Search

BackgroundStandard treatment for patients with newly diagnosed glioblastoma includes surgery, radiotherapy (RT), and temozolomide (TMZ) chemotherapy (TMZ/RT→TMZ). The proteasome has long been considered a promising therapeutic target because of its role as a central biological hub in tumor cells. Marizomib is a novel pan-proteasome inhibitor that crosses the blood-brain barrier.MethodsEuropean Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer 1709/Canadian Cancer Trials Group CE.8 was a multicenter, randomized, controlled, open-label phase 3 superiority trial. Key eligibility criteria included newly diagnosed glioblastoma, age > 18 years and Karnofsky performance status > 70. Patients were randomized in a 1:1 ratio. The primary objective was to compare overall survival (OS) in patients receiving marizomib in addition to TMZ/RT→TMZ with patients receiving the only standard treatment in the whole population and in the subgroup of patients with MGMT promoter-unmethylated tumors.ResultsThe trial was opened at 82 institutions in Europe, Canada, and the U.S. A total of 749 patients (99.9% of the planned 750) were randomized. OS was not different between the standard and the marizomib arm (median 17 vs. 16.5 months; HR = 1.04; P = .64). PFS was not statistically different either (median 6.0 vs. 6.3 months; HR = 0.97; P = .67). In patients with MGMT promoter-unmethylated tumors, OS was also not different between standard therapy and marizomib (median 14.5 vs. 15.1 months, HR = 1.13; P = .27). More CTCAE grade 3/4 treatment-emergent adverse events were observed in the marizomib arm than in the standard arm.ConclusionsAdding marizomib to standard temozolomide-based radiochemotherapy resulted in more toxicity, but did not improve OS or PFS in patients with newly diagnosed glioblastoma.

BACKGROUND: Resection of the contrast-enhancing (CE) tumor represents the standard of care in newly diagnosed glioblastoma. However, some tumors ultimately diagnosed as glioblastoma lack contrast enhancement and have a low-grade appearance on imaging (non-CE glioblastoma). We aimed to (a) volumetrically define the value of non-CE tumor resection in the absence of contrast enhancement, and to (b) delineate outcome differences between glioblastoma patients with and without contrast enhancement. METHODS: The RANO resect group retrospectively compiled a global, eight-center cohort of patients with newly diagnosed glioblastoma per WHO 2021 classification. The associations between postoperative tumor volumes and outcome were analyzed. Propensity score-matched analyses were constructed to compare glioblastomas with and without contrast enhancement. RESULTS: Among 1323 newly diagnosed IDH-wildtype glioblastomas, we identified 98 patients (7.4%) without contrast enhancement. In such patients, smaller postoperative tumor volumes were associated with more favorable outcome. There was an exponential increase in risk for death with larger residual non-CE tumor. Accordingly, extensive resection was associated with improved survival compared to lesion biopsy. These findings were retained on a multivariable analysis adjusting for demographic and clinical markers. Compared to CE glioblastoma, patients with non-CE glioblastoma had a more favorable clinical profile and superior outcome as confirmed in propensity score analyses by matching the patients with non-CE glioblastoma to patients with CE glioblastoma using a large set of clinical variables. CONCLUSIONS: The absence of contrast enhancement characterizes a less aggressive clinical phenotype of IDH-wildtype glioblastomas. Maximal resection of non-CE tumors has prognostic implications and translates into favorable outcome.

