Search

Imaging response assessment is a cornerstone of patient care and drug development in oncology. Clinicians/clinical researchers rely on tumor imaging to estimate the impact of new treatments and guide decision making for patients and candidate therapies. This is important in brain cancer, where associations between tumor size/growth and emerging neurological deficits are strong. Accurately measuring the impact of a new therapy on tumor growth early in clinical development, where patient numbers are small, would be valuable for decision making regarding late-stage development activation. Current attempts to measure the impact of a new therapy have limited influence on clinical development, as determination of progression, stability or response does not currently account for individual tumor growth kinetics prior to the initiation of experimental therapies. Therefore, we posit that imaging-based response assessment, often used as a tool for estimating clinical effect, is incomplete as it does not adequately account for growth trajectories or biological characteristics of tumors prior to the introduction of an investigational agent. Here, we propose modifications to the existing framework for evaluating imaging assessment in primary brain tumors that will provide a more reliable understanding of treatment effects. Measuring tumor growth trajectories prior to a given intervention may allow us to more confidently conclude whether there is an anti-tumor effect. This updated approach to imaging-based tumor response assessment is intended to improve our ability to select candidate therapies for later-stage development, including those that may not meet currently sought thresholds for "response" and ultimately lead to identification of effective treatments.

Determination of therapeutic benefit in intracranial tumors is intimately dependent on serial assessment of radiographic images. The Response Assessment in Neuro-Oncology (RANO) criteria were established in 2010 to provide an updated framework to better characterize tumor response to contemporary treatments. Since this initial update a number of RANO criteria have provided some basic principles for the interpretation of changes on MR images; however, the details of how to operationalize RANO and other criteria for use in clinical trials are ambiguous and not standardized. In this review article designed for the neuro-oncologist or treating clinician, we outline essential steps for performing radiographic assessments by highlighting primary features of the Imaging Charter (referred to as the Charter for the remainder of this article), a document that describes the clinical trial imaging methodology and methods to ensure operationalization of the Charter into the workings of a clinical trial. Lastly, we provide recommendations for specific changes to optimize this methodology for neuro-oncology, including image registration, requirement of growing tumor for eligibility in trials of recurrent tumor, standardized image acquisition guidelines, and hybrid reader paradigms that allow for both unbiased measurements and more comprehensive interpretation.

Glioblastomas are the most common form of malignant primary brain tumor and an important cause of morbidity and mortality. In recent years there have been important advances in understanding the molecular pathogenesis and biology of these tumors, but this has not translated into significantly improved outcomes for patients. In this consensus review from the Society for Neuro-Oncology (SNO) and the European Association of Neuro-Oncology (EANO), the current management of isocitrate dehydrogenase wildtype (IDHwt) glioblastomas will be discussed. In addition, novel therapies such as targeted molecular therapies, agents targeting DNA damage response and metabolism, immunotherapies, and viral therapies will be reviewed, as well as the current challenges and future directions for research.

Building on an initiative to enhance clinical trial participation involving the Society for Neuro-Oncology, the Response Assessment in Neuro-Oncology Working Group, patient advocacy groups, clinical trial cooperative groups, and other partners, we evaluate the impact of eligibility criteria and trial conduct on neuro-oncology clinical trial participation. Clinical trials often carry forward eligibility criteria from prior studies that may be overly restrictive and unnecessary and needlessly limit patient accrual. Inclusion and exclusion criteria should be evaluated based on the goals and design of the study and whether they impact patient safety and/or treatment efficacy. In addition, we evaluate clinical trial conduct as a barrier to accrual and discuss strategies to minimize such barriers for neuro-oncology trials.

