-
Neurology India 2022Seizures often herald the clinical appearance of glioma. Temozolomide (TMZ) is the first-line chemotherapeutic agent that has been used to treat glioma. (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Seizures often herald the clinical appearance of glioma. Temozolomide (TMZ) is the first-line chemotherapeutic agent that has been used to treat glioma.
OBJECTIVE
We conducted a systematic review to determine seizure outcomes in glioma patients treated with TMZ.
METHODS AND MATERIAL
We searched EMBASE and PubMed databases (January 1, 2003-August 26, 2021) by using search terms closely related to glioma, seizure, and temozolomide. Titles, abstracts, and full texts were screened and selected using previously established inclusion and exclusion criteria. The research team members reviewed potential articles and reached a consensus on the final articles to be included.
RESULTS
Nine studies containing data from three continents met our inclusion criteria. From several descriptive studies on low-grade gliomas (LGGs), the percentage of patients with partial seizure control after TMZ treatment ranged from 29% to 89.7%, and the percentage of patients with complete seizure control after TMZ ranged from 19.4% to 72%. In a retrospective cohort study of patients with LGGs, there was a marked difference in decreased seizure frequency between patients receiving TMZ and those who did not receive TMZ. In a randomized trial, TMZ seemed to have little effect on seizure control in elderly patients with glioblastoma.
CONCLUSIONS
At present, there are few high-quality and well-designed clinical studies on TMZ for gliomas-related seizures. In terms of the literature included in this review, TMZ has an inhibitory effect on epilepsy. More randomized controlled trials are needed to elucidate the clinical benefits of TMZ in the treatment of gliomas-related seizures.
Topics: Aged; Antineoplastic Agents, Alkylating; Brain Neoplasms; Glioma; Humans; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Retrospective Studies; Seizures; Temozolomide
PubMed: 35864610
DOI: 10.4103/0028-3886.349588 -
Frontiers in Oncology 2022Multiple treatments of unresectable advanced or metastatic melanoma have been licensed in the adjuvant setting, causing tremendous interest in developing neoadjuvant...
Multiple treatments of unresectable advanced or metastatic melanoma have been licensed in the adjuvant setting, causing tremendous interest in developing neoadjuvant strategies for melanoma. Eligible studies included those that compared overall survival/progression-free survival/grade 3 or 4 adverse events in patients with unresectable advanced or metastatic melanoma. Seven eligible randomized trials with nine publications were included in this study. Direct and network meta-analysis consistently indicated that nivolumab+ipilimumab, nivolumab, and trametinib could significantly improve overall survival and progression-free survival compared to ipilimumab in advanced melanoma patients. Compared to ipilimumab, nivolumab, dacarbazine, and ipilimumab+gp100 had a reduced risk of grade 3/4 adverse reactions. The nivolumab+ipilimumab combination had the highest risk of adverse events, followed by ipilimumab+dacarbazine and trametinib. Combination therapy was more beneficial to improve overall survival and progression-free survival than monotherapy in advanced melanoma treatment, albeit at the cost of increased toxicity. Regarding the overall survival/progression-free survival, ipilimumab+gp100 ranked below ipilimumab+dacarbazine and nivolumab+ipilimumab, although it had a smaller rate of grade 3 or 4 AEs than other treatments (except nivolumab). Nivolumab is the optimum adjuvant treatment for unresectable advanced or metastatic melanoma with a good risk-benefit profile. In order to choose the best therapy, clinicians must consider the efficacy, adverse events, and physical status.
PubMed: 35785213
DOI: 10.3389/fonc.2022.926242 -
BMC Cancer Nov 2021Malignant glioma cell line models are integral to pre-clinical testing of novel potential therapies. Accurate prediction of likely efficacy in the clinic requires that...
BACKGROUND
Malignant glioma cell line models are integral to pre-clinical testing of novel potential therapies. Accurate prediction of likely efficacy in the clinic requires that these models are reliable and consistent. We assessed this by examining the reporting of experimental conditions and sensitivity to temozolomide in glioma cells lines.