Surgical resection represents the standard of care for people with newly diagnosed diffuse gliomas, and the neuropathological and molecular profile of the resected tissue guides clinical management and forms the basis for research. The Response Assessment in Neuro-Oncology (RANO) consortium is an international, multidisciplinary effort that aims to standardise research practice in neuro-oncology. These recommendations represent a multidisciplinary consensus from the four RANO groups: RANO resect, RANO recurrent glioblastoma, RANO radiotherapy, and RANO/PET for a standardised workflow to achieve a representative tumour evaluation in a disease characterised by intratumoural heterogeneity, including recommendations on which tumour regions should be surgically sampled, how to define those regions on the basis of preoperative imaging, and the optimal sample volume. Practical recommendations for tissue sampling are given for people with low-grade and high-grade gliomas, as well as for people with newly diagnosed and recurrent disease. Sampling of liquid biopsies is also addressed. A standardised workflow for subsequent handling of the resected tissue is proposed to avoid information loss due to decreasing tissue quality or insufficient clinical information. The recommendations offer a framework for prospective biobanking studies.

BACKGROUND: The value of re-resection in recurrent glioblastoma remains controversial as a randomized trial that specifies intentional incomplete resection cannot be justified ethically. Here, we aimed to (1) explore the prognostic role of extent of re-resection using the previously proposed Response Assessment in Neuro-Oncology (RANO) classification (based upon residual contrast-enhancing (CE) and non-CE tumor), and to (2) define factors consolidating the surgical effects on outcome. METHODS: The RANO resect group retrospectively compiled an 8-center cohort of patients with first recurrence from previously resected glioblastomas. The associations of re-resection and other clinical factors with outcome were analyzed. Propensity score-matched analyses were constructed to minimize confounding effects when comparing the different RANO classes. RESULTS: We studied 681 patients with first recurrence of Isocitrate Dehydrogenase (IDH) wild-type glioblastomas, including 310 patients who underwent re-resection. Re-resection was associated with prolonged survival even when stratifying for molecular and clinical confounders on multivariate analysis; ≤1 cm3 residual CE tumor was associated with longer survival than non-surgical management. Accordingly, maximal resection (class 2) had superior survival compared to submaximal resection (class 3). Administration of (radio-)chemotherapy in the absence of postoperative deficits augmented the survival associations of smaller residual CE tumors. Conversely, supramaximal resection of non-CE tumor (class 1) was not associated with prolonged survival but was frequently accompanied by postoperative deficits. The prognostic role of residual CE tumor was confirmed in propensity score analyses. CONCLUSIONS: The RANO resect classification serves to stratify patients with re-resection of glioblastoma. Complete resection according to RANO resect classes 1 and 2 is prognostic.

Central nervous system (CNS) tumor patients commonly undergo multimodality treatment in the course of their disease. Adverse effects and complications from these interventions have not been systematically studied, but pose significant challenges in clinical practice and impact function and quality of life, especially in the management of long-term brain tumor survivors. Here, the European Association of Neuro-Oncology (EANO) has developed recommendations to prevent, diagnose, and manage adverse effects and complications in the adult primary brain CNS tumor (except lymphomas) patient population with a specific focus on surgery, radiotherapy, and pharmacotherapy. Specifically, we also provide recommendations for dose adaptations, interruptions, and reexposure for pharmacotherapy that may serve as a reference for the management of standard of care in clinical trials. We also summarize which interventions are unnecessary, inactive or contraindicated. This consensus paper should serve as a reference for the conduct of standard therapy within and outside of clinical trials.