BackgroundIn the current study, we pooled imaging data in newly diagnosed glioblastoma (GBM) patients from international multicenter clinical trials, single institution databases, and multicenter clinical trial consortiums to identify the relationship between postoperative residual enhancing tumor volume and overall survival (OS).MethodsData from 1511 newly diagnosed GBM patients from 5 data sources were included in the current study: (i) a single institution database from UCLA (N = 398; Discovery); (ii) patients from the Ben and Cathy Ivy Foundation for Early Phase Clinical Trials Network Radiogenomics Database (N = 262 from 8 centers; Confirmation); (iii) the chemoradiation placebo arm from an international phase III trial (AVAglio; N = 394 from 120 locations in 23 countries; Validation); (iv) the experimental arm from AVAglio examining chemoradiation plus bevacizumab (N = 404 from 120 locations in 23 countries; Exploratory Set 1); and (v) an Alliance (N0874) phase I/II trial of vorinostat plus chemoradiation (N = 53; Exploratory Set 2). Postsurgical, residual enhancing disease was quantified using T1 subtraction maps. Multivariate Cox regression models were used to determine influence of clinical variables, O6-methylguanine-DNA methyltransferase (MGMT) status, and residual tumor volume on OS.ResultsA log-linear relationship was observed between postoperative, residual enhancing tumor volume and OS in newly diagnosed GBM treated with standard chemoradiation. Postoperative tumor volume is a prognostic factor for OS (P < 0.01), regardless of therapy, age, and MGMT promoter methylation status.ConclusionPostsurgical, residual contrast-enhancing disease significantly negatively influences survival in patients with newly diagnosed GBM treated with chemoradiation with or without concomitant experimental therapy.

The RANO criteria have not been assessed using outcome data from prospective trials. We examined the radiologic data of patients with recurrent glioblastoma from the randomized phase II trial (AVF3708g) to determine the effect of including T2/FLAIR evaluation as per RANO criteria on measurements of objective response rates (ORRs) and progression-free survival (PFS) compared with assessment based on contrast enhancement (Macdonald criteria).The ORRs and median PFS were determined using the RANO criteria and compared with those obtained using the Macdonald criteria. Landmark analyses were performed at 2, 4, and 6 months, and Cox proportional hazard models were used to determine the associations between OR and progression with subsequent survival.The ORRs were 0.331 [95% confidence interval (CI), 0.260-0.409] and 0.393 (95% CI, 0.317-0.472) by RANO and Macdonald criteria, respectively (P < 0.0001). The median PFS was 4.6 months (95% CI, 4.1-5.5) using RANO criteria, compared with 6.4 months (95% CI, 5.5-7.1) as determined by Macdonald criteria (P = 0.01). At 2-, 4-, and 6-month landmarks, both OR status and PFS determined by either RANO or Macdonald criteria were predictive of overall survival [OS; hazard ratios for 4-month landmark (OR HR = 1.93, P = 0.0012; PFS HR, 4.23, P < 0.0001)].The inclusion of T2/FLAIR assessment resulted in statistically significant differences in median PFS and ORRs compared with assessment of solely enhancing tumor (Macdonald criteria), although OR and PFS determined by both RANO and Macdonald criteria correlated with OS.

PurposePatients with high-grade gliomas (HGG) are frequently excluded from first-in-human solid tumor trials because of perceived poor prognosis, excessive toxicities, concomitant drug interactions, and poor efficacy. We conducted an analysis of outcomes from select, single-agent phase I studies in patients with HGG. We compared outcomes to pooled analysis of published studies in solid tumors with various molecular and cytotoxic drugs evaluated as single agents or as combinations.Patient and methodsIndividual records of patients with recurrent HGG enrolled onto Adult Brain Tumor Consortium trials of single-agent, cytotoxic or molecular agents from 2000 to 2008 were analyzed for baseline characteristics, toxicities, responses, and survival.ResultsOur analysis included 327 patients with advanced, refractory HGG who were enrolled onto eight trials involving targeted molecular (n=5) and cytotoxic (n=3) therapies. At enrollment, patients had a median Karnofsky performance score of 90 and median age of 52 years; 62% were men, 63% had glioblastoma, and the median number of prior systemic chemotherapies was one. Baseline laboratory values were in an acceptable range to meet eligibility criteria. Patients were on the study for a median of two cycles (range, ConclusionPatients with HGG who meet standard eligibility criteria may be good candidates for solid tumor phase I studies with single-agent molecular or cytotoxic drugs with favorable preclinical rationale and pharmacokinetic properties in this population.

