-
Neurotherapeutics : the Journal of the... Apr 2017The impact of targeted therapies in glioma has been modest. All the therapies that have demonstrated a significant survival benefit for gliomas in Phase III trials,... (Review)
Review
The impact of targeted therapies in glioma has been modest. All the therapies that have demonstrated a significant survival benefit for gliomas in Phase III trials, including radiation, chemotherapy (temozolomide and PCV [procarbazine, lomustine, vincristine]), and tumor-treating fields, are based on nonspecific targeting of proliferating cells. Recent advances in the molecular understanding of gliomas suggest some potential reasons for the failure of more targeted therapies in gliomas. Specifically, the histologic-based glioma classification is composed of multiple different molecular subtypes with distinct biology, natural history, and prognosis. As a result of these insights, the diagnosis and classification of gliomas have recently been updated by the World Health Organization. However, these changes and other novel observations regarding glioma biomarkers and subtypes highlight several clinical challenges. First, the field is faced with the difficulty of reinterpreting the results of prior studies and retrospective data using the new classifications to clarify prognostic assessments and treatment recommendations for patients. Second, the new classifications and insights require rethinking the design and stratification of future clinical trials. Last, these observations provide the essential framework for the development and testing of new specific targeted therapies for particular glioma subtypes. This review aims to summarize the current literature regarding glioma subclassifications and their clinical relevance in this evolving field.
Topics: Brain Neoplasms; Gene Deletion; Gene Expression; Glioma; Humans; Molecular Targeted Therapy; Mutation; World Health Organization
PubMed: 28281173
DOI: 10.1007/s13311-017-0519-x -
The New England Journal of Medicine Nov 2017Bevacizumab is approved for the treatment of patients with progressive glioblastoma on the basis of uncontrolled data. Data from a phase 2 trial suggested that the... (Comparative Study)
Comparative Study Randomized Controlled Trial
BACKGROUND
Bevacizumab is approved for the treatment of patients with progressive glioblastoma on the basis of uncontrolled data. Data from a phase 2 trial suggested that the addition of bevacizumab to lomustine might improve overall survival as compared with monotherapies. We sought to determine whether the combination would result in longer overall survival than lomustine alone among patients at first progression of glioblastoma.
METHODS
We randomly assigned patients with progression after chemoradiation in a 2:1 ratio to receive lomustine plus bevacizumab (combination group, 288 patients) or lomustine alone (monotherapy group, 149 patients). The methylation status of the promoter of O-methylguanine-DNA methyltransferase (MGMT) was assessed. Health-related quality of life and neurocognitive function were evaluated at baseline and every 12 weeks. The primary end point of the trial was overall survival.
RESULTS
A total of 437 patients underwent randomization. The median number of 6-week treatment cycles was three in the combination group and one in the monotherapy group. With 329 overall survival events (75.3%), the combination therapy did not provide a survival advantage; the median overall survival was 9.1 months (95% confidence interval [CI], 8.1 to 10.1) in the combination group and 8.6 months (95% CI, 7.6 to 10.4) in the monotherapy group (hazard ratio for death, 0.95; 95% CI, 0.74 to 1.21; P=0.65). Locally assessed progression-free survival was 2.7 months longer in the combination group than in the monotherapy group: 4.2 months versus 1.5 months (hazard ratio for disease progression or death, 0.49; 95% CI, 0.39 to 0.61; P<0.001). Grade 3 to 5 adverse events occurred in 63.6% of the patients in the combination group and 38.1% of the patients in the monotherapy group. The addition of bevacizumab to lomustine affected neither health-related quality of life nor neurocognitive function. The MGMT status was prognostic.
CONCLUSIONS
Despite somewhat prolonged progression-free survival, treatment with lomustine plus bevacizumab did not confer a survival advantage over treatment with lomustine alone in patients with progressive glioblastoma. (Funded by an unrestricted educational grant from F. Hoffmann-La Roche and by the EORTC Cancer Research Fund; EORTC 26101 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01290939 ; Eudra-CT number, 2010-023218-30 .).
Topics: Adult; Aged; Aged, 80 and over; Antineoplastic Agents, Alkylating; Antineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy Protocols; Bevacizumab; Brain Neoplasms; Chemoradiotherapy; Disease-Free Survival; Female; Glioblastoma; Humans; Intention to Treat Analysis; Kaplan-Meier Estimate; Lomustine; Male; Middle Aged
PubMed: 29141164
DOI: 10.1056/NEJMoa1707358 -
Pharmacological Research Sep 2021Glioblastoma multiforme (GBM) is a WHO grade IV glioma and the most common malignant, primary brain tumor with a 5-year survival of 7.2%. Its highly infiltrative nature,...