Durable objective response rate (ORR) remains a meaningful endpoint in recurrent cancer; however, the target ORR for single-arm recurrent glioblastoma trials has not been based on historic information or tied to patient outcomes. The current study reviewed 68 treatment arms comprising 4793 patients in past trials in recurrent glioblastoma in order to judiciously define target ORRs for use in recurrent glioblastoma trials. ORR was estimated at 6.1% [95% CI 4.23; 8.76%] for cytotoxic chemothera + pies (ORR = 7.59% for lomustine, 7.57% for temozolomide, 0.64% for irinotecan, and 5.32% for other agents), 3.37% for biologic agents, 7.97% for (select) immunotherapies, and 26.8% for anti-angiogenic agents. ORRs were significantly correlated with median overall survival (mOS) across chemotherapy (R2= 0.4078, P < .0001), biologics (R2= 0.4003, P = .0003), and immunotherapy trials (R2= 0.8994, P < .0001), but not anti-angiogenic agents (R2= 0, P = .8937). Pooling data from chemotherapy, biologics, and immunotherapy trials, a meta-analysis indicated a strong correlation between ORR and mOS (R2= 0.3900, P < .0001; mOS [weeks] = 1.4xORR + 24.8). Assuming an ineffective cytotoxic (control) therapy has ORR = 7.6%, the average ORR for lomustine and temozolomide trials, a sample size of ≥40 patients with target ORR>25% is needed to demonstrate statistical significance compared to control with a high level of confidence (P < .01) and adequate power (>80%). Given this historic data and potential biases in patient selection, we recommend that well-controlled, single-arm phase II studies in recurrent glioblastoma should have a target ORR >25% (which translates to a median OS of approximately 15 months) and a sample size of ≥40 patients, in order to convincingly demonstrate antitumor activity. Crucially, this response needs to have sufficient durability, which was not addressed in the current study.

Genetic alterations help predict the clinical behavior of diffuse gliomas, but some variability remains uncorrelated. Here, we demonstrate that haploinsufficient deletions of chromatin-bound tumor suppressor NFKB inhibitor alpha (NFKBIA) display distinct patterns of occurrence in relation to other genetic markers and are disproportionately present at recurrence. NFKBIA haploinsufficiency is associated with unfavorable patient outcomes, independent of genetic and clinicopathologic predictors. NFKBIA deletions reshape the DNA and histone methylome antipodal to the IDH mutation and induce a transcriptome landscape partly reminiscent of H3K27M mutant pediatric gliomas. In IDH mutant gliomas, NFKBIA deletions are common in tumors with a clinical course similar to that of IDH wild-type tumors. An externally validated nomogram model for estimating individual patient survival in IDH mutant gliomas confirms that NFKBIA deletions predict comparatively brief survival. Thus, NFKBIA haploinsufficiency aligns with distinct epigenome changes, portends a poor prognosis, and should be incorporated into models predicting the disease fate of diffuse gliomas.

BackgroundTerminology to describe extent of resection in glioblastoma is inconsistent across clinical trials. A surgical classification system was previously proposed based upon residual contrast-enhancing (CE) tumor. We aimed to (1) explore the prognostic utility of the classification system and (2) define how much removed non-CE tumor translates into a survival benefit.MethodsThe international RANO resect group retrospectively searched previously compiled databases from 7 neuro-oncological centers in the USA and Europe for patients with newly diagnosed glioblastoma per WHO 2021 classification. Clinical and volumetric information from pre- and postoperative MRI were collected.ResultsWe collected 1,008 patients with newly diagnosed IDHwt glioblastoma. 744 IDHwt glioblastomas were treated with radiochemotherapy per EORTC-26981/22981 (TMZ/RT→TMZ) following surgery. Among these homogenously treated patients, lower absolute residual tumor volumes (in cm3) were favorably associated with outcome: patients with "maximal CE resection" (class 2) had superior outcome compared to patients with "submaximal CE resection" (class 3) or "biopsy" (class 4). Extensive resection of non-CE tumor (≤5 cm3 residual non-CE tumor) was associated with better survival among patients with complete CE resection, thus defining class 1 ("supramaximal CE resection"). The prognostic value of the resection classes was retained on multivariate analysis when adjusting for molecular and clinical markers.ConclusionsThe proposed "RANO categories for extent of resection in glioblastoma" are highly prognostic and may serve for stratification within clinical trials. Removal of non-CE tumor beyond the CE tumor borders may translate into additional survival benefit, providing a rationale to explicitly denominate such "supramaximal CE resection."