METHODS
We searched Medline and Embase (Jan 1994-Jan 2021) for studies evaluating the effect of temozolomide monotherapy on cell viability of at least one malignant glioma cell line. Key data items included type of cell lines, temozolomide exposure duration in hours (hr), and cell viability measure (IC).
RESULTS
We included 212 studies from 2789 non-duplicate records that reported 248 distinct cell lines. The commonest cell line was U87 (60.4%). Only 10.4% studies used a patient-derived cell line. The proportion of studies not reporting each experimental condition ranged from 8.0-27.4%, including base medium (8.0%), serum supplementation (9.9%) and number of replicates (27.4%). In studies reporting IC, the median value for U87 at 24 h, 48 h and 72 h was 123.9 μM (IQR 75.3-277.7 μM), 223.1 μM (IQR 92.0-590.1 μM) and 230.0 μM (IQR 34.1-650.0 μM), respectively. The median IC at 72 h for patient-derived cell lines was 220 μM (IQR 81.1-800.0 μM).
CONCLUSION
Temozolomide sensitivity reported in comparable studies was not consistent between or within malignant glioma cell lines. Drug discovery science performed on these models cannot reliably inform clinical translation. A consensus model of reporting can maximise reproducibility and consistency among in vitro studies.
Topics: Animals; Antineoplastic Agents, Alkylating; Bias; Brain Neoplasms; Cell Line, Tumor; Cell Survival; Glioma; Humans; In Vitro Techniques; Mice; Temozolomide
PubMed: 34794398
DOI: 10.1186/s12885-021-08972-5 -
Neuro-oncology Sep 2021The DNA repair protein O6-methylguanine-DNA methyltransferase (MGMT) causes resistance of tumor cells to alkylating agents. It is a predictive biomarker in high-grade... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
MGMT promoter methylation testing to predict overall survival in people with glioblastoma treated with temozolomide: a comprehensive meta-analysis based on a Cochrane Systematic Review.
BACKGROUND
The DNA repair protein O6-methylguanine-DNA methyltransferase (MGMT) causes resistance of tumor cells to alkylating agents. It is a predictive biomarker in high-grade gliomas treated with temozolomide, however, there is no consensus on which test method, methylation sites, and cutoff values to use.
METHODS
We performed a Cochrane Review to examine studies using different techniques to measure MGMT and predict survival in glioblastoma patients treated with temozolomide. Eligible longitudinal studies included (i) adults with glioblastoma treated with temozolomide with or without radiotherapy, or surgery; (ii) where MGMT status was determined in tumor tissue, and assessed by 1 or more technique; and (iii) where overall survival was an outcome parameter, with sufficient information to estimate hazard ratios (HRs). Two or more methods were compared in 32 independent cohorts with 3474 patients.
RESULTS
Methylation-specific PCR (MSP) and pyrosequencing (PSQ) techniques were more prognostic than immunohistochemistry for MGMT protein, and PSQ is a slightly better predictor than MSP.
CONCLUSIONS
We cannot draw strong conclusions about use of frozen tissue vs formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded in MSP and PSQ. Also, our meta-analysis does not provide strong evidence about the best CpG sites or threshold. MSP has been studied mainly for CpG sites 76-80 and 84-87 and PSQ at CpG sites ranging from 72 to 95. A cutoff threshold of 9% for CpG sites 74-78 performed better than higher thresholds of 28% or 29% in 2 of the 3 good-quality studies. About 190 studies were identified presenting HRs from survival analysis in patients in which MGMT methylation was measured by 1 technique only.
Topics: Antineoplastic Agents, Alkylating; Brain Neoplasms; DNA Methylation; DNA Modification Methylases; DNA Repair Enzymes; Glioblastoma; Glioma; Humans; Methylation; Promoter Regions, Genetic; Temozolomide; Tumor Suppressor Proteins
PubMed: 34467991
DOI: 10.1093/neuonc/noab105 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Mar 2021Glioblastoma is an aggressive form of brain cancer. Approximately five in 100 people with glioblastoma survive for five years past diagnosis. Glioblastomas that have a... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
Prognostic value of test(s) for O6-methylguanine-DNA methyltransferase (MGMT) promoter methylation for predicting overall survival in people with glioblastoma treated with temozolomide.