Glioblastoma multiforme (GBM) is a WHO grade IV glioma and the most common malignant, primary brain tumor with a 5-year survival of 7.2%. Its highly infiltrative nature, genetic heterogeneity, and protection by the blood brain barrier (BBB) have posed great treatment challenges. The standard treatment for GBMs is surgical resection followed by chemoradiotherapy. The robust DNA repair and self-renewing capabilities of glioblastoma cells and glioma initiating cells (GICs), respectively, promote resistance against all current treatment modalities. Thus, durable GBM management will require the invention of innovative treatment strategies. In this review, we will describe biological and molecular targets for GBM therapy, the current status of pharmacologic therapy, prominent mechanisms of resistance, and new treatment approaches. To date, medical imaging is primarily used to determine the location, size and macroscopic morphology of GBM before, during, and after therapy. In the future, molecular and cellular imaging approaches will more dynamically monitor the expression of molecular targets and/or immune responses in the tumor, thereby enabling more immediate adaptation of tumor-tailored, targeted therapies.
Topics: Animals; Antineoplastic Agents; Brain Neoplasms; Drug Resistance, Neoplasm; Glioblastoma; Humans
PubMed: 34302977
DOI: 10.1016/j.phrs.2021.105780 -
Biomedicines Mar 2021The standard of care (SOC) for high-grade gliomas (HGG) is maximally safe surgical resection, followed by concurrent radiation therapy (RT) and temozolomide (TMZ) for 6... (Review)
Review
The standard of care (SOC) for high-grade gliomas (HGG) is maximally safe surgical resection, followed by concurrent radiation therapy (RT) and temozolomide (TMZ) for 6 weeks, then adjuvant TMZ for 6 months. Before this SOC was established, glioblastoma (GBM) patients typically lived for less than one year after diagnosis, and no adjuvant chemotherapy had demonstrated significant survival benefits compared with radiation alone. In 2005, the Stupp et al. randomized controlled trial (RCT) on newly diagnosed GBM patients concluded that RT plus TMZ compared to RT alone significantly improved overall survival (OS) (14.6 vs. 12.1 months) and progression-free survival (PFS) at 6 months (PFS6) (53.9% vs. 36.4%). Outside of TMZ, there are four drugs and one device FDA-approved for the treatment of HGGs: lomustine, intravenous carmustine, carmustine wafer implants, bevacizumab (BVZ), and tumor treatment fields (TTFields). These treatments are now mainly used to treat recurrent HGGs and symptoms. TTFields is the only treatment that has been shown to improve OS (20.5 vs. 15.6 months) and PFS6 (56% vs. 37%) in comparison to the current SOC. TTFields is the newest addition to this list of FDA-approved treatments, but has not been universally accepted yet as part of SOC.
PubMed: 33810154
DOI: 10.3390/biomedicines9030324 -
Cancer Cell Mar 2020Here, we show that tumor ADORA1 deletion suppresses cell growth in human melanoma cell lines in vitro and tumor development in vivo in immune-deficient xenografts....
Here, we show that tumor ADORA1 deletion suppresses cell growth in human melanoma cell lines in vitro and tumor development in vivo in immune-deficient xenografts. However, this deletion induces the upregulation of PD-L1 levels, which inactivates cocultured T cells in vitro, compromises anti-tumor immunity in vivo, and reduces anti-tumor efficacy in an immune-competent mouse model. Functionally, PD-1 mAb treatment enhances the efficacy of ADORA1-deficient or ADORA1 antagonist-treated melanoma and NSCLC immune-competent mouse models. Mechanistically, we identify ATF3 as the factor transcriptionally upregulating PD-L1 expression. Tumor ATF3 deletion improves the effect of ADORA1 antagonist treatment of melanoma and NSCLC xenografts. We observe higher ADORA1, lower ATF3, and lower PD-L1 expression levels in tumor tissues from nonresponders among PD-1 mAb-treated NSCLC patients.
Topics: Activating Transcription Factor 3; Adenosine A1 Receptor Antagonists; Adult; Aged; Animals; Antineoplastic Agents, Immunological; Antineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy Protocols; B7-H1 Antigen; Carcinoma, Non-Small-Cell Lung; Cell Line, Tumor; Cytarabine; Female; Humans; Lomustine; Lung Neoplasms; Male; Melanoma; Mice, Inbred BALB C; Mice, Inbred C57BL; Middle Aged; Mitoxantrone; Prednisone; Receptor, Adenosine A1; Tumor Escape; Xenograft Model Antitumor Assays
PubMed: 32183950
DOI: 10.1016/j.ccell.2020.02.006 -
Journal of Feline Medicine and Surgery Aug 2021The aim of this study was to assess the efficacy and tolerability of lomustine, methotrexate and cytarabine chemotherapy as rescue treatment for feline lymphoma.