BackgroundTo assess whether artificial intelligence (AI)-based decision support allows more reproducible and standardized assessment of treatment response on MRI in neuro-oncology as compared to manual 2-dimensional measurements of tumor burden using the Response Assessment in Neuro-Oncology (RANO) criteria.MethodsA series of 30 patients (15 lower-grade gliomas, 15 glioblastoma) with availability of consecutive MRI scans was selected. The time to progression (TTP) on MRI was separately evaluated for each patient by 15 investigators over two rounds. In the first round the TTP was evaluated based on the RANO criteria, whereas in the second round the TTP was evaluated by incorporating additional information from AI-enhanced MRI sequences depicting the longitudinal changes in tumor volumes. The agreement of the TTP measurements between investigators was evaluated using concordance correlation coefficients (CCC) with confidence intervals (CI) and P-values obtained using bootstrap resampling.ResultsThe CCC of TTP-measurements between investigators was 0.77 (95% CI = 0.69,0.88) with RANO alone and increased to 0.91 (95% CI = 0.82,0.95) with AI-based decision support (P = .005). This effect was significantly greater (P = .008) for patients with lower-grade gliomas (CCC = 0.70 [95% CI = 0.56,0.85] without vs. 0.90 [95% CI = 0.76,0.95] with AI-based decision support) as compared to glioblastoma (CCC = 0.83 [95% CI = 0.75,0.92] without vs. 0.86 [95% CI = 0.78,0.93] with AI-based decision support). Investigators with less years of experience judged the AI-based decision as more helpful (P = .02).ConclusionsAI-based decision support has the potential to yield more reproducible and standardized assessment of treatment response in neuro-oncology as compared to manual 2-dimensional measurements of tumor burden, particularly in patients with lower-grade gliomas. A fully-functional version of this AI-based processing pipeline is provided as open-source (https://github.com/NeuroAI-HD/HD-GLIO-XNAT).

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.

Glioblastoma (GBM) is characterized by extensive cellular and genetic heterogeneity. Its initial presentation as primary disease (pGBM) has been subject to exhaustive molecular and cellular profiling. By contrast, our understanding of how GBM evolves to evade the selective pressure of therapy is starkly limited. The proteomic landscape of recurrent GBM (rGBM), which is refractory to most treatments used for pGBM, are poorly known. We, therefore, quantified the transcriptome and proteome of 134 patient-derived pGBM and rGBM samples, including 40 matched pGBM-rGBM pairs. GBM subtypes transition from pGBM to rGBM towards a preferentially mesenchymal state at recurrence, consistent with the increasingly invasive nature of rGBM. We identified immune regulatory/suppressive genes as important drivers of rGBM and in particular 2-5-oligoadenylate synthase 2 (OAS2) as an essential gene in recurrent disease. Our data identify a new class of therapeutic targets that emerge from the adaptive response of pGBM to therapy, emerging specifically in recurrent disease and may provide new therapeutic opportunities absent at pGBM diagnosis.

Many studies in patients with brain tumors evaluating innovative PET tracers have been published in recent years, and the initial results are promising. Here, the Response Assessment in Neuro-Oncology (RANO) PET working group provides an overview of the literature on novel investigational PET tracers for brain tumor patients. Furthermore, newer indications of more established PET tracers for the evaluation of glucose metabolism, amino acid transport, hypoxia, cell proliferation, and others are also discussed. Based on the preliminary findings, these novel investigational PET tracers should be further evaluated considering their promising potential. In particular, novel PET probes for imaging of translocator protein and somatostatin receptor overexpression as well as for immune system reactions appear to be of additional clinical value for tumor delineation and therapy monitoring. Progress in developing these radiotracers may contribute to improving brain tumor diagnostics and advancing clinical translational research.

