Search

Immune-mediated anti-tumoral responses, elicited by oncolytic viruses and augmented with checkpoint inhibition, may be an effective treatment approach for glioblastoma. Here in this multicenter phase 1/2 study we evaluated the combination of intratumoral delivery of oncolytic virus DNX-2401 followed by intravenous anti-PD-1 antibody pembrolizumab in recurrent glioblastoma, first in a dose-escalation and then in a dose-expansion phase, in 49 patients. The primary endpoints were overall safety and objective response rate. The primary safety endpoint was met, whereas the primary efficacy endpoint was not met. There were no dose-limiting toxicities, and full dose combined treatment was well tolerated. The objective response rate was 10.4% (90% confidence interval (CI) 4.2-20.7%), which was not statistically greater than the prespecified control rate of 5%. The secondary endpoint of overall survival at 12 months was 52.7% (95% CI 40.1-69.2%), which was statistically greater than the prespecified control rate of 20%. Median overall survival was 12.5 months (10.7-13.5 months). Objective responses led to longer survival (hazard ratio 0.20, 95% CI 0.05-0.87). A total of 56.2% (95% CI 41.1-70.5%) of patients had a clinical benefit defined as stable disease or better. Three patients completed treatment with durable responses and remain alive at 45, 48 and 60 months. Exploratory mutational, gene-expression and immunophenotypic analyses revealed that the balance between immune cell infiltration and expression of checkpoint inhibitors may potentially inform on response to treatment and mechanisms of resistance. Overall, the combination of intratumoral DNX-2401 followed by pembrolizumab was safe with notable survival benefit in select patients (ClinicalTrials.gov registration: NCT02798406).

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.

With rapid advances in our understanding of cancer, there is an expanding number of potential novel combination therapies, including novel-novel combinations. Identifying which combinations are appropriate and in which subpopulations are among the most difficult questions in medical research. We conducted a Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA)-guided systematic review of trials of novel-novel combination therapies involving immunotherapies or molecular targeted therapies in advanced solid tumors. A MEDLINE search was conducted using a modified Cochrane Highly Sensitive Search Strategy for published clinical trials between July 1, 2017, and June 30, 2020, in the top-ranked medical and oncology journals. Trials were evaluated according to a criterion adapted from previously published Food and Drug Administration guidance and other key considerations in designing trials of combinations. This included the presence of a strong biological rationale, the use of a new established or emerging predictive biomarker prospectively incorporated into the clinical trial design, appropriate comparator arms of monotherapy or supportive external data sources and a primary endpoint demonstrating a clinically meaningful benefit. Of 32 identified trials, there were 11 (34%) trials of the novel-novel combination of anti-programmed death 1 (PD-1)/programmed death ligand 1 (PD-L1) and anti-cytotoxic T lymphocyte-associated antigen-4 (CTLA-4) therapy, and 10 (31%) trials of anti-PD-1/PD-L1 and anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) combination therapy. 20 (62.5%) trials were phase II trials, while 12 (37.5%) were phase III trials. Most (72%) trials lacked significant preclinical evidence supporting the development of the combination in the given indication. A majority of trials (69%) were conducted in biomarker unselected populations or used pre-existing biomarkers within the given indication for patient selection. Most studies (66%) were considered to have appropriate comparator arms or had supportive external data sources such as prior studies of monotherapy. All studies were evaluated as selecting a clinically meaningful primary endpoint. In conclusion, designing trials to evaluate novel-novel combination therapies presents numerous challenges to demonstrate efficacy in a comprehensive manner. A greater understanding of biological rationale for combinations and incorporating predictive biomarkers may improve effective evaluation of combination therapies. Innovative statistical methods and increasing use of external data to support combination approaches are potential strategies that may improve the efficiency of trial design. Designing trials to evaluate novel-novel combination therapies presents numerous challenges to demonstrate efficacy in a comprehensive manner. A greater understanding of biological rationale for combinations and incorporating predictive biomarkers may improve effective evaluation of combination therapies. Innovative statistical methods and increasing use of external data to support combination approaches are potential strategies that may improve the efficiency of trial design.