OBJECTIVES
The aim of this study was to assess the efficacy and tolerability of lomustine, methotrexate and cytarabine chemotherapy as rescue treatment for feline lymphoma.
METHODS
The medical records of 13 cats treated with lomustine, methotrexate and cytarabine for relapsed high-grade feline lymphoma, at a single institution between 2013 and 2018, were examined. All anatomical types were included. Data were analysed using descriptive statistics.
RESULTS
Nine cats received all three drugs and four cats received only two drugs owing to progressive disease. In cats that received (or in which there was intention to treat with) all three drugs, 6/13 (46%) demonstrated a complete or partial response to chemotherapy. Treatment was generally well tolerated, although two cats experienced Veterinary Comparative Oncology Group (VCOG) grade 3 neutropenia and one cat experienced VCOG grade 3 thrombocytopenia. The median progression-free survival was 61 days (range 16-721 days).
CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE
CHOP-(cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, vincristine, prednisolone) and COP-based protocols are established first-line chemotherapy for feline lymphoma, but standard rescue protocols are lacking. Lomustine has become a popular single-agent option, but prolonged or cumulative myelosuppression can result in treatment delays, risking relapse. Therefore, a multidrug lomustine-based protocol may be advantageous, and, from first principles, should also better overcome resistance. This study suggests that lomustine, methotrexate and cytarabine may represent an efficacious and well-tolerated protocol for feline lymphoma rescue.
Topics: Animals; Antineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy Protocols; Cat Diseases; Cats; Cyclophosphamide; Cytarabine; Lomustine; Lymphoma; Methotrexate; Neoplasm Recurrence, Local
PubMed: 33176543
DOI: 10.1177/1098612X20972066 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... May 2021Glioblastoma (GBM) is a highly malignant brain tumour that almost inevitably progresses or recurs after first line standard of care. There is no consensus regarding the... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Glioblastoma (GBM) is a highly malignant brain tumour that almost inevitably progresses or recurs after first line standard of care. There is no consensus regarding the best treatment/s to offer people upon disease progression or recurrence. For the purposes of this review, progression and recurrence are considered as one entity.
OBJECTIVES
To evaluate the effectiveness of further treatment/s for first and subsequent progression or recurrence of glioblastoma (GBM) among people who have received the standard of care (Stupp protocol) for primary treatment of the disease; and to prepare a brief economic commentary on the available evidence.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched MEDLINE and Embase electronic databases from 2005 to December 2019 and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL, in the Cochrane Library; Issue 12, 2019). Economic searches included the National Health Service Economic Evaluation Database (NHS EED) up to 2015 (database closure) and MEDLINE and Embase from 2015 to December 2019.
SELECTION CRITERIA
Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and comparative non-randomised studies (NRSs) evaluating effectiveness of treatments for progressive/recurrent GBM. Eligible studies included people with progressive or recurrent GBM who had received first line radiotherapy with concomitant and adjuvant temozolomide (TMZ).
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Two review authors independently selected studies and extracted data to a pre-designed data extraction form. We conducted network meta-analyses (NMA) and ranked treatments according to effectiveness for each outcome using the random-effects model and Stata software (version 15). We rated the certainty of evidence using the GRADE approach.