BackgroundNearly all patients with newly diagnosed glioblastoma experience recurrence following standard-of-care radiotherapy (RT) + temozolomide (TMZ). The purpose of the phase III randomized CheckMate 548 study was to evaluate RT + TMZ combined with the immune checkpoint inhibitor nivolumab (NIVO) or placebo (PBO) in patients with newly diagnosed glioblastoma with methylated MGMT promoter (NCT02667587).MethodsPatients (N = 716) were randomized 1:1 to NIVO [(240 mg every 2 weeks × 8, then 480 mg every 4 weeks) + RT (60 Gy over 6 weeks) + TMZ (75 mg/m2 once daily during RT, then 150-200 mg/m2 once daily on days 1-5 of every 28-day cycle × 6)] or PBO + RT + TMZ following the same regimen. The primary endpoints were progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) in patients without baseline corticosteroids and in all randomized patients.ResultsAs of December 22, 2020, median (m)PFS (blinded independent central review) was 10.6 months (95% CI, 8.9-11.8) with NIVO + RT + TMZ vs 10.3 months (95% CI, 9.7-12.5) with PBO + RT + TMZ (HR, 1.1; 95% CI, 0.9-1.3) and mOS was 28.9 months (95% CI, 24.4-31.6) vs 32.1 months (95% CI, 29.4-33.8), respectively (HR, 1.1; 95% CI, 0.9-1.3). In patients without baseline corticosteroids, mOS was 31.3 months (95% CI, 28.6-34.8) with NIVO + RT + TMZ vs 33.0 months (95% CI, 31.0-35.1) with PBO + RT + TMZ (HR, 1.1; 95% CI, 0.9-1.4). Grade 3/4 treatment-related adverse event rates were 52.4% vs 33.6%, respectively.ConclusionsNIVO added to RT + TMZ did not improve survival in patients with newly diagnosed glioblastoma with methylated or indeterminate MGMT promoter. No new safety signals were observed.

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.

Core Outcome Sets (COS) define minimum outcomes to be measured and reported in clinical effectiveness trials for a particular health condition/health area. Despite recognition as critical to clinical research design for other health areas, none have been developed for neuro-oncology. COS development projects should carefully consider: scope (how the COS should be used), stakeholders involved in development (including patients as both research partners and participants), and consensus methodologies used (typically a Delphi survey and consensus meeting), as well as dissemination plans. Developing COS for neuro-oncology is potentially challenging due to extensive tumor subclassification (including molecular stratification), different symptoms related to anatomical tumor location, and variation in treatment options. Development of a COS specific to tumor subtype, in a specific location, for a particular intervention may be too narrow and would be unlikely to be used. Equally, a COS that is applicable across a wider area of neuro-oncology may be too broad and therefore lack specificity. This review describes why and how a COS may be developed, and discusses challenges for their development, specific to neuro-oncology. The COS under development are briefly described, including: adult glioma, incidental/untreated meningioma, meningioma requiring intervention, and adverse events from surgical intervention for pediatric brain tumors.

The factors driving therapy resistance in diffuse glioma remain poorly understood. To identify treatment-associated cellular and genetic changes, we analyzed RNA and/or DNA sequencing data from the temporally separated tumor pairs of 304 adult patients with isocitrate dehydrogenase (IDH)-wild-type and IDH-mutant glioma. Tumors recurred in distinct manners that were dependent on IDH mutation status and attributable to changes in histological feature composition, somatic alterations, and microenvironment interactions. Hypermutation and acquired CDKN2A deletions were associated with an increase in proliferating neoplastic cells at recurrence in both glioma subtypes, reflecting active tumor growth. IDH-wild-type tumors were more invasive at recurrence, and their neoplastic cells exhibited increased expression of neuronal signaling programs that reflected a possible role for neuronal interactions in promoting glioma progression. Mesenchymal transition was associated with the presence of a myeloid cell state defined by specific ligand-receptor interactions with neoplastic cells. Collectively, these recurrence-associated phenotypes represent potential targets to alter disease progression.