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]

On September 14-15, 2015, a meeting of clinicians and investigators in the fields of veterinary and human neuro-oncology, clinical trials, neuropathology, and drug development was convened at the National Institutes of Health campus in Bethesda, Maryland. This meeting served as the inaugural event launching a new consortium focused on improving the knowledge, development of, and access to naturally occurring canine brain cancer, specifically glioma, as a model for human disease. Within the meeting, a SWOT (strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and threats) assessment was undertaken to critically evaluate the role that naturally occurring canine brain tumors could have in advancing this aspect of comparative oncology aimed at improving outcomes for dogs and human beings. A summary of this meeting and subsequent discussion are provided to inform the scientific and clinical community of the potential for this initiative. Canine and human comparisons represent an unprecedented opportunity to complement conventional brain tumor research paradigms, addressing a devastating disease for which innovative diagnostic and treatment strategies are clearly needed.

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]

PurposeA phase I, dose-finding study of vorinostat in combination with temozolomide (TMZ) was conducted to determine the maximum tolerated dose (MTD), safety, and pharmacokinetics in patients with high-grade glioma (HGG).Experimental designThis phase I, dose-finding, investigational study was conducted in two parts. Part 1 was a dose-escalation study of vorinostat in combination with TMZ 150 mg/m(2)/day for 5 days every 28 days. Part 2 was a dose-escalation study of vorinostat in combination with TMZ 150 mg/m(2)/day for 5 days of the first cycle and 200 mg/m(2)/day for 5 days of the subsequent 28-day cycles.ResultsIn part 1, the MTD of vorinostat administered on days 1 to 7 and 15 to 21 of every 28-day cycle, in combination with TMZ, was 500 mg daily. Dose-limiting toxicities (DLT) included grade 3 anorexia, grade 3 ALT, and grade 5 hemorrhage in the setting of grade 4 thrombocytopenia. In part 2, the MTD of vorinostat on days 1 to 7 and 15 to 21 of every 28-day cycle, combined with TMZ, was 400 mg daily. No DLTs were encountered, but vorinostat dosing could not be escalated further due to thrombocytopenia. The most common serious adverse events were fatigue, lymphopenia, thrombocytopenia, and thromboembolic events. There were no apparent pharmacokinetic interactions between vorinostat and TMZ. Vorinostat treatment resulted in hyperacetylation of histones H3 and H4 in peripheral mononuclear cells.ConclusionVorinostat in combination with temozolomide is well tolerated in patients with HGG. A phase I/II trial of vorinostat with radiotherapy and concomitant TMZ in newly diagnosed glioblastoma is underway.

We have tested the predictive value of apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) histogram analysis in stratifying progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) in bevacizumab-treated patients with recurrent glioblastoma multiforme (GBM) from the multi-center BRAIN study. Available MRI's from patients enrolled in the BRAIN study (n = 97) were examined by generating ADC histograms from areas of enhancing tumor on T1 weighted post-contrast images fitted to a two normal distribution mixture curve. ADC classifiers including the mean ADC from the lower curve (ADC-L) and the mean lower curve proportion (LCP) were tested for their ability to stratify PFS and OS by using Cox proportional hazard ratios and the Kaplan-Meier method with log-rank test. Mean ADC-L was 1,209 × 10(-6)mm(2)/s ± 224 (SD), and mean LCP was 0.71 ± 0.23 (SD). Low ADC-L was associated with worse outcome. The hazard ratios for 6-month PFS, overall PFS, and OS in patients with less versus greater than mean ADC-L were 3.1 (95 % confidence interval: 1.6, 6.1; P = 0.001), 2.3 (95 % CI: 1.3, 4.0; P = 0.002), and 2.4 (95 % CI: 1.4, 4.2; P = 0.002), respectively. In patients with ADC-L 0.71 versus ADC-L >1,209 and LCP