A recent joint meeting was held on January 30, 2014, with the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA), National Cancer Institute (NCI), clinical scientists, imaging experts, pharmaceutical and biotech companies, clinical trials cooperative groups, and patient advocate groups to discuss imaging endpoints for clinical trials in glioblastoma. This workshop developed a set of priorities and action items including the creation of a standardized MRI protocol for multicenter studies. The current document outlines consensus recommendations for a standardized Brain Tumor Imaging Protocol (BTIP), along with the scientific and practical justifications for these recommendations, resulting from a series of discussions between various experts involved in aspects of neuro-oncology neuroimaging for clinical trials. The minimum recommended sequences include: (i) parameter-matched precontrast and postcontrast inversion recovery-prepared, isotropic 3D T1-weighted gradient-recalled echo; (ii) axial 2D T2-weighted turbo spin-echo acquired after contrast injection and before postcontrast 3D T1-weighted images to control timing of images after contrast administration; (iii) precontrast, axial 2D T2-weighted fluid-attenuated inversion recovery; and (iv) precontrast, axial 2D, 3-directional diffusion-weighted images. Recommended ranges of sequence parameters are provided for both 1.5 T and 3 T MR systems.

Glioblastoma is the most common primary brain malignancy and is associated with poor prognosis despite aggressive local and systemic therapy, which is related to a paucity of viable treatment options in both the newly diagnosed and recurrent settings. Even so, the rapidly increasing number of targeted therapies being evaluated in oncology clinical trials offers hope for the future. Given the broad range of possibilities for future trials, the Brain Malignancy Steering Committee convened a clinical trials planning meeting that was held at the Udvar-Hazy Center in Chantilly, Virginia, on September 19 and 20, 2013. This manuscript reports the deliberations leading up to the event from the Targeted Therapies Working Group and the results of the meeting.

Over the past 20 years, very few agents have been approved for the treatment of brain tumors. Recent studies have highlighted some of the challenges in assessing activity in novel agents for the treatment of brain tumors. This paper reviews some of the key challenges related to assessment of tumor response to therapy in adult high-grade gliomas and discusses the strengths and limitations of imaging-based endpoints. Although overall survival is considered the "gold standard" endpoint in the field of oncology, progression-free survival and response rate are endpoints that hold great value in neuro-oncology. Particular focus is given to advancements made since the January 2006 Brain Tumor Endpoints Workshop, including the development of Response Assessment in Neuro-Oncology criteria, the value of T2/fluid-attenuated inversion recovery, use of objective response rates and progression-free survival in clinical trials, and the evaluation of pseudoprogression, pseudoresponse, and inflammatory response in radiographic images.

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.

PURPOSE: Adaptive clinical trials use algorithms to predict, during the study, patient outcomes and final study results. These predictions trigger interim decisions, such as early discontinuation of the trial, and can change the course of the study. Poor selection of the Prediction Analyses and Interim Decisions (PAID) plan in an adaptive clinical trial can have negative consequences, including the risk of exposing patients to ineffective or toxic treatments. METHODS: We present an approach that leverages data sets from completed trials to evaluate and compare candidate PAIDs using interpretable validation metrics. The goal is to determine whether and how to incorporate predictions into major interim decisions in a clinical trial. Candidate PAIDs can differ in several aspects, such as the prediction models used, timing of interim analyses, and potential use of external data sets. To illustrate our approach, we considered a randomized clinical trial in glioblastoma. The study design includes interim futility analyses on the basis of the predictive probability that the final analysis, at the completion of the study, will provide significant evidence of treatment effects. We examined various PAIDs with different levels of complexity to investigate if the use of biomarkers, external data, or novel algorithms improved interim decisions in the glioblastoma clinical trial. RESULTS: Validation analyses on the basis of completed trials and electronic health records support the selection of algorithms, predictive models, and other aspects of PAIDs for use in adaptive clinical trials. By contrast, PAID evaluations on the basis of arbitrarily defined ad hoc simulation scenarios, which are not tailored to previous clinical data and experience, tend to overvalue complex prediction procedures and produce poor estimates of trial operating characteristics such as power and the number of enrolled patients. CONCLUSION: Validation analyses on the basis of completed trials and real world data support the selection of predictive models, interim analysis rules, and other aspects of PAIDs in future clinical trials. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Gliosarcoma is an aggressive brain tumor with histologic features of glioblastoma (GBM) and soft tissue sarcoma. Despite its poor prognosis, its rarity has precluded analysis of its underlying biology. We used a multi-center database to characterize the genomic landscape of gliosarcoma. Sequencing data was obtained from 35 gliosarcoma patients from Genomics Evidence Neoplasia Information Exchange (GENIE) 5.0, a database curated by the American Association of Cancer Research (AACR). We analyzed genomic alterations in gliosarcomas and compared them to GBM (n = 1,449) and soft tissue sarcoma (n = 1,042). 30 samples were included (37% female, median age 59 [IQR: 49–64]). Nineteen common genes were identified in gliosarcoma, defined as those altered in > 5% of samples, including TERT Promoter (92%), PTEN (66%), and TP53 (60%). Of the 19 common genes in gliosarcoma, 6 were also common in both GBM and soft tissue sarcoma, 4 in GBM alone, 0 in soft tissue sarcoma alone, and 9 were more distinct to gliosarcoma. Of these, BRAF harbored an OncoKB level 1 designation, indicating its status as a predictive biomarker of response to an FDA-approved drug in certain cancers. EGFR, CDKN2A, NF1, and PTEN harbored level 4 designations in solid tumors, indicating biological evidence of these biomarkers predicting a drug-response. Gliosarcoma contains molecular features that overlap GBM and soft tissue sarcoma, as well as its own distinct genomic signatures. This may play a role in disease classification and inclusion criteria for clinical trials. Gliosarcoma mutations with potential therapeutic indications include BRAF, EGFR, CDKN2A, NF1, and PTEN. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Summary: Background Mutant isocitrate dehydrogenase 1 and 2 (IDH1/IDH2) enzymes produce the oncometabolite D-2-hydroxyglutarate (2-HG). Ivosidenib (AG-120) is a targeted mutant IDH1 inhibitor under evaluation in a phase 1 dose escalation and expansion study of IDH1-mutant advanced solid tumors including cholangiocarcinoma, chondrosarcoma, and glioma. We explored the pharmacokinetic (PK) and pharmacodynamic (PD) profiles of ivosidenib in these populations. Methods Ivosidenib was administered orally once (QD) or twice (BID) daily in continuous 28-day cycles; 168 patients received ≥1 dose within the range 100 mg BID to 1200 mg QD. PK and PD were assessed using validated liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry assays. Results Ivosidenib demonstrated good oral exposure after single and multiple doses, was rapidly absorbed, and had a long terminal half-life (mean 40–102 h after single dose). Exposure increased less than dose proportionally. Steady state was reached by day 15, with moderate accumulation across all tumors (1.5- to 1.7-fold for area-under-the-curve at 500 mg QD). None of the intrinsic and extrinsic factors assessed affected ivosidenib exposure, including patient/disease characteristics and concomitant administration of weak CYP3A4 inhibitors/inducers. After multiple doses in patients with cholangiocarcinoma or chondrosarcoma, plasma 2-HG was reduced by up to 98%, to levels seen in healthy subjects. Exposure-response relationships for safety and efficacy outcomes were flat across the doses tested. Conclusions Ivosidenib demonstrated good oral exposure and a long half-life. Robust, persistent plasma 2-HG inhibition was observed in IDH1-mutant cholangiocarcinoma and chondrosarcoma. Ivosidenib 500 mg QD is an appropriate dose irrespective of various intrinsic and extrinsic factors. Trial RegistrationClinicalTrials.gov (NCT02073994). [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background Whereas much information exists in general oncology regarding the barriers to clinical trial referral, those specific to neuro-oncology are not yet well known. Trial barriers lead to lower patient accrual, which can lead to less-efficient clinical trials and slower improvement of the standard of care, which may negatively effect patient outcomes. Thus, the aim of this study was to determine the clinical trial referral barriers that are specific to neuro-oncology to improve trial accrual rates. Methods An electronic survey was completed by 426 Society for Neuro-Oncology members, of whom 372 are included in this report. Descriptive statistics, including frequencies, means, and proportions, were used to characterize our survey sample. Results Only 22% of participants reported that their center tracks referrals to clinical trials inside as well as outside their own institution, with an estimate of less than 30% of patients referred. The most commonly reported provider-referral barrier was finding ongoing trials in the patient's geographic area. Providers also perceived that while considering participation in a trial their patients may not qualify for any trials, and if they do, may be unable to travel to the study site for follow-up. Additionally, practice location and provider and institution type all influenced referral patterns. Conclusion Efforts should be made to broaden trial availability and eligibility criteria, improve trial referral tracking, and ensure patients and their caregivers understand the goals and importance of clinical trials to reduce barriers and improve trial participation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Radiographic endpoints including response and progression are important for the evaluation of new glioblastoma therapies. The current RANO criteria was developed to overcome many of the challenges identified with previous guidelines for response assessment, however, significant challenges and limitations remain. The current recommendations build on the strengths of the current RANO criteria, while addressing many of these limitations. Modifications to the current RANO criteria include suggestions for volumetric response evaluation, use contrast enhanced T1 subtraction maps to increase lesion conspicuity, removal of qualitative non-enhancing tumor assessment requirements, use of the post-radiation time point as the baseline for newly diagnosed glioblastoma response assessment, and "treatment-agnostic" response assessment rubrics for identifying pseudoprogression, pseudoresponse, and a confirmed durable response in newly diagnosed and recurrent glioblastoma trials. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The introduction of antiangiogenic therapies for the treatment of malignant glioma and the effect of these agents on standard imaging studies were the stimuli for forming a small group of investigators to critically evaluate the limitations of the Macdonald criteria in assessing response to treatment. The initial goal of this group was to highlight the challenges in accurately determining the efficacy of therapeutic interventions for malignant glioma and to develop new criteria that could be implemented in clinical care as well as in the design and conduct of clinical trials. This initial Response Assessment in Neuro-Oncology (RANO) effort started in 2008 and over the last 7 years, it has expanded to include a critical review of response assessment across several tumor types as well as endpoint selection and trial design to improve outcome criteria for neuro-oncological trials. In this paper, we review the overarching principles of the RANO initiative and the efforts to date. We also highlight the diverse and expanding efforts of the multidisciplinary groups of investigators who have volunteered their time as part of this endeavor. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Treatment options for patients with non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) with brain metastases are limited. Patupilone (EPO906), a blood-brain barrier-penetrating, microtubule-targeting, cytotoxic agent, has shown clinical activity in phase 1/2 studies in patients with NSCLC. This study evaluates the efficacy, pharmacokinetics, and safety of patupilone in NSCLC brain metastases.Methods: Adult patients with NSCLC and confirmed progressive brain metastases received patupilone intravenously at 10 mg/m(2) every 3 weeks. The primary endpoint of this multinomial 2-stage study combined early progression (EP; death or progression within 3 weeks) and progression-free survival at 9 weeks (PFS9w) to determine drug activity.Results: Fifty patients with a median age of 60 years (range, 33-74 years) were enrolled; the majority were men (58%), and most had received prior therapy for brain metastases (98%). The PFS9w rate was 36%, and the EP rate was 26%. Patupilone blood pharmacokinetic analyses showed mean areas under the concentration-time curve from time zero to 504 hours for cycles 1 and 3 of 1544 and 1978 ng h/mL, respectively, and a mean steady state distribution volume of 755 L/m(2) . Grade 3/4 adverse events (AEs), regardless of their relation with the study drug, included diarrhea (24%), pulmonary embolisms (8%), convulsions (4%), and peripheral neuropathy (4%). All patients discontinued the study drug: 31 (62%) for disease progression and 13 (26%) for AEs. Twenty-five of 32 deaths were due to brain metastases. The median time to progression and the overall survival were 3.2 and 8.8 months, respectively.Conclusions: This is the first prospective study of chemotherapy for recurrent brain metastases from NSCLC. In this population, patupilone demonstrated activity in heavily treated patients. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