BACKGROUND
Glioblastoma is an aggressive form of brain cancer. Approximately five in 100 people with glioblastoma survive for five years past diagnosis. Glioblastomas that have a particular modification to their DNA (called methylation) in a particular region (the O-methylguanine-DNA methyltransferase (MGMT) promoter) respond better to treatment with chemotherapy using a drug called temozolomide.
OBJECTIVES
To determine which method for assessing MGMT methylation status best predicts overall survival in people diagnosed with glioblastoma who are treated with temozolomide.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched MEDLINE, Embase, BIOSIS, Web of Science Conference Proceedings Citation Index to December 2018, and examined reference lists. For economic evaluation studies, we additionally searched NHS Economic Evaluation Database (EED) up to December 2014.
SELECTION CRITERIA
Eligible studies were longitudinal (cohort) studies of adults with diagnosed glioblastoma treated with temozolomide with/without radiotherapy/surgery. Studies had to have related MGMT status in tumour tissue (assessed by one or more method) with overall survival and presented results as hazard ratios or with sufficient information (e.g. Kaplan-Meier curves) for us to estimate hazard ratios. We focused mainly on studies comparing two or more methods, and listed brief details of articles that examined a single method of measuring MGMT promoter methylation. We also sought economic evaluations conducted alongside trials, modelling studies and cost analysis.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Two review authors independently undertook all steps of the identification and data extraction process for multiple-method studies. We assessed risk of bias and applicability using our own modified and extended version of the QUality In Prognosis Studies (QUIPS) tool. We compared different techniques, exact promoter regions (5'-cytosine-phosphate-guanine-3' (CpG) sites) and thresholds for interpretation within studies by examining hazard ratios. We performed meta-analyses for comparisons of the three most commonly examined methods (immunohistochemistry (IHC), methylation-specific polymerase chain reaction (MSP) and pyrosequencing (PSQ)), with ratios of hazard ratios (RHR), using an imputed value of the correlation between results based on the same individuals.
MAIN RESULTS
We included 32 independent cohorts involving 3474 people that compared two or more methods. We found evidence that MSP (CpG sites 76 to 80 and 84 to 87) is more prognostic than IHC for MGMT protein at varying thresholds (RHR 1.31, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.01 to 1.71). We also found evidence that PSQ is more prognostic than IHC for MGMT protein at various thresholds (RHR 1.36, 95% CI 1.01 to 1.84). The data suggest that PSQ (mainly at CpG sites 74 to 78, using various thresholds) is slightly more prognostic than MSP at sites 76 to 80 and 84 to 87 (RHR 1.14, 95% CI 0.87 to 1.48). Many variants of PSQ have been compared, although we did not see any strong and consistent messages from the results. Targeting multiple CpG sites is likely to be more prognostic than targeting just one. In addition, we identified and summarised 190 articles describing a single method for measuring MGMT promoter methylation status.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
PSQ and MSP appear more prognostic for overall survival than IHC. Strong evidence is not available to draw conclusions with confidence about the best CpG sites or thresholds for quantitative methods. MSP has been studied mainly for CpG sites 76 to 80 and 84 to 87 and PSQ at CpG sites ranging from 72 to 95. A threshold of 9% for CpG sites 74 to 78 performed better than higher thresholds of 28% or 29% in two of three good-quality studies making such comparisons.
Topics: Adult; Antineoplastic Agents, Alkylating; Bias; Brain Neoplasms; Cohort Studies; CpG Islands; DNA Methylation; DNA Modification Methylases; DNA Repair Enzymes; Glioblastoma; High-Throughput Nucleotide Sequencing; Humans; Immunohistochemistry; Polymerase Chain Reaction; Predictive Value of Tests; Prognosis; Promoter Regions, Genetic; Temozolomide; Tumor Suppressor Proteins
PubMed: 33710615
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD013316.pub2 -
Clinical & Translational Oncology :... Jun 2021Considering the increased cancer patient survivorship, the focus is now on addressing the impacts of treatment on quality of life. In young people, altered reproductive...
PURPOSE
Considering the increased cancer patient survivorship, the focus is now on addressing the impacts of treatment on quality of life. In young people, altered reproductive function is a major issue and its effects in young males are largely neglected by novel research. To improve clinician awareness, we systematically reviewed side effects of chemotherapy for Hodgkin lymphoma (HL) in young males.
METHODS
The review was prospectively registered (PROSPERO N. CRD42019122868). Three databases (Medline via PUBMED, SCOPUS, and Cochrane Library) were searched for studies featuring males aged 13-51-years who underwent chemotherapy for HL using ABVD (Adriamycin® (doxorubicin), bleomycin, vinblastine, and dacarbazine) or BEACOPP (bleomycin, etoposide, doxorubicin, cyclophosphamide, vincristine, procarbazine, and prednisolone) regimens. These chemotherapy regimens were compared against each other using sperm characteristics, FSH, and inhibin B levels to measure fertility levels.
RESULTS
Data were extracted from five studies featuring 1344 patients. 6 months post-ABVD saw marked deterioration in sperm count, further reduced by more cycles (P = 0.05). Patients treated with BEACOPP rather than ABVD were more prone to oligospermia. Receiving fewer cycles of both regimens increased the likelihood of sperm production recovering. Patients treated with 6-8 cycles of BEACOPP did not recover spermiogenesis.
CONCLUSIONS
ABVD and BEACOPP regimens significantly reduce fertility function to varying effects depending on treatment duration. ABVD temporarily causes significant reductions in male fertility, whereas BEACOPP's effects are more permanent. Therefore, clinicians should discuss fertility preservation with male patients receiving infertility-inducing gonadotoxic therapy. Further high-quality studies are required to more adequality describe the risk to fertility by chemotherapy.
Topics: Antineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy Protocols; Bleomycin; Cyclophosphamide; Dacarbazine; Doxorubicin; Etoposide; Fertility; Hodgkin Disease; Humans; Infertility, Male; Male; Prednisone; Procarbazine; Vinblastine; Vincristine
PubMed: 32944834
DOI: 10.1007/s12094-020-02483-8 -
Scientific Reports Jul 2020Translation of survival benefits observed in glioblastoma clinical trials to populations and to longer-term survival remains uncertain. We aimed to assess if... (Comparative Study)
Comparative Study Meta-Analysis
Translation of survival benefits observed in glioblastoma clinical trials to populations and to longer-term survival remains uncertain. We aimed to assess if ≥ 2-year survival has changed in relation to the trial of radiotherapy plus concomitant and adjuvant temozolomide published in 2005. We searched MEDLINE and Embase for population-based studies with ≥ 50 patients published after 2002 reporting survival at ≥ 2 years following glioblastoma diagnosis. Primary endpoints were survival at 2-, 3- and 5-years stratified by recruitment period. We meta-analysed survival estimates using a random effects model stratified according to whether recruitment ended before 2005 (earlier) or started during or after 2005 (later). PROSPERO registration number CRD42019130035. Twenty-three populations from 63 potentially eligible studies contributed to the meta-analyses. Pooled 2-year overall survival estimates for the earlier and later study periods were 9% (95% confidence interval [CI] 6-12%; n/N = 1,488/17,507) and 18% (95% CI 14-22%; n/N = 5,670/32,390), respectively. Similarly, pooled 3-year survival estimates increased from 4% (95% CI 2-6%; n/N = 325/10,556) to 11% (95% CI 9-14%; n/N = 1900/16,397). One study with a within-population comparison showed similar improvement in survival among the older population. Pooled 5-year survival estimates were 3% (95% CI 1-5%; n/N = 401/14,919) and 4% (95% CI 2-5%; n/N = 1,291/28,748) for the earlier and later periods, respectively. Meta-analyses of real-world data suggested a doubling of 2- and 3-year survival in glioblastoma patients since 2005. However, 5-year survival remains poor with no apparent improvement. Detailed clinically annotated population-based data and further molecular characterization of longer-term survivors may explain the unchanged survival beyond 5 years.
