Dataset Information

Phase III randomized trial comparing the efficacy of cediranib as monotherapy, and in combination with lomustine, versus lomustine alone in patients with recurrent glioblastoma.

ABSTRACT: A randomized, phase III, placebo-controlled, partially blinded clinical trial (REGAL [Recent in in Glioblastoma Alone and With Lomustine]) was conducted to determine the efficacy of cediranib, an oral pan-vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) receptor tyrosine kinase inhibitor, either as monotherapy or in combination with lomustine versus lomustine in patients with recurrent glioblastoma.Patients (N = 325) with recurrent glioblastoma who previously received radiation and temozolomide were randomly assigned 2:2:1 to receive (1) cediranib (30 mg) monotherapy; (2) cediranib (20 mg) plus lomustine (110 mg/m(2)); (3) lomustine (110 mg/m(2)) plus a placebo. The primary end point was progression-free survival based on blinded, independent radiographic assessment of postcontrast T1-weighted and noncontrast T2-weighted magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) brain scans.The primary end point of progression-free survival (PFS) was not significantly different for either cediranib alone (hazard ratio [HR] = 1.05; 95% CI, 0.74 to 1.50; two-sided P = .90) or cediranib in combination with lomustine (HR = 0.76; 95% CI, 0.53 to 1.08; two-sided P = .16) versus lomustine based on independent or local review of postcontrast T1-weighted MRI.This study did not meet its primary end point of PFS prolongation with cediranib either as monotherapy or in combination with lomustine versus lomustine in patients with recurrent glioblastoma, although cediranib showed evidence of clinical activity on some secondary end points including time to deterioration in neurologic status and corticosteroid-sparing effects.

SUBMITTER: Batchelor TT

PROVIDER: S-EPMC4021043 | biostudies-literature | 2013 Sep

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Phase III randomized trial comparing the efficacy of cediranib as monotherapy, and in combination with lomustine, versus lomustine alone in patients with recurrent glioblastoma.

Batchelor Tracy T TT Mulholland Paul P Neyns Bart B Nabors L Burt LB Campone Mario M Wick Antje A Mason Warren W Mikkelsen Tom T Phuphanich Surasak S Ashby Lynn S LS Degroot John J Gattamaneni Rao R Cher Lawrence L Rosenthal Mark M Payer Franz F Jürgensmeier Juliane M JM Jain Rakesh K RK Sorensen A Gregory AG Xu John J Liu Qi Q van den Bent Martin M

Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology 20130812 26

<h4>Purpose</h4>A randomized, phase III, placebo-controlled, partially blinded clinical trial (REGAL [Recent in in Glioblastoma Alone and With Lomustine]) was conducted to determine the efficacy of cediranib, an oral pan-vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) receptor tyrosine kinase inhibitor, either as monotherapy or in combination with lomustine versus lomustine in patients with recurrent glioblastoma.<h4>Patients and methods</h4>Patients (N = 325) with recurrent glioblastoma who previousl ...[more]

PMID: 23940216

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundThe combination of galunisertib, a transforming growth factor (TGF)-? receptor (R)1 kinase inhibitor, and lomustine was found to have antitumor activity in murine models of glioblastoma.MethodsGalunisertib (300 mg/day) was given orally 14 days on/14 days off (intermittent dosing). Lomustine was given as approved. Patients were randomized in a 2:1:1 ratio to galunisertib + lomustine, galunisertib monotherapy, or placebo + lomustine. The primary objective was overall survival (OS); secondary objectives were safety, pharmacokinetics (PKs), and antitumor activity.ResultsOne hundred fifty-eight patients were randomized: galunisertib + lomustine (N = 79), galunisertib (N = 39), and placebo + lomustine (N = 40). Baseline characteristics were: male (64.6%), white (75.3%), median age 58 years, ECOG performance status (PS) 1 (63.3%), and primary glioblastoma (93.7%). The PKs of galunisertib were not altered with lomustine, and galunisertib had a median half-life of ?8 hours. Median OS in months (95% credible interval [CrI]) for galunisertib + lomustine was 6.7 (range: 5.3-8.5), 8.0 (range: 5.7-11.7) for galunisertib alone, and 7.5 (range: 5.6-10.3) for placebo + lomustine. There was no difference in OS for patients treated with galunisertib + lomustine compared with placebo + lomustine [P (HR < 1) = 26%]. Median progression-free survival of ?2 months was observed in all 3 arms. Among 8 patients with IDH1 mutation, 7 patients were treated with galunisertib (monotherapy or with lomustine); OS ranged from 4 to 17 months. Patients treated with galunisertib alone had fewer drug-related grade 3/4 adverse events (n = 34) compared with lomustine-treated patients (10% vs 26%). Baseline PS, post-discontinuation of bevacizumab, tumor size, and baseline levels of MDC/CCL22 were correlated with OS.ConclusionsGalunisertib + lomustine failed to demonstrate improved OS relative to placebo + lomustine. Efficacy outcomes were similar in all 3 arms.Clinical trial registrationNCT01582269, ClinicalTrials.gov.

