. At PD, most patients had the same tumor focus (local/multifocal, >84%) and infiltrative profile (>88%) as at baseline; no shift to a diffuse or multifocal phenotype was observed., Conclusions: Pseudoprogression complicated progression assessment in a small but relevant number of patients but had negligible impact on PFS. Bevacizumab did not appear to adversely impact tumor progression patterns., (© The Author(s) 2016. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the Society for Neuro-Oncology. All rights reserved. For permissions, please e-mail: journals.permissions@oup.com.)

Background: In this post-hoc, exploratory analysis, we examined outcomes for patients enrolled in the AVAglio trial of front-line bevacizumab or placebo plus radiotherapy/temozolomide who received only a single line of therapy., Methods: Patients with newly diagnosed glioblastoma received protocol-defined treatment until progressive disease (PD). Co-primary endpoints were investigator-assessed progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS). After confirmed PD, patients were treated at the investigators' discretion. PFS/OS were assessed in patients with a PFS event who did not receive post-PD therapy (Group 1) and patients with a PFS event who received post-PD therapy plus patients who did not have a PFS event at the final data cutoff (Group 2). Kaplan-Meier methodology was used. A multivariate Cox proportional hazards model for known prognostic variables was generated., Results: Baseline characteristics were balanced. In patients with a PFS event who did not receive post-PD therapy (Group 1; n = 225 [24.4% of the intent-to-treat population]), the addition of bevacizumab to radiotherapy/temozolomide resulted in a 3.6-month extension in both median PFS (hazard ratio [HR]: 0.62, P = .0016) and median OS (HR: 0.67, P = .0102). Multivariate analyses supported this OS benefit (HR: 0.66). In the remaining patients (Group 2; n = 696), a 5.2-month PFS extension was observed in bevacizumab-treated patients (HR: 0.61, P < .0001); OS was comparable between the treatment arms (HR: 0.88, P = .1502). No significant differences in safety were observed between the 2 groups., Conclusion: This exploratory analysis suggests that the addition of bevacizumab to standard glioblastoma treatment prolongs PFS and OS for patients with PD who receive only one line of therapy., (© The Author(s) 2016. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the Society for Neuro-Oncology. All rights reserved. For permissions, please e-mail: journals.permissions@oup.com.)

Background: The proposed use of bevacizumab with radiotherapy/temozolomide for newly diagnosed glioblastoma raised potential safety concerns. Bevacizumab has been linked with stroke, bleeding events, and wound-healing complications in other tumor types; these events are of particular concern for glioblastoma (highly vascular tumors that are usually resected). Published data on the interaction of bevacizumab with radiotherapy/temozolomide are also limited. We report safety data from a phase III randomized trial (Avastin in Glioblastoma), focusing on these considerations., Methods: Eligible patients received: radiotherapy and temozolomide plus bevacizumab/placebo, 6 cycles; a 4-week treatment break; temozolomide plus bevacizumab/placebo, 6 cycles; and bevacizumab/placebo until progression. Data on adverse events (AEs) were collected throughout., Results: Bevacizumab-treated patients (n = 461) had a longer median safety follow-up time (12.3 vs 8.5 mo), and a higher proportion completed 6 cycles of maintenance temozolomide (64.6% vs 36.9%) versus placebo (n = 450). The incidences of relevant AEs (bevacizumab vs placebo, respectively) were: arterial thromboembolic events (5.9% vs 1.6%); cerebral hemorrhage (3.3% vs 2.0%); wound-healing complications (6.9% vs 4.7%); thrombocytopenia (34.1% vs 27.3%); radiotherapy-associated skin injury (8.2% vs 9.3%); alopecia (39.0% vs 36.0%); gastrointestinal perforation (including gastrointestinal abscesses and fistulae, 1.7% vs 0.4%); and radiotherapy-associated injury (0.4% vs 0.0%). Overall, 15.8% and 23.8% of bevacizumab- and placebo-treated patients had surgery (including biopsy) after progression. Within 30 days of postprogression surgery, AE incidence was 10.9% (bevacizumab) and 23.4% (placebo)., Conclusion: The safety profile was consistent with that expected from radiotherapy/temozolomide plus bevacizumab. The increased AE incidence with bevacizumab did not impact patients' ability to receive standard-of-care treatment or to undergo further surgery., (© The Author(s) 2016. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the Society for Neuro-Oncology. All rights reserved. For permissions, please e-mail: journals.permissions@oup.com.)