Topics: Brain Neoplasms; Cancer Survivors; Chemotherapy, Adjuvant; Disease-Free Survival; Glioblastoma; Humans; Risk; Temozolomide; Time Factors; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 32669604
DOI: 10.1038/s41598-020-68011-4 -
JAMA Network Open Mar 2020Since 2011, immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) have been effective treatment options for advanced melanoma. Little is known about how risks of immune-related adverse... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
IMPORTANCE
Since 2011, immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) have been effective treatment options for advanced melanoma. Little is known about how risks of immune-related adverse events (irAEs) vary by ICIs.
OBJECTIVE
To compare the risk of irAEs across different treatment regimens for advanced melanoma using network meta-analysis.
DATA SOURCES
PubMed/MEDLINE, Embase, Web of Science, and Scopus were searched for all randomized clinical trial (RCT) articles published from January 1, 2010, through June 30, 2019.
STUDY SELECTION
Studies included phases 2 and 3 RCTs in the treatment of advanced melanoma that compared ICIs (ipilimumab, nivolumab, and pembrolizumab) with chemotherapy drugs (eg, dacarbazine, carboplatin, and paclitaxel) or different ICI regimens.
DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS
Different treatment regimens were compared using bayesian network meta-analysis with Markov chain Monte Carlo simulation with noninformative prior distribution and random-effects generalized linear models.
MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES
Primary outcomes were the cumulative incidence of any irAEs (regardless of severity) and severe irAEs (grades 3-5). Based on the pooled odds ratios (ORs) and 95% credible intervals (95% CrI), the probability of being associated with the lowest irAE risks was estimated for each treatment regimen.
RESULTS
Nine RCTs with 8 different treatment regimens for advanced melanoma and involving a total of 5051 patients were included. Overall, the 3 ICI treatment regimens associated with the lowest risk of any or severe irAEs were pembrolizumab, 2 mg/kg, every 3 weeks; nivolumab, 3 mg/kg, every 2 weeks; and pembrolizumab, 10 mg/kg, every 3 weeks. Compared with ipilimumab, 10 mg/kg, every 3 weeks, only nivolumab, 3 mg/kg, every 2 weeks, was associated with a decreased risk for any irAEs (OR, 0.34; 95% CrI, 0.13-0.94). A decreased risk for severe irAEs was observed for ipilimumab, 3 mg/kg, every 3 weeks (OR, 0.35; 95% CrI, 0.14-0.74); pembrolizumab, 10 mg/kg, every 2 weeks (OR, 0.22; 95% CrI, 0.05-0.95) and 10 mg/kg every 3 weeks (OR, 0.20; 95% CrI, 0.06-0.68); and nivolumab, 3 mg/kg, every 2 weeks (OR, 0.20; 95% CrI, 0.07-0.48) compared with ipilimumab, 10 mg/kg, every 3 weeks. An increased risk for severe irAEs was associated with nivolumab, 1 mg/kg, every 3 weeks combined with ipilimumab, 3 mg/kg, every 3 weeks compared with other ICI regimens (ORs ranging from 4.09 [95% CrI, 1.73-10.99] to 7.40 [95% CrI, 1.12-49.29]) except ipilimumab, 10 mg/kg, every 3 weeks.
CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE
These findings suggest that for patients with advanced melanoma at high risk of irAEs, pembrolizumab, 2 mg/kg, every 3 weeks, nivolumab, 3 mg/kg, every 2 weeks, and pembrolizumab, 10 mg/kg, every 3 weeks may be the preferred treatment regimens (with respect to irAE risks) among the ICI regimens reported, whereas ipilimumab, 10 mg/kg, every 3 weeks alone and nivolumab, 1 mg/kg, every 3 weeks combined with ipilimumab, 3 mg/kg, every 3 weeks should be used with caution. A network analysis may be valuable for clinical decision-making when evidence from head-to-head comparisons is lacking.