Project description:BackgroundOlaparib is a poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase inhibitor and cediranib is an anti-angiogenic agent with activity against VEGF receptor (VEGFR) 1, VEGFR2, and VEGFR3. Both oral agents have antitumour activity in women with recurrent ovarian cancer, and their combination was active and had manageable toxicities in a phase 1 trial. We investigated whether this combination could improve progression-free survival (PFS) compared with olaparib monotherapy in women with recurrent platinum-sensitive ovarian cancer.MethodsIn our randomised, open-label, phase 2 study, we recruited women (aged ≥18 years) who had measurable platinum-sensitive, relapsed, high-grade serous or endometrioid ovarian, fallopian tube, or primary peritoneal cancer, or those with deleterious germline BRCA1/2 mutations from nine participating US academic medical centres. We randomly allocated participants (1:1) according to permuted blocks, stratified by germline BRCA status and previous anti-angiogenic therapy, to receive olaparib capsules 400 mg twice daily or the combination at the recommended phase 2 dose of cediranib 30 mg daily and olaparib capsules 200 mg twice daily. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival analysed in the intention-to-treat population. The phase 2 trial is no longer accruing patients. An interim analysis was conducted in November, 2013, after 50% of expected events had occurred and efficacy results were unmasked. The primary analysis was performed on March 31, 2014, after 47 events (66% of those expected). The trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01116648.FindingsBetween Oct 26, 2011, and June 3, 2013, we randomly allocated 46 women to receive olaparib alone and 44 to receive the combination of olaparib and cediranib. Median PFS was 17·7 months (95% CI 14·7-not reached) for the women treated with cediranib plus olaparib compared with 9·0 months (95% CI 5·7-16·5) for those treated with olaparib monotherapy (hazard ratio 0·42, 95% CI 0·23-0·76; p=0·005). Grade 3 and 4 adverse events were more common with combination therapy than with monotherapy, including fatigue (12 patients in the cediranib plus olaparib group vs five patients in the olaparib monotherapy group), diarrhoea (ten vs none), and hypertension (18 vs none).InterpretationCediranib plus olaparib seems to improve PFS in women with recurrent platinum-sensitive high-grade serous or endometrioid ovarian cancer, and warrants study in a phase 3 trial. The side-effect profile suggests such investigations should include assessments of quality of life and patient-reported outcomes to understand the effects of a continuing oral regimen with that of intermittent chemotherapy.FundingAmerican Recovery and Reinvestment Act grant from the National Institutes of Health (NIH) (3 U01 CA062490-16S2); Intramural Program of the Center for Cancer Research; and the Division of Cancer Treatment and Diagnosis, National Cancer Institute, NIH.

Project description:Abstract Background Treatment options for recurrent glioblastoma are limited and with the possible exception of regorafenib, no agent has demonstrated superior activity to lomustine. Therefore, there is an urgent need for more effective treatment strategies for recurrent glioblastoma. Here, we investigated different treatment combinations based on the tumor-stroma targeting antibody-cytokine fusion protein L19TNF in preclinical glioma models and translated the most effective treatment combination to patients with recurrent glioblastoma. Material and Methods Orthotopic immunocompetent mouse glioma models were used to study the anti-glioma activity of L19TNF in combination with anti-PD1, bevacizumab or lomustine. Tumor growth was monitored by MRI. Flow cytometry and microscopy were used to characterize tumor-infiltrating-immune cells. MHC immunoaffinity purification and mass spectrometry were used to characterize the MHC immunopeptidome. Genetic mouse models were used to study immune-dependent effects. Subsequently, we translated the most efficient treatment combination to patients with recurrent glioblastoma within a phase I/II clinical trial (NCT04573192). Results The combination of L19TNF and lomustine demonstrated strong synergistic anti-tumor activity in two immunocompetent orthotopic glioma models and cured a majority of tumor-bearing mice. In contrast, combinations with anti-PD-1 or bevacizumab had only limited anti-glioma activity. Furthermore, compared to the monotherapies, the combination of L19TNF and lomustine led to the strongest increase in tumor-infiltrating lymphoid cells as demonstrated by flow cytometry and microsopy and to the highest number of peptides presented in the context of MHC-I. The treatment effect was abrograted in different genetic immunodeficient mouse models. The treatment combination of L19TNF and lomustine was well tolerated in the first patients treated within a phase I/II clinical trial and we observed partial tumor responses also in patients with an unmethylated MGMT promoter. Conclusion The combination of L19TNF and lomustine demonstrated promising anti-glioma activity and patients are currently recruited within a phase I/II clinical trial for patients with recurrent glioblastoma.