MAIN RESULTS
We included 42 studies: these comprised 34 randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and 8 non-randomised studies (NRSs) involving 5236 participants. We judged most RCTs to be at a low risk of bias and NRSs at high risk of bias. Interventions included chemotherapy, re-operation, re-irradiation and novel therapies either used alone or in combination. For first recurrence, we included 11 interventions in the network meta-analysis (NMA) for overall survival (OS), and eight in the NMA for progression-free survival (PFS). Lomustine (LOM; also known as CCNU) was the most common comparator and was used as the reference treatment. No studies in the NMA evaluated surgery, re-irradiation, PCV (procarbazine, lomustine, vincristine), TMZ re-challenge or best supportive care. We could not perform NMA for second or later recurrence due to insufficient data. Quality-of-life data were sparse. First recurrence (NMA findings) Median OS across included studies in the NMA ranged from 5.5 to 12.6 months and median progression-free survival (PFS) ranged from 1.5 months to 4.2 months. We found no high-certainty evidence that any treatments tested were better than lomustine. These treatments included the following. Bevacizumab plus lomustine: Evidence suggested probably little or no difference in OS between bevacizumab (BEV) combined with lomustine (LOM) and LOM monotherapy (hazard ratio (HR) 0.91, 0.75 to 1.10; moderate-certainty evidence), although BEV + LOM may improve PFS (HR 0.57, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.44 to 0.74; low-certainty evidence). Bevacizumab monotherapy: Low-certainty evidence suggested there may be little or no difference in OS (HR 1.22, 95% CI 0.84 to 1.76) and PFS (HR 0.90, 95% CI 0.58 to 1.38; low-certainty evidence) between BEV and LOM monotherapies; more evidence on BEV is needed. Regorafenib (REG): REG may improve OS compared with LOM (HR 0.50, 95% CI 0.33 to 0.76; low-certainty evidence). Evidence on PFS was very low certainty and more evidence on REG is needed. Temozolomide (TMZ) plus Depatux-M (ABT414): For OS, low-certainty evidence suggested that TMZ plus ABT414 may be more effective than LOM (HR 0.66, 95% CI 0.47 to 0.92) and may be more effective than BEV (HR 0.54, 95% CI 0.33 to 0.89; low-certainty evidence). This may be due to the TMZ component only and more evidence is needed. Fotemustine (FOM): FOM and LOM may have similar effects on OS (HR 0.89, 95% CI 0.51 to 1.57, low-certainty evidence). Bevacizumab and irinotecan (IRI): Evidence on BEV + irinotecan (IRI) versus LOM for both OS and PFS is very uncertain and there is probably little or no difference between BEV + IRI versus BEV monotherapy (OS: HR 0.95, 95% CI 0.70 to 1.30; moderate-certainty evidence). When treatments were ranked for OS, FOM ranked first, BEV + LOM second, LOM third, BEV + IRI fourth, and BEV fifth. Ranking does not take into account the certainty of the evidence, which also suggests there may be little or no difference between FOM and LOM. Other treatments Three studies evaluated re-operation versus no re-operation, with or without re-irradiation and chemotherapy, and these suggested possible survival advantages with re-operation within the context of being able to select suitable candidates for re-operation. A cannabinoid treatment in the early stages of evaluation, in combination with TMZ, merits further evaluation. Second or later recurrence Limited evidence from three heterogeneous studies suggested that radiotherapy with or without BEV may have a beneficial effect on survival but more evidence is needed. Evidence was insufficient to draw conclusions about the best radiotherapy dosage. Other evidence suggested that there may be little difference in survival with tumour-treating fields compared with physician's best choice of treatment. We found no reliable evidence on best supportive care. Severe adverse events (SAEs) The BEV+LOM combination was associated with significantly greater risk of SAEs than LOM monotherapy (RR 2.51, 95% CI 1.72 to 3.66, high-certainty evidence), and ranked joint worst with cediranib + LOM (RR 2.51, 95% CI 1.29 to 4.90; high-certainty evidence). LOM ranked best and REG ranked second best. Adding novel treatments to BEV was generally associated with a higher risk of severe adverse events compared with BEV alone.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
For treatment of first recurrence of GBM, among people previously treated with surgery and standard chemoradiotherapy, the combination treatments evaluated did not improve overall survival compared with LOM monotherapy and were often associated with a higher risk of severe adverse events. Limited evidence suggested that re-operation with or without re-irradiation and chemotherapy may be suitable for selected candidates. Evidence on second recurrence is sparse. Re-irradiation with or without bevacizumab may be of value in selected individuals, but more evidence is needed.
Topics: Brain Neoplasms; Glioblastoma; Humans; Lomustine; Neoplasm Recurrence, Local; Network Meta-Analysis
PubMed: 34559423
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD013579.pub2 -
Cancer Treatment Reviews Jul 2020Glioblastomas are the most common malignant primary intrinsic brain tumors. Their incidence increases with age, and males are more often affected. First-line management... (Review)
Review
Glioblastomas are the most common malignant primary intrinsic brain tumors. Their incidence increases with age, and males are more often affected. First-line management includes maximum safe surgical resection followed by involved-field radiotherapy plus concomitant and six cycles of maintenance temozolomide chemotherapy. Standards of care at recurrence are much less well defined. Minorities of patients are offered second surgery or re-irradiation, but data on a positive impact on survival from randomized trials are lacking. The majority of patients who are eligible for salvage therapy receive systemic treatment, mostly with nitrosourea-based regimens or, depending on availability, bevacizumab alone or in various combinations. In clinical trials, lomustine alone has been increasingly used as a control arm, assigning this drug a standard-of-care position in the setting of recurrent glioblastoma. Here we review the activity of lomustine in the treatment of diffuse gliomas of adulthood in various settings. The most compelling data for lomustine stem from three randomized trials when lomustine was combined with procarbazine and vincristine as the PCV regimen in the newly diagnosed setting together with radiotherapy; improved survival with PCV was restricted to patients with isocitrate dehydrogenase-mutant tumors. No other agent with the possible exception of regorafenib has shown superior activity to lomustine in recurrent glioblastoma, but activity is largely restricted to patients with tumors with O-methylguanine DNA methyltransferase (MGMT) promoter methylation. Hematological toxicity, notably thrombocytopenia often limits adequate exposure.