We initiated a prospective multicenter phase II trial using rituximab and temozolomide in immunocompetent patients with progressive or recurrent primary central nervous system lymphoma (PCNSL) based on activity observed in retrospective studies. Treatment consisted of an induction phase with rituximab (750 mg/m2) on days 1, 8, 15 and 22 and temozolomide (150 mg/m2) days 1-7 and 15-21, followed by six cycles of consolidation temozolomide (150-200 mg/m2 × 5/28 days), followed by maintenance with methylprednisolone (1 g IV every 28 days) until progression. Sixteen patients were enrolled, and a complete response was seen in 2/14 (14%) evaluable patients. The median progression-free survival was 7 weeks and median overall survival was not reached (median follow-up: 37 months). Treatment was well tolerated, but due to slow accrual and preliminary analysis suggesting futility, the trial was closed early. Given the overall modest activity, this regimen should be reserved for patients who are not candidates for other, more aggressive salvage treatments. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Summary: Numerous antiangiogenic agents with diverse mechanisms of action are currently under investigation for the treatment of patients with glioblastoma (GBM), a diagnosis that continues to carry a poor prognosis despite maximal conventional therapy. Early clinical trials suggest that antiangiogenic drugs, which target the blood vessels of these highly angiogenic tumors, may have clinical benefit in GBM patients. Antiangiogenic agents have potent antiedema and steroid-sparing effects in patients, and emerging data suggest that these drugs may modestly improve progression-free survival. Although these early results are encouraging, several issues arise regarding the use and efficacy of these agents. Interpretation of the radiographic changes that occur after treatment with antiangiogenic agents presents a major challenge. Still lacking are reliable radiographic and biologic markers that can predict which patients will benefit from treatment and that accurately indicate response and progression during therapy. In addition, most patients treated with antiangiogenic drugs eventually progress, and the mechanisms by which tumors escape from therapy are only beginning to be understood. Larger prospective trials that incorporate correlative biomarker studies will be required to address these challenges. Here, we summarize the clinical experience with antiangiogenic therapy in patients with malignant gliomas (MG), review the major issues concerning the use and development of these agents, and discuss strategies that may build upon the initial gains observed with antiangiogenic agents. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

The frequency, characteristics and reversibility of bortezomib-associated peripheral neuropathy were evaluated in the phase III APEX (Assessment of Proteasome Inhibition for Extending Remissions) trial in patients with relapsed myeloma, and the impact of a dose-modification guideline on peripheral neuropathy severity and reversibility was assessed. Patients received bortezomib 1·3 mg/m2 (days 1, 4, 8, 11, eight 21-d cycles, then days 1, 8, 15, 22, three 35-d cycles); bortezomib was held, dose-reduced or discontinued depending on peripheral neuropathy severity, according to a protocol-specified dose-modification guideline. Overall, 124/331 patients (37%) had treatment-emergent peripheral neuropathy, including 30 (9%) with grade ≥3; incidence and severity were not affected by age, number/type of prior therapies, baseline glycosylated haemoglobin level, or diabetes history. Grade ≥3 incidence appeared lower versus phase II trials (13%) that did not specifically provide dose-modification guidelines. Of patients with grade ≥2 peripheral neuropathy, 58/91 (64%) experienced improvement or resolution to baseline at a median of 110 d, including 49/72 (68%) who had dose modification versus 9/19 (47%) who did not. Efficacy did not appear adversely affected by dose modification for grade ≥2 peripheral neuropathy. Bortezomib-associated peripheral neuropathy is manageable and reversible in most patients with relapsed myeloma. Dose modification using a specific guideline improves peripheral neuropathy management without adversely affecting outcome. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