Background: Amino acid transport imaging with 18F-FDOPA PET is increasingly used for detection of glioblastoma recurrence. However, a standardized image interpretation for 18F-FDOPA brain PET studies has not yet been established. This study compares visual and semiquantitative analysis parameters for detection of tumor recurrence and correlates them with progression-free survival (PFS)., Methods: One-hundred ten patients (72 male:38 female) with suspected tumor recurrence who underwent 18F-FDOPA PET imaging were studied. PET scans were analyzed visually (5-point scale) and semiquantitatively (lesion-to-striatum- and lesion- to-normal-brain-tissue ratios using both SUV(mean) and SUV(max)). Accuracies for recurrence detection were calculated using histopathology and clinical follow-up for validation. Receiving operator characteristic and Kaplan-Meier survival analysis were performed to derive imaging-based prediction of PFS and overall survival (OS)., Results: Accuracies for detection of glioblastoma recurrence were similar for visual (82%) and semiquantitative (range, 77%-82%) analysis. Both visual and semiquantitative indices were significant predictors of PFS, with mean lesion-to normal brain tissue ratios providing the best discriminator (mean survival, 39.4 vs 9.3 months; P < .001). None of the investigated parameters was predictive for OS., Conclusions: Both visual and semiquantitative indices detected glioblastoma recurrence with high accuracy and were predictive for PFS. Lesion-to-normal-tissue ratios were the best discriminators of PFS; however, none of the investigated parameters predicted OS. These retrospectively established analysis parameters need to be confirmed prospectively.

Diffuse gliomas consist of both low- and high-grade varieties, each with distinct morphological and biological features. The often extended periods of relative indolence exhibited by low-grade gliomas (LGG; WHO grade II) differ sharply from the aggressive, rapidly fatal clinical course of primary glioblastoma (GBM; WHO grade IV). Nevertheless, until recently, the molecular foundations underlying this stark biological contrast between glioma variants remained largely unknown. The discoveries of distinctive and highly recurrent genomic and epigenomic abnormalities in LGG have both informed a more accurate classification scheme and pointed to viable avenues for therapeutic development. As such, the field of neuro-oncology now seems poised to capitalize on these gains to achieve significant benefit for LGG patients. This report will briefly recount the proceedings of a workshop held in January 2013 and hosted by Accelerate Brain Cancer Cure (ABC(2)) on the subject of LGG. While much of the meeting covered recent insights into LGG biology, its focus remained on how best to advance the clinical management, whether by improved preclinical modeling, more effective targeted therapeutics and clinical trial design, or innovative imaging technology.

Mutations in isocitrate dehydrogenase 1 (IDH1) or 2 (IDH2) are found in a subset of gliomas. Among the many phenotypic differences between mutant and wild-type IDH1/2 gliomas, the most salient is that IDH1/2 mutant glioma patients demonstrate markedly improved survival compared with IDH1/2 wild-type glioma patients. To address the mechanism underlying the superior clinical outcome of IDH1/2 mutant glioma patients, we investigated whether overexpression of the IDH1(R132H) protein could affect response to therapy in the context of an isogenic glioma cell background. Stable clonal U87MG and U373MG cell lines overexpressing IDH1(WT) and IDH1(R132H) were generated, as well as U87MG cell lines overexpressing IDH2(WT) and IDH2(R172K). In vitro experiments were conducted to characterize baseline growth and migration and response to radiation and temozolomide. In addition, reactive oxygen species (ROS) levels were measured under various conditions. U87MG-IDH1(R132H) cells, U373MG-IDH1(R132H) cells, and U87MG-IDH2(R172K) cells demonstrated increased sensitivity to radiation but not to temozolomide. Radiosensitization of U87MG-IDH1(R132H) cells was accompanied by increased apoptosis and accentuated ROS generation, and this effect was abrogated by the presence of the ROS scavenger N-acetyl-cysteine. Interestingly, U87MG-IDH1(R132H) cells also displayed decreased growth at higher cell density and in soft agar, as well as decreased migration. Overexpression of IDH1(R132H) and IDH2(R172K) mutant protein in glioblastoma cells resulted in increased radiation sensitivity and altered ROS metabolism and suppression of growth and migration in vitro. These findings provide insight into possible mechanisms contributing to the improved outcomes observed in patients with IDH1/2 mutant gliomas.

