Search

Background: Leptomeningeal metastases occur across multiple solid and lymphoid cancers, and patients typically undergo cytopathologic assessment of cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) in this setting. For patients diagnosed with metastatic cancer, the detection of actionable somatic mutations in CSF can provide clinically valuable information for treatment without the need for additional tissue collection. Methods: The authors validated a targeted next‐generation sequencing assay for the detection of somatic variants in cancer (OncoPanel) on cell‐free DNA (cfDNA) isolated from archival CSF specimens in a cohort of 25 patients who had undergone molecular testing of a prior tumor specimen. Results: CSF storage time and volume had no impact on cfDNA concentration or mean target coverage of the assay. Previously identified somatic variants in CSF cfDNA were detected in 88%, 50%, and 27% of specimens diagnosed cytologically as positive, suspicious/atypical, and negative for malignancy, respectively. Somatic variants were identified in 81% of CSF specimens from patients who had leptomeningeal enhancement on magnetic resonance imaging compared with 31% from patients without such enhancement. Conclusions: These data highlight the stability of cfDNA in CSF, which allows for cytopathologic evaluation before triage for next‐generation sequencing assays. For a subset of cases in which clinical suspicion is high but cytologic or radiographic studies are inconclusive, the detection of pathogenic somatic variants in CSF cfDNA may aid in the diagnosis of leptomeningeal metastases. This study demonstrates the utility of cell‐free DNA from archival cerebrospinal fluid for the identification of targetable pathogenic tumor variants in patients undergoing cytopathologic assessment for suspected leptomeningeal metastases. The presence of pathogenic tumor variants correlates with cytopathologic and radiographic findings. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Summary: Data describing outcomes of chimeric antigen receptor (CAR) T‐cell therapy in patients with secondary central nervous system (SCNS) involvement of mantle cell lymphoma (MCL) are limited. We identified 10 patients with MCL and SCNS involvement treated with anti‐CD19 CAR T‐cell therapy at three US academic centres. Frequent objective responses were observed in the CNS (86%) and systemically (90%), and the 1‐year progression‐free survival was 47%. Seven patients developed immune‐effector‐cell‐associated‐neurotoxicity‐syndrome (n = 2 Grade 1, n = 5 Grade 3). Our results suggest that anti‐CD19 CAR T‐cell therapy in this setting is feasible and additional data regarding neurotoxicity in this population may be warranted. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Responses to bevacizumab in glioblastoma (GBM) are not durable. Plasma levels of basic fibroblast growth factor (bFGF) increase at the time of tumor progression. By targeting vascular endothelial growth factor receptor (VEGFR), platelet‐derived growth factor receptor, Src, and FGF receptor pathways, ponatinib may potentially help to overcome some of the putative mechanisms of adaptive resistance. Methods: We performed a phase II trial of ponatinib in patients with bevacizumab‐refractory GBM and variants. Adult patients with Karnofsky performance score (KPS) ≥60, measurable disease, and normal organ and marrow function received 45 mg ponatinib daily. No limit on the number of prior therapies but only one prior bevacizumab‐containing regimen was allowed. Primary endpoint was 3‐month progression‐free survival. Plasma biomarkers of angiogenesis and inflammation were evaluated before and after treatment. Results: The study closed after the first stage. Fifteen patients enrolled: median age 61 [27‐74]; median KPS 80 [70‐90]; median number of prior relapses 2 [2‐4]. Three‐month progression‐free survival rate was 0, median overall survival was 98 days [95% CI 56, 257], and median PFS was 28 days [95% CI 27, 30]. No responses were seen. The most common grade ≥3 adverse events included fatigue (n = 3), hypertension (2), and lipase elevation (2). Ponatinib treatment significantly increased plasma VEGF, soluble (s)VEGFR1, sVEGFR2, sTIE2, interferon gamma (IFNγ), tumor necrosis factor alpha (TNF‐α), interleukin (IL)‐6, IL‐8, and IL‐10 and decreased sVEGFR2. Conclusions: Ponatinib was associated with minimal activity in bevacizumab‐refractory GBM patients. Circulating biomarker data confirmed pharmacodynamic changes and suggested that resistance to ponatinib may be related to an increase in inflammatory cytokines. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The NIH Revitalization Act, implemented 29 years ago, set to improve the representation of women and minorities in clinical trials. In this study, we investigate progress made in all phase therapeutic clinical trials for neuroepithelial CNS tumors stratified by demographic-specific age-adjusted disease incidence and mortality. Additionally, we identify workforce characteristics associated with clinical trials meeting established accrual benchmarks., Methods: Registry study of published clinical trials for World Health Organization defined neuroepithelial CNS tumors between January 2000 and December 2019. Study participants were obtained from PubMed and ClinicalTrials.gov. Population-based data originated from the CBTRUS for incidence analyses. SEER-18 Incidence-Based Mortality data was used for mortality analysis. Descriptive statistics, Fisher exact, and χ 2 tests were used for data analysis., Results: Among 662 published clinical trials representing 49 907 participants, 62.5% of participants were men and 37.5% women (P < .0001) representing a mortality specific over-accrual for men (P = .001). Whites, Asians, Blacks, and Hispanics represented 91.7%, 1.5%, 2.6%, and 1.7% of trial participants. Compared with mortality, Blacks (47% of expected mortality, P = .008), Hispanics (17% of expected mortality, P < .001) and Asians (33% of expected mortality, P < .001) were underrepresented compared with Whites (114% of expected mortality, P < .001). Clinical trials meeting accrual benchmarks for race included minority authorship., Conclusions: Following the Revitalization Act, minorities and women remain underrepresented in therapeutic clinical trials for neuroepithelial tumors, relative to disease incidence and mortality. Study accrual has improved with time. This study provides a framework for clinical trial accrual efforts and offers guidance regarding workforce considerations associated with enrollment of underserved patients., (© 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.)