Topics: Antineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy Protocols; Brain Neoplasms; Glioblastoma; Humans; Lomustine; Neoplasm Recurrence, Local; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
PubMed: 32408220
DOI: 10.1016/j.ctrv.2020.102029 -
The New England Journal of Medicine Apr 2016Grade 2 gliomas occur most commonly in young adults and cause progressive neurologic deterioration and premature death. Early results of this trial showed that treatment... (Randomized Controlled Trial)
Randomized Controlled Trial
BACKGROUND
Grade 2 gliomas occur most commonly in young adults and cause progressive neurologic deterioration and premature death. Early results of this trial showed that treatment with procarbazine, lomustine (also called CCNU), and vincristine after radiation therapy at the time of initial diagnosis resulted in longer progression-free survival, but not overall survival, than radiation therapy alone. We now report the long-term results.
METHODS
We included patients with grade 2 astrocytoma, oligoastrocytoma, or oligodendroglioma who were younger than 40 years of age and had undergone subtotal resection or biopsy or who were 40 years of age or older and had undergone biopsy or resection of any of the tumor. Patients were stratified according to age, histologic findings, Karnofsky performance-status score, and presence or absence of contrast enhancement on preoperative images. Patients were randomly assigned to radiation therapy alone or to radiation therapy followed by six cycles of combination chemotherapy.
RESULTS
A total of 251 eligible patients were enrolled from 1998 through 2002. The median follow-up was 11.9 years; 55% of the patients died. Patients who received radiation therapy plus chemotherapy had longer median overall survival than did those who received radiation therapy alone (13.3 vs. 7.8 years; hazard ratio for death, 0.59; P=0.003). The rate of progression-free survival at 10 years was 51% in the group that received radiation therapy plus chemotherapy versus 21% in the group that received radiation therapy alone; the corresponding rates of overall survival at 10 years were 60% and 40%. A Cox model identified receipt of radiation therapy plus chemotherapy and histologic findings of oligodendroglioma as favorable prognostic variables for both progression-free and overall survival.
CONCLUSIONS
In a cohort of patients with grade 2 glioma who were younger than 40 years of age and had undergone subtotal tumor resection or who were 40 years of age or older, progression-free survival and overall survival were longer among those who received combination chemotherapy in addition to radiation therapy than among those who received radiation therapy alone. (Funded by the National Cancer Institute and others; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00003375.).
Topics: Adult; Antineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy Protocols; Astrocytoma; Brain Neoplasms; Combined Modality Therapy; Disease-Free Survival; Female; Follow-Up Studies; Humans; Lomustine; Male; Neoplasm Grading; Oligodendroglioma; Procarbazine; Survival Analysis; Vincristine; Young Adult
PubMed: 27050206
DOI: 10.1056/NEJMoa1500925 -
Journal of Veterinary Internal Medicine 2015Intracranial neoplasia is commonly diagnosed in dogs and can be treated by a variety of methods, but formal comparisons of treatment efficacy are currently unavailable.... (Review)
Review
Intracranial neoplasia is commonly diagnosed in dogs and can be treated by a variety of methods, but formal comparisons of treatment efficacy are currently unavailable. This review was undertaken to summarize the current state of knowledge regarding outcome after the treatment of intracranial masses in dogs, with the aim of defining optimal recommendations for owners. This review summarizes data from 794 cases in 22 previously published reports and follows PRISMA guidelines for systematic review. A Pubmed search was used to identify suitable articles. These then were analyzed for quality and interstudy variability of inclusion and exclusion criteria and the outcome data extracted for summary in graphs and tables. There was a high degree of heterogeneity among studies with respect to inclusion and exclusion criteria, definition of survival periods, and cases lost to follow-up making comparisons among modalities troublesome. There is a need for standardized design and reporting of outcomes of treatment for brain tumors in dogs. The available data do not support lomustine as an effective treatment, but also do not show a clear difference in outcome between radiotherapy and surgery for those cases in which the choice is available.
Topics: Animals; Antineoplastic Agents; Brain Neoplasms; Dog Diseases; Dogs; Radiotherapy
PubMed: 26375164
DOI: 10.1111/jvim.13617