Newly diagnosed glioblastoma is now commonly treated with surgery, if feasible, or biopsy, followed by radiation plus concomitant and adjuvant temozolomide. The treatment of recurrent glioblastoma continues to be a moving target as new therapeutic principles enrich the standards of care for newly diagnosed disease. We reviewed PubMed and American Society of Clinical Oncology abstracts from January 2006 to January 2012 to identify clinical trials investigating the treatment of recurrent or progressive glioblastoma with nitrosoureas, temozolomide, bevacizumab, and/or combinations of these agents. At recurrence, a minority of patients are eligible for second surgery or reirradiation, based on appropriate patient selection. In temozolomide-pretreated patients, progression-free survival rates at 6 months of 20%-30% may be achieved either with nitrosoureas, temozolomide in various dosing regimens, or bevacizumab. Combination regimens among these agents or with other drugs have not produced evidence for superior activity but commonly produce more toxicity. More research is needed to better define patient profiles that predict benefit from the limited therapeutic options available after the current standard of care has failed.

Neurocognitive decline is a frequent adverse effect of glioblastoma. Antitumor therapies that are efficacious, as measured by traditional endpoints such as objective response (OR) and progression-free survival (PFS), and have beneficial effects on neurocognitive function (NCF) are of clinical benefit to these patients. We evaluated neurocognitive changes across time in 167 patients with recurrent glioblastoma treated with bevacizumab-based therapy in BRAIN, a phase II, randomized, multicenter trial. All patients underwent MRI and neurocognitive testing at baseline and every 6 weeks thereafter. Memory, visuomotor scanning speed, and executive function were evaluated using the Hopkins Verbal Learning Test-Revised, the Trail Making Test, and the Controlled Oral Word Association test, respectively. NCF relative to baseline for patients with an OR, PFS >6 months, or disease progression was evaluated at time of OR, 24 weeks, and time of progression, respectively. For patients with an OR or PFS >6 months, median standardized test scores were examined from baseline to week 24. Most patients with an OR or PFS >6 months had poorer NCF performance compared to the general population at baseline and had improved or stable NCF at the time of response or at the 24-week assessment, respectively; most patients with progressive disease had neurocognitive decline at the time of progression. For patients with an OR or PFS >6 months, median standardized test scores were largely stable across the first 24 weeks on study. Neurocognitive testing was an objective, valid, and feasible method of monitoring NCF in patients with recurrent glioblastoma.

Development of effective therapies for recurrent glioblastoma multiforme (GBM) and reliable, timely evaluation of their benefit are needed. Understanding the relationship between objective response (OR) and survival is important for determining whether OR can provide an early signal of treatment activity in clinical trials. We performed a landmark analysis to evaluate the association between OR and survival at 9, 18, and 26 weeks for 167 patients with recurrent GBM who participated in BRAIN, a phase II trial that evaluated efficacy of bevacizumab alone or in combination with irinotecan, using the Cox regression models adjusted for age, baseline Karnofsky performance score, first vs second relapse, and treatment arm. Hazard ratios (HRs) and P-values for survival between responders and nonresponders were calculated. Additional analyses were performed to test robustness, validity, fit, and accuracy of the models. The relationships between progression-free survival (PFS) and survival and between OR and PFS were also explored. There were 55 responders and 112 nonresponders across the 2 treatment arms in BRAIN. OR status at 9, 18, and 26 weeks was a statistically significant predictor of survival (HR ≤ 0.52, P < .01). PFS was also a statistically significant predictor of survival at each landmark (HR ≤ 0.25, P < .0001). The association between OR and PFS was not statistically significant, likely due to inadequate statistical power for the analysis. Clarifying the relationship of OR and survival is important for determining whether OR can be a reliable predictor of the benefit of a therapeutic agent in patients with recurrent GBM.

First-line therapy for patients with glioblastoma multiforme includes treatment with radiation and temozolomide (TMZ), an oral DNA alkylating chemotherapy. Sensitivity of glioma cells to TMZ is dependent on the level of cellular O(6)-methylguanine-DNA methyltransferase (MGMT) repair activity. Several common coding-region polymorphisms in the MGMT gene (L84F and the linked pair I143V/K178R) modify functional characteristics of MGMT and cancer risk. To determine whether these polymorphic changes influence the ability of MGMT to protect glioma cells from TMZ, we stably overexpressed enhanced green fluorescent protein (eGFP)-tagged MGMT constructs in U87MG glioma cells. We confirmed that the wild-type (WT) eGFP-MGMT protein is properly localized within the nucleus and found that L84F, I143V/K178R, and L84F/I143V/K178R eGFP-MGMT variants exhibited nuclear localization patterns indistinguishable from WT. Using MTT [3-(4,5-dimethyl-2-thiazolyl)-2,5-diphenyl-2H-tetrazolium bromide] proliferation and clonogenic survival assays, we confirmed that WT cells expressing eGFP-MGMT are resistant to TMZ treatment compared with control U87MG cells, and that each of the polymorphic eGFP-MGMT variants confers similar resistance to TMZ. However, upon exposure to O(6)-benzylguanine (O(6)-BG), a synthetic MGMT inhibitor, the L84F and L84F/I143V/K178R variants were degraded more rapidly than WT or I143V/K178R in a proteasome-dependent manner. Despite the increased O(6)-BG- stimulated protein turnover caused by the L84F alteration, cells expressing L84F eGFP-MGMT did not exhibit altered sensitivity to the combination of O(6)-BG and TMZ compared with WT cells. In conclusion, we demonstrated that the L84F polymorphic variant has altered protein turnover without modifying sensitivity of U87MG cells to TMZ or combined TMZ and O(6)-BG. These findings may provide a clue to determining the clinical significance of MGMT coding-region polymorphisms.