Project description:BACKGROUND:Activation of the vascular endothelial growth factor receptor (VEGFR) and the oncogenic Src pathway has been implicated in the development of castration-resistant prostate cancer (CRPC) in preclinical models. Cediranib and dasatinib are multi-kinase inhibitors targeting VEGFR and Src respectively. Phase II studies of cediranib and dasatinib in CRPC have shown single agent activity. METHODS:Docetaxel-pretreated CRPC patients were randomized to arm A: cediranib alone (20 mg/day) versus arm B: cediranib (20 mg/day) plus dasatinib (100 mg/day) given orally on 4-week cycles. Primary endpoint was 12-week progression-free survival (PFS) as per the Prostate Cancer Clinical Trials Working Group (PCWG2). Patient reported outcomes were evaluated using Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Prostate (FACT-P) and Present Pain Intensity (PPI) scales. Correlative studies of bone turnover markers (BTM), including bone alkaline phosphate (BAP) and serum beta-C telopeptide (B-CTx) were serially assayed. Results A total of 22 patients, 11 per arm, were enrolled. Baseline demographics were similar in both arms. Median number of cycles =4 in arm A (range 1-12) and 2 in arm B (range 1-9). Twelve-week PFS was 73 % in arm A versus 18 % in arm B (p?=?0.03). Median PFS in months (arm A versus B) was: 5.2 versus 2.6 (95 % CI: 1.9-6.5 versus 1.4-not reached). Most common grade 3 toxicities were hypertension, anemia and thrombocytopenia in arm A and hypertension, diarrhea and fatigue in arm B. One treatment-related death (retroperitoneal hemorrhage) was seen in arm A. FACT-P and PPI scores did not significantly change in either arm. No correlation between BTM and PFS was seen in either arm. CONCLUSIONS:Although limited by small numbers, this randomized study showed that the combination of VEGFR and Src targeted therapy did not result in improved efficacy and may be associated with a worse outcome than VEGFR targeted therapy alone in patients with CRPC. ClinicalTrials.gov number: NCT01260688.

Project description:ObjectivesTumour recurrence of glioblastoma multiforme (GBM) after initial treatment with surgical resection, radiotherapy and chemotherapy is an inevitable phenomenon. This retrospective cohort study compared the efficacy of interstitial high dose rate brachytherapy (HDR-BRT), re-resection and sole dose dense temozolomide chemotherapy (ddTMZ) in the treatment of recurrent glioblastoma after initial surgery and radiochemotherapy.DesignRetropective cohort study.SettingPrimary level of care with two participating centres. The geographical location was central Germany.ParticipantsFrom January 2005 to December 2010, a total of 111 patients developed recurrent GBM after initial surgery and radiotherapy with concomitant temozolomide. The inclusion criteria were as follows: (1) histology-proven diagnosis of primary GBM (WHO grade 4), (2) primary treatment with resection and radiochemotherapy, and (3) tumour recurrence/progression.InterventionsThis study compared retrospectively the efficacy of interstitial HDR-BRT, re-resection and ddTMZ alone in the treatment of recurrent glioblastoma.Primary and secondary outcome measuresMedian survival, progression free survival and complication rate.ResultsMedian survival after salvage therapy of the recurrence was 37, 30 and 26 weeks, respectively. The HDR-BRT group did significantly better than both the reoperation (p<0.05) and the ddTMZ groups (p<0.05). Moderate to severe complications in the HDR-BRT, reoperation and sole chemotherapy groups occurred in 5/50 (10%), 4/36 (11%) and 9/25 (36%) cases, respectively.ConclusionsCT-guided interstitial HDR-BRT attained higher survival benefits in the management of recurrent glioblastoma after initial surgery and radiotherapy with concurrent temozolomide in comparison with the other treatment modalities. The low risk of complications of the HDR-BRT and the fact that it can be delivered percutaneously in local anaesthesia render it a promissing treatment option for selected patients which should be further evaluated.

Dataset Information

Phase III randomized trial comparing the efficacy of cediranib as monotherapy, and in combination with lomustine, versus lomustine alone in patients with recurrent glioblastoma.

Publications

Phase III randomized trial comparing the efficacy of cediranib as monotherapy, and in combination with lomustine, versus lomustine alone in patients with recurrent glioblastoma.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets