Search

Background We observed rapid tumor progression following COVID-19 infection among patients with glioblastoma and sought to systematically characterize their disease course in a retrospective case–control study. Methods Using an institutional database, we retrospectively identified a series of COVID-19-positive glioblastoma cases and matched them by age and sex 1:2 to glioblastoma controls who had a negative COVID-19 test during their disease course. Demographic and clinical data were analyzed. Hyperprogression was defined using modified response evaluation criteria in solid tumors criteria. Time to progression and overall survival were estimated using the Kaplan–Meier method. Results Thirty-two glioblastoma cases with positive COVID-19 testing were matched to 64 glioblastoma controls with negative testing; age, sex, and molecular profiles did not differ between groups. Progression events occurred in 27 cases (84%) and 46 controls (72%). Of these, 14 cases (52%) presented with multifocal disease or leptomeningeal disease at progression compared with 10 controls (22%; P  = .0082). Hyperprogression was identified in 13 cases (48%) but only 4 controls (9%; P  = .0001). Cases had disease progression at a median of 35 days following COVID-19 testing, compared with 164 days for controls (P  = .0001). Median survival from COVID-19 testing until death was 8.3 months for cases but 17 months for controls (P  = .0016). Median overall survival from glioblastoma diagnosis was 20.7 months for cases and 24.6 months for controls (P  = .672). Conclusions Patients with glioblastoma may have accelerated disease progression in the first 2 months after COVID-19 infection. Infected patients should be monitored vigilantly. Future investigations should explore tumor-immune microenvironment changes linking tumor progression and COVID-19. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background Patients with relapsed intracranial germinoma can achieve durable remission with standard chemotherapy regimens and/or reirradiation; however, innovative therapies are required for patients with relapsed and/or refractory intracranial nongerminomatous germ cell tumors (NGGCTs) due to their poor prognosis. Improved outcomes have been reported using reinduction chemotherapy to achieve minimal residual disease, followed by marrow-ablative chemotherapy (HDCx) with autologous hematopoietic progenitor cell rescue (AuHPCR). We conducted a phase II trial evaluating the response and toxicity of a 3-drug combination developed for recurrent intracranial germ cell tumors consisting of gemcitabine, paclitaxel, and oxaliplatin (GemPOx). Methods A total of 9 patients with confirmed relapsed or refractory intracranial GCT were enrolled after signing informed consent, and received at least 2 cycles of GemPOx, of which all but 1 had relapsed or refractory NGGCTs. One patient with progressive disease was found to have pathologically confirmed malignant transformation to pure embryonal rhabdomyosarcoma (without GCT elements), hence was ineligible and not included in the analysis. Patients who experienced sufficient responses proceeded to receive HDCx with AuHPCR. Treatment response was determined based on radiographic tumor assessments and tumor markers. Results A total of 7 patients achieved sufficient response and proceeded with HDCx and AuHPCR, and 5 subsequently received additional radiotherapy. A total of 2 patients developed progressive disease while receiving GemPOx. Myelosuppression and transaminitis were the most common treatment-related adverse events. With a mean follow-up of 44 months, 4 patients (3 NGGCTs, 1 germinoma) are alive without evidence of disease. Conclusions GemPOx demonstrates efficacy in facilitating stem cell mobilization, thus facilitating the feasibility of both HDCx and radiotherapy. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background Radiation necrosis (RN) is a potential complication after radiation therapy for brain tumors. It is hypothesized that VEGF plays an important role in the pathophysiology of RN. Bevacizumab, a monoclonal antibody against VEGF-A, is often successful in the management of RN. The objective of this study is to assess whether VEGF receptor (VEGFR) inhibitors, a group of oral tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs), can prevent or reverse RN. Methods We retrospectively studied a cohort of 102 patients with renal cell carcinoma and brain metastases seen at The Ohio State University James Cancer Center between January 1, 2011 and April 30, 2019. We identified those who developed RN and analyzed the temporal relationship between the use of VEGFR TKIs and the development of RN. Results The cumulative incidence of RN is 13.7% after radiation treatments that included LINAC-based stereotactic radiosurgery, fractionated stereotactic radiotherapy, or Gamma Knife radiosurgery. There was no statistically significant difference in the cumulative incidence of RN between patients taking TKIs and patients who were off TKIs (9.9% and 11.5% respectively, P  = .741). The median time to development of RN was only numerically shorter in patients taking TKIs (151 vs 315 days, P  = .315). One patient developed RN after stopping cabozantinib. Eight patients developed RN while on cabozantinib, pazopanib, or sunitinib. One patient was started on axitinib during active RN without significant improvement subsequently. Conclusions VEGFR TKIs do not consistently prevent RN. The therapeutic effects of VEGFR TKIs against RN warrant further research. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background. Brain tumor patients have limited survival and suffer from high morbidity requiring specific symptom management. Specialized palliative care (PC) services have been developed to address these symptoms and provide end-of-life treatment. Global utilization patterns of PC in neuro-oncology are unknown. Methods. In a collaborative effort between the Society for Neuro-Oncology (SNO), the European Association of Neuro-Oncology (EANO), and the Asian Society for Neuro-Oncology (ASNO), a 22-question survey was distributed. Wilcoxon 2-sample and Kruskal-Wallis tests were used to assess differences in responses. Results. Five hundred fifty-two evaluable responses were received. The most significant differences were found between Asia-Oceania (AO) and Europe as well as AO and United States/Canada (USA-C). USA-C providers had more subspecialty training in neuro-oncology, but most providers had received no or minimal training in palliative care independent of region. Providers in all 3 regions reported referring patients at the onset of symptoms requiring palliation, but USA-C and European responders refer a larger total proportion of patients to PC (P < .001). Physicians in AO and Europe (both 46%) as well as 29% of USA-C providers did not feel comfortable dealing with end-of-life issues. Most USA-C patients (63%) are referred to hospice compared with only 8% and 19% in AO and Europe (P < .001), respectively. Conclusion. This is the first report describing global differences of PC utilization in neuro-oncology. Significant differences in provider training, culture, access, and utilization were mainly found between AO and USA-C or AO and Europe. PC patterns are more similar in Europe and USA-C. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]