The purpose of this study was to determine the response to CPT-11 administered every three weeks to adults with progressive malignant glioma, treated with or without enzyme-inducing antiepileptic drug (EIAED) therapy, at the recommended phase 2 dose determined from a previous phase 1 study. Adult patients age 18 or older with a KPS of 60 or higher who had measurable recurrent grade III anaplastic glioma (AG) or grade IV glioblastoma multiforme (GBM) were eligible. No more than one prior chemotherapy was allowed, either as adjuvant therapy or for recurrent disease. The CPT-11 dose was 350 mg/m(2) i.v. every three weeks in patients not on EIAED and 750 mg/m(2) in patients on EIAED therapy. Patients with stable or responding disease could be treated until tumor progression or a total of 12 months of therapy. The primary end point of the study was to determine whether CPT-11 could significantly delay tumor progression, using the rate of six-month progression-free survival (PFS-6). The trial was sized to be able to discriminate between a 15% and 35% rate for the GBM group alone and between a 20% and 40% rate for the entire cohort. There were 51 eligible patients, including 38 GBM and 13 AG patients, enrolled. The median age was 52 and 42 years, respectively. PFS-6 for the entire cohort was 17.6%. PFS-6 was 15.7% (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.07-0.31) for the GBM patients and 23% (95% CI, 0.07-0.52) for AG patients. Toxicity for the group included diarrhea and myelosuppression. We conclude that the recommended phase 2 dose of CPT-11 for patients with or without EIAED was ineffective on this schedule, in this patient population.

This phase II study in recurrent high-grade glioma evaluated the response rate, toxicities, and time to treatment failure of high-dose carboplatin modulated by a 24-h infusion of thymidine (75 g/m(2)). The trial was based on preclinical data and a prior phase I study ( J. Clin. Oncol. 17, 2922-2931, 1999); a phase II recurrent high-grade glioma study was initiated in July of 1998. Thymidine was given over 24 h; carboplatin was given over 20 min at hour 20 of the thymidine infusion. The starting dose of carboplatin had a value of 7 for the area under the curve (AUC), with allowance for dose escalation of 1 AUC unit per cycle if grade 2 toxicity was observed. Treatment cycles were repeated every 4 weeks. Accrual as of September 1999 was 45 patients [4 were unevaluable]: 76% with glioblastoma multiforme (GBM), 20% with anaplastic oligodendroglioma, 2% with mixed type, and 2% with anaplastic astrocytoma. Most patients had prior chemotherapy (78%). As observed in the earlier phase I study (in which carboplatin pharmacokinetics were unaltered by thymidine or antiseizure medications), thymidine was myeloprotective, resulting in a minimal need for dose reduction for patients having a >2 grade toxicity (in only 4% of the courses of treatment). Of 101 total courses, the number of courses (at the AUCs) was 3 (5), 4 (6), 58 (7), 20 (8), 11 (9), and 5 (10). Grade 3 nonhematologic toxicities included headache (4%), altered consciousness (3%), fatigue (1%), and nausea (3%). Responses included 2 partial (1 oligodendroglioma, 1 GBM; 5%); 3 minor (1 anaplastic astrocytoma, 2 GBM; 7.3%); 6 stable disease (14.6%); and 30 progressive disease (73.2%). For GBM patients, median survival was 23 weeks (with a 95% confidence interval of 20 to 50 weeks), and progression-free survival was 8 weeks (with a 95% confidence interval of 7-16 weeks). These results in GBM were comparable to other phase II GBM trials and thus do not represent a therapeutic advance in the treatment of GBM. Taken collectively, however, results are consistent with continued investigation of thymidine in combination with chemotherapeutic agents for high-grade glioma and other malignant diseases. The significant myeloprotection afforded by thymidine may have particular relevance to polychemotherapeutic regimens.