BackgroundThere is an extensive literature highlighting the utility of blood-based liquid biopsies in several extracranial tumors for diagnosis and monitoring.MethodsThe RANO (Response Assessment in Neuro-Oncology) group developed a multidisciplinary international Task Force to review the English literature on liquid biopsy in gliomas focusing on the most frequently used techniques, that is circulating tumor DNA, circulating tumor cells, and extracellular vesicles in blood and CSF.ResultsctDNA has a higher sensitivity and capacity to represent the spatial and temporal heterogeneity in comparison to circulating tumor cells. Exosomes have the advantages to cross an intact blood-brain barrier and carry also RNA, miRNA, and proteins. Several clinical applications of liquid biopsies are suggested: to establish a diagnosis when tissue is not available, monitor the residual disease after surgery, distinguish progression from pseudoprogression, and predict the outcome.ConclusionsThere is a need for standardization of biofluid collection, choice of an analyte, and detection strategies along with rigorous testing in future clinical trials to validate findings and enable entry into clinical practice.

IntroductionMeningioma is the most common primary intracranial tumour in adults. The majority are non-malignant, but a proportion behave more aggressively. Incidental/minimally symptomatic meningioma are often managed by serial imaging. Symptomatic meningioma, those that threaten neurovascular structures, or demonstrate radiological growth, are usually resected as first-line management strategy. For patients in poor clinical condition, or with inoperable, residual or recurrent disease, radiotherapy is often used as primary or adjuvant treatment. Effective pharmacotherapy treatments do not currently exist. There is heterogeneity in the outcomes measured and reported in meningioma clinical studies. Two 'Core Outcome Sets' (COS) will be developed: (COSMIC: Intervention) for use in meningioma clinical effectiveness trials and (COSMIC: Observation) for use in clinical studies of incidental/untreated meningioma.Methods and analysisTwo systematic literature reviews and trial registry searches will identify outcomes measured and reported in published and ongoing (1) meningioma clinical effectiveness trials, and (2) clinical studies of incidental/untreated meningioma. Outcomes include those that are clinician reported, patient reported, caregiver reported and based on objective tests (eg, neurocognitive tests), as well as measures of progression and survival. Outcomes will be deduplicated and categorised to generate two long lists. The two long lists will be prioritised through two, two-round, international, modified eDelphi surveys including patients with meningioma, healthcare professionals, researchers and those in caring/supporting roles. The two final COS will be ratified through two 1-day online consensus meetings, with representation from all stakeholder groups.Ethics and disseminationInstitutional review board (University of Liverpool) approval was obtained for the conduct of this study. Participant eConsent will be obtained prior to participation in the eDelphi surveys and consensus meetings. The two systematic literature reviews and two final COS will be published and freely available.Trial registration numberCOMET study ID 1508.

Immunotherapy has revolutionized treatment for many hard-to-treat cancers but has yet to produce significant improvement in outcomes for patients with glioblastoma. This reflects the multiple and unique mechanisms of immune evasion and escape in this highly heterogeneous tumor. Glioblastoma engenders profound local and systemic immunosuppression and is remarkably effective at inducing T-cell dysfunction, posing a challenge to any immunotherapy-based approach. To overcome these mechanisms, multiple disparate modes of immune-oriented therapy will be required. However, designing trials that can evaluate these combinatorial approaches requires careful consideration. In this review, we explore the immunotherapy resistance mechanisms that have been encountered to date and how combinatorial approaches may address these. We also describe the unique aspects of trial design in both preclinical and clinical settings and consider endpoints and markers of response best suited for an intervention involving multiple agents.

Therapeutic advances for glioblastoma have been minimal over the past 2 decades. In light of the multitude of recent phase III trials that have failed to meet their primary endpoints following promising preclinical and early-phase programs, a Society for Neuro-Oncology Think Tank was held in November 2020 to prioritize areas for improvement in the conduct of glioblastoma clinical trials. Here, we review the literature, identify challenges related to clinical trial eligibility criteria and trial design in glioblastoma, and provide recommendations from the Think Tank. In addition, we provide a data-driven context with which to frame this discussion by analyzing key study design features of adult glioblastoma clinical trials listed on ClinicalTrials.gov as "recruiting" or "not yet recruiting" as of February 2021.