Topics: Aged; Antineoplastic Agents; Antineoplastic Agents, Immunological; Drug-Related Side Effects and Adverse Reactions; Female; Humans; Male; Melanoma; Middle Aged; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Skin Neoplasms
PubMed: 32211869
DOI: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2020.1611 -
Medicine Nov 2019Glioblastoma (GB) is one of the most common malignancies with limited standard therapies such as surgery, radiotherapy (RT) plus temozolomide (TMZ). Molecularly targeted... (Comparative Study)
Comparative Study
BACKGROUND
Glioblastoma (GB) is one of the most common malignancies with limited standard therapies such as surgery, radiotherapy (RT) plus temozolomide (TMZ). Molecularly targeted drugs have been investigated among various clinical trials and are expected to develop in the field of tumor therapy, while the efficacy remains uncertain due to limited previous results. Thus, we focus on the evaluation of molecularly targeted drugs to clarify its overall effectiveness in terms of treating newly diagnosed GB.
METHODS
Electronic databases were searched for eligible literatures updated to April 2018. Randomized-controlled trials were included to assess the efficacy and safety of molecularly targeted drugs in patients with newly diagnosed GB. The main outcomes were further calculated including the following parameters: PFS (progression-free survival), OS (overall survival) as well as AEs (adverse events). All data were pooled along with their 95% confidence interval using RevMan software. Sensitivity analyses and heterogeneity were evaluated quantitatively.
RESULTS
The combination of molecularly targeted drugs with TMZ + RT had no significant effects on OS (OR = 0.96, 95%CI = 0.89-1.04, P = .36). Meanwhile, the combination regimen significantly improved the PFS of patients with newly diagnosed GB (OR = 0.86 ,95% CI 0.75-0.98, P = .02). The rate of AEs (OR = 1.68,95%CI = 1.44-1.97, P < .00001) was higher in patients receiving molecularly targeted drugs, which was comparable to the contemporary group.
CONCLUSION
Longer PFS and a higher rate of AEs were observed with the addition of molecularly targeted drugs to standard chemoradiation in patients harboring newly diagnosed GB. Nevertheless, compared with the control arm, the regimen did not significantly prolong OS.
Topics: Brain Neoplasms; Chemoradiotherapy; Female; Glioblastoma; Humans; Male; Molecular Targeted Therapy; Prognosis; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Survival Analysis; Temozolomide; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 31702627
DOI: 10.1097/MD.0000000000017759 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Nov 2018This is an updated version of the original Cochrane Review published in September 2014. The most common primary brain tumours in adults are gliomas. Gliomas span a... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
This is an updated version of the original Cochrane Review published in September 2014. The most common primary brain tumours in adults are gliomas. Gliomas span a spectrum from low to high grade and are graded pathologically on a scale of one to four according to the World Health Organization (WHO) classification. High-grade glioma (HGG) carries a poor prognosis. Grade IV glioma is known as glioblastoma and carries a median survival in treated patients of about 15 months. Glioblastomas are rich in blood vessels (i.e. highly vascular) and also rich in a protein known as vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) that promotes new blood vessel formation (the process of angiogenesis). Anti-angiogenic agents inhibit the process of new blood vessel formation and promote regression of existing vessels. Several anti-angiogenic agents have been investigated in clinical trials, both in newly diagnosed and recurrent HGG, showing preliminary promising results. This review was undertaken to report on the benefits and harms associated with the use of anti-angiogenic agents in the treatment of HGGs.
OBJECTIVES
To evaluate the efficacy and toxicity of anti-angiogenic therapy in people with high-grade glioma (HGG). The intervention can be used in two broad groups: at first diagnosis as part of 'adjuvant' therapy, or in the setting of recurrent disease.
SEARCH METHODS
We conducted updated searches to identify published and unpublished randomised controlled trials (RCTs), including the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL; 2018, Issue 9), MEDLINE and Embase to October 2018. We handsearched proceedings of relevant oncology conferences up to 2018. We also searched trial registries for ongoing studies.
SELECTION CRITERIA
RCTs evaluating the use of anti-angiogenic therapy to treat HGG versus the same therapy without anti-angiogenic therapy.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Review authors screened the search results and reviewed the abstracts of potentially relevant articles before retrieving the full text of eligible articles.
MAIN RESULTS
After a comprehensive literature search, we identified 11 eligible RCTs (3743 participants), of which 7 were included in the original review (2987 participants). There was significant design heterogeneity in the included studies, especially in the response assessment criteria used. All eligible studies were restricted to glioblastomas and there were no eligible studies evaluating other HGGs. Ten studies were available as fully published peer-reviewed manuscripts, and one study was available in abstract form. The overall risk of bias in included studies was low. This risk was based upon low rates of selection bias, detection bias, attrition bias and reporting bias. The 11 studies included in this review did not show an improvement in overall survival with the addition of anti-angiogenic therapy (pooled hazard ratio (HR) of 0.95, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.88 to 1.02; P = 0.16; 11 studies, 3743 participants; high-certainty evidence). However, pooled analysis from 10 studies (3595 participants) showed improvement in progression-free survival with the addition of anti-angiogenic therapy (HR 0.73, 95% CI 0.68 to 0.79; P < 0.00001; high-certainty evidence).We carried out additional analyses of overall survival and progression-free survival according to treatment setting and for anti-angiogenic therapy combined with chemotherapy compared to chemotherapy alone. Pooled analysis of overall survival in either the adjuvant or recurrent setting did not show an improvement (HR 0.93, 95% CI 0.86 to 1.02; P = 0.12; 8 studies, 2833 participants; high-certainty evidence and HR 0.99, 95% CI 0.85 to 1.16; P = 0.90; 3 studies, 910 participants; moderate-certainty evidence, respectively). Pooled analysis of overall survival for anti-angiogenic therapy combined with chemotherapy compared to chemotherapy also did not clearly show an improvement (HR 0.92, 95% CI 0.85 to 1.00; P = 0.05; 11 studies, 3506 participants; low-certainty evidence). The progression-free survival in the subgroups all showed findings that demonstrated improvements in progression-free survival with the addition of anti-angiogenic therapy. Pooled analysis of progression-free survival in both the adjuvant and recurrent setting showed an improvement (HR 0.75, 95% CI 0.69 to 0.82; P < 0.00001; 8 studies, 2833 participants; high-certainty evidence and HR 0.64, 95% CI 0.54 to 0.76; P < 0.00001; 2 studies, 762 participants; moderate-certainty evidence, respectively). Pooled analysis of progression-free survival for anti-angiogenic therapy combined with chemotherapy compared to chemotherapy alone showed an improvement (HR 0.72, 95% CI 0.66 to 0.77; P < 0.00001; 10 studies, 3464 participants). Similar to trials of anti-angiogenic therapies in other solid tumours, adverse events related to this class of therapy included hypertension and proteinuria, poor wound healing, and the potential for thromboembolic events, although generally, the rate of grade 3 and 4 adverse events was low (< 14.1%) and in keeping with the literature. The impact of anti-angiogenic therapy on quality of life varied between studies.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
The use of anti-angiogenic therapy does not significantly improve overall survival in newly diagnosed people with glioblastoma. Thus, there is insufficient evidence to support the use of anti-angiogenic therapy for people with newly diagnosed glioblastoma at this time. Overall there is a lack of evidence of a survival advantage for anti-angiogenic therapy over chemotherapy in recurrent glioblastoma. When considering the combination anti-angiogenic therapy with chemotherapy compared with the same chemotherapy alone, there may possibly be a small improvement in overall survival. While there is strong evidence that bevacizumab (an anti-angiogenic drug) prolongs progression-free survival in newly diagnosed and recurrent glioblastoma, the impact of this on quality of life and net clinical benefit for patients remains unclear. Not addressed here is whether subsets of people with glioblastoma may benefit from anti-angiogenic therapies, nor their utility in other HGG histologies.
Topics: Angiogenesis Inhibitors; Antibodies, Monoclonal, Humanized; Antineoplastic Agents; Bevacizumab; Brain Neoplasms; Camptothecin; Dacarbazine; Glioblastoma; Humans; Hypertension; Irinotecan; Lomustine; Neoplasm Recurrence, Local; Neovascularization, Pathologic; Progression-Free Survival; Proteinuria; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Snake Venoms; Temozolomide
PubMed: 30480778
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD008218.pub4