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/m² i.v. every three weeks in patients not on EIAED and 750 mg/m² 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. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Successful drug development for people with cancers of the CNS has been challenging. There are multiple barriers to successful drug development including biological factors, rarity of the disease, and ineffective use of clinical trials. Based upon a series of presentations at the First Central Nervous System Clinical Trials Conference hosted by the American Society of Clinical Oncology and the Society for Neuro-Oncology, we provide an overview on drug development and novel trial designs in neuro-oncology. This Review discusses the challenges of therapeutic development in neuro-oncology and proposes strategies to improve the drug discovery process by enriching the pipeline of promising therapies, optimising trial design, incorporating biomarkers, using external data, and maximising efficacy and reproducibility of clinical trials. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Effective treatments for patients with cholangiocarcinoma after progression on gemcitabine-based chemotherapy are urgently needed. Mutations in the BRAF gene have been found in 5% of biliary tract tumours. The combination of dabrafenib and trametinib has shown activity in several BRAFV600E-mutated cancers. We aimed to assess the activity and safety of dabrafenib and trametinib combination therapy in patients with BRAFV600E-mutated biliary tract cancer.Methods: This study is part of an ongoing, phase 2, open-label, single-arm, multicentre, Rare Oncology Agnostic Research (ROAR) basket trial in patients with BRAFV600E-mutated rare cancers. Patients were eligible for the biliary tract cancer cohort if they were aged 18 years or older, had BRAFV600E-mutated, unresectable, metastatic, locally advanced, or recurrent biliary tract cancer, an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0-2, and had received previous systemic treatment. All patients were treated with oral dabrafenib 150 mg twice daily and oral trametinib 2 mg once daily until disease progression or intolerance of treatment. The primary endpoint was the overall response rate, which was determined by Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors version 1.1 in the intention-to-treat evaluable population, which comprised all enrolled patients regardless of receiving treatment who were evaluable (ie, had progression, began a new anticancer treatment, withdrew consent, died, had stable disease for 6 weeks or longer, or had two or more post-baseline assessments). The ROAR trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02034110. These results are based on an interim analysis; the study is active but not recruiting.Findings: Between March 12, 2014, and July 18, 2018, 43 patients with BRAFV600E-mutated biliary tract cancer were enrolled to the study and were evaluable. Median follow-up was 10 months (IQR 6-15). An investigator-assessed overall response was achieved by 22 (51%, 95% CI 36-67) of 43 patients. An independent reviewer-assessed overall response was achieved by 20 (47%, 95% CI 31-62) of 43 patients. The most common grade 3 or worse adverse event was increased γ-glutamyltransferase in five (12%) patients. 17 (40%) patients had serious adverse events and nine (21%) had treatment-related serious adverse events, the most frequent of which was pyrexia (eight [19%]). No treatment-related deaths were reported.Interpretation: Dabrafenib plus trametinib combination treatment showed promising activity in patients with BRAFV600E-mutated biliary tract cancer, with a manageable safety profile. Routine testing for BRAFV600E mutations should be considered in patients with biliary tract cancer.Funding: GlaxoSmithKline and Novartis. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Clinical trials of treatments for high-grade gliomas have traditionally relied on measures of response or time-dependent metrics; however, these endpoints have limitations because they do not characterise the functional or symptomatic effect of the condition on the person. Including clinical outcome assessments, such as patient- reported outcomes (PROs), to determine net clinical benefit of a treatment strategy is needed because of the substantial burden of symptoms and impaired functioning in this patient population. The US National Cancer Institute convened a meeting to review previous recommendations and existing PRO measures of symptoms and function that can be applied to current trials and clinical practice for high-grade gliomas. Measures were assessed for relevance, relationship to disease and therapy, sensitivity to change, psychometric properties, response format, patient acceptability, and use of self-report. The group also relied on patient input including the results of an online survey, a literature review on available clinical outcomes, expert opinion, and alignment with work done by other organisations. A core set of priority constructs was proposed that allows more comprehensive evaluation of therapies and comparison of outcomes among studies, and enhances efforts to improve the measurement of these core clinical outcomes. The proposed set of constructs was then presented to the Society for Neuro-Oncology Response Assessment in Neuro-Oncology Working Group and feedback was solicited. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Summary: Advances in the management of gliomas, including the approval of agents such as temozolomide and bevacizumab, have created an evolving therapeutic landscape in glioma treatment, thus affecting our ability to reliably use historical controls to comparatively assess the activity of new therapies. Furthermore, the increasing availability of novel, targeted agents—which are competing for a small patient population, in view of the low incidence of primary brain tumours—draws attention to the need to improve the efficiency of phase 2 clinical testing in neuro-oncology to expeditiously transition the most promising of these drugs or combinations to potentially practice-changing phase 3 trials. In this report from the Response Assessment in Neurooncology (RANO) group, we review phase 2 trial designs that can address these challenges and capitalise on scientific and clinical advances in brain tumour treatment in neuro-oncology to accelerate and optimise the selection of drugs deserving further testing in phase 3 trials. Although there is still a small role for single-arm and non-comparative phase 2 designs, emphasis is placed on the potential role that comparative randomised phase 2 designs—such as screening designs, selection designs, discontinuation designs, and adaptive designs, including seamless phase 2/3 designs—can have. The rational incorporation of these designs, as determined by the specific clinical setting and the trial''s endpoints or goals, has the potential to substantially advance new drug development in neuro-oncology. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]