It is widely recognized that subspecialized multidisciplinary care improves neuro-oncology outcomes. Optimizing patient outcomes relies on the expertise of the treating physicians, neuroradiology and neuropathology, and supportive services familiar with common neurologic syndromes that occur after brain tumor diagnosis and treatment. Despite an increasing number of providers, patient access to specialized multidisciplinary care and clinical trials remains limited. Barriers to equitable health care exist across the United States, with marginalized communities being impacted disproportionately. Such disparity causes increased morbidity and mortality for patients from backgrounds with various elements of diversity. Limited attention to this inequity has resulted in an incomplete understanding of the spectrum of experiences that patients with neuro-oncologic diseases encounter. Clinical trials represent the highest standard and quality of care in medicine, but inclusion of under-represented and underserved groups consistently lags behind counterpart participants from majority racial and ethnic groups. Through provider education as it pertains to issues from bias and health literacy to increasing clinical trial enrollment and offering opportunities through telemedicine, opportunities for improving access to high-quality neuro-oncologic care are explored.

Meningiomas are the most frequently occurring primary brain tumors in adults, representing almost one-third of all primary central nervous system tumors. Several factors have been suggested as an underlying cause in the development of meningiomas, such as ionizing radiation (therapeutic or other incidental exposure), hormonal factors, and genetic predisposition syndromes. Other established factors associated with meningiomas include age, female gender, and those from non-Hispanic Black backgrounds. Though the 2016 World Health Organization Classification of Brain Tumors largely preserves the existing grading scheme for organization of meningioma, there is increasing understanding of the molecular factors underlying the development of meningioma, some of which now form the basis for active clinical investigation. The mainstay of treatment has been the combination of radiation therapy and surgery, with a limited role for systemic therapy due to low efficacy, short duration of treatment response, and lack of uniform response criteria. Similar to other primary and metastatic brain tumors, immune-based therapies hold promise and are still under investigation., (Copyright © 2020 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Many factors contribute to the poor survival of malignant brain tumor patients, some of which are not easily remedied. However, one contributor to the lack of progress that may be modifiable is poor clinical trial accrual. Surveys of brain tumor patients and neuro-oncology providers suggest that clinicians do a poor job of discussing clinical trials with patients and referring patients for clinical trials. Yet, data from the Cancer Action Network of the American Cancer Society suggest that most eligible oncology patients asked to enroll on a clinical trial will agree to do so. To this end, the Society for Neuro-Oncology (SNO) in collaboration with the Response Assessment in Neuro-Oncology (RANO) Working Group, patient advocacy groups, clinical trial cooperative groups, including the Adult Brain Tumor Consortium (ABTC), and other partners are working together with the intent to double clinical trial accrual over the next 5 years. Here we describe the factors contributing to poor clinical trial accrual in neuro-oncology and offer possible solutions., (© 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.)