Dataset Information

AT-11FINAL RESULTS FROM THE RANDOMIZED PHASE II TRIAL AVAREG (ML25739) WITH BEVACIZUMAB (BEV) OR FOTEMUSTINE (FTM) IN RECURRENT GBM

ABSTRACT: AIM: The treatment of recurrent glioblastoma remains an open issue and the role of BEV has been largely debated since only few data compared this agent with the standard agents. METHODS: A multicenter, open-label, randomized (2:1), non-comparative phase II study (EudraCT:2011-001363-46; AVAREG-ML25739) with BEV 10 mg/m2 iv every 2 weeks or FTM 75 mg/m2 iv day 1-8-15 followed, after a 35 days interval, by FTM 100 mg/m2 every 3 weeks, was conducted. Primary endpoint was overall survival at 6 months (OS6). RESULTS: 91 pts with recurrent GBM were enrolled among 10 Italian centers between 11/2011 and 9/2012. Median age was 57 years (range:28-78), PS was 0/1/2 in 42/35/14 pts. All pts were treated with RT/TMZ accordingly with EORTC 26981-22981/NCIC-CE3. Time from diagnosis to 1st recurrence was 331 days in the BEV arm and 460 days in the FTM arm. At time of recurrence, 21 pts (23.1%) received re-resection before the study inclusion (13/8 pts in BEV/FTM arms). Fifty-nine pts were enrolled in the BEV arm and 32 pts in the FTM arm. OS6 was 62.1% (95%CI:48.4-74.5) and 73.3% (95%CI:54.1-87.7), OS9 was 37.9% (95%CI:25.5-51.6) and 46.7% (95%CI:28.3-65.7) in the BEV and FTM arms, respectively. Median OS was 7.3 months (95%CI:5.8-9.2) in the BEV arm and 8.7 months (95%CI:6.3-15.4) in the FTM arm. PFS6 was 26.3% and 10.7%, respectively. In the BEV arm, OS6 and OS9 were 77.8% (95%CI:57.7-91.4) and 59.3% (95%CI:38.8-77.6) in pts =55 yrs, and were 48.4% (95%CI:30.1-66.9) and 19.3% (95%CI:7.4-37.5) in pts >55 yrs. HR for OS in BEV group for pts >55 yrs compared with pts =55 yrs was 2.0 (95%CI:1.0-4.1, p = 0.05). G3-4 toxicity: thrombocytopenia 0% vs 21.9%, neutropenia 1.7% vs 12.5%, intestinal perforation and cerebral ischaemia/hemorrhage 3.4% vs 0%, pulmonary thromboembolism 1.7% vs 0%, and acute myocardial infarction 1.7% vs 0%, in the Bev and FTM arms respectively. CONCLUSIONS: BEV in recurrent GBM showed survival rates superimposable with FTM.

SUBMITTER: Brandes A

PROVIDER: S-EPMC4217788 | biostudies-literature | 2014 Nov

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BACKGROUND: RANO criteria were applied to evaluate differences in response between the 2 arms: TMZ or TMZ + BEV in a randomized study. We evaluate here the RANO sub-criterion (PI) to evaluate response. METHODS: Between December 2009 and April 2013, p with unresectable GBM, PS < 3 and MMS ≥25 were randomly assigned to receive eitherTMZ (200 mg/m2, days 1–5,for 2 28-day cycles), followed by standard TMZ with concomitant radiotherapy (60Gy) and then adjuvant TMZ for 6 cycles (TMZ Arm), or the same regimen but with the addition of BEV (10mg/kg /15 days) during pre-radiotherapy and concomitant treatment (BEV Arm). The primary endpoint was response according to RANO criteria after the 2 pre-radiotherapy cycles. The study was powered to detect a 30% difference between arms. A centralized revision of MRI's blinded to clinical status of p is ongoing. (ClinicalTrials.gov NCT01102595). RESULTS:103 p were registered and 93 randomized – 45 to the TMZ Arm and 48 to the BEV Arm. All p who received at least one dose of treatment were included in the analysis. Overall response rate (ORR) was evaluated after the 2-pre-radiotherapy cycles. Patients completed pre-radiotherapy treatment in 48.9% (TMZ Arm) vs 66.7% (BEV Arm), p = 0.08. Response was not evaluable in 3p (TMZ arm) and 5p (BEV arm) because of previous toxicity or refuse to continue. ORR by RANO criteria for evaluable p was: Arm TMZ: PR 3 (7.1%) SD 8 (19%) PD 31 (73.8%)., Arm B: PR 11 (25.6%) SD 17 (39.5%) 15 (34.9%) P = 0.001. Response by individual RANO sub criterion (Arm TMZ% vs Arm BEV%).1- MRI IP: PR (8.3 vs 26.2), SD (22.2 vs 42.8), P (69.4 vs 31) (P = 0.003), 2-Neurological status: SD (54.8 vs 79.5), No SD (45.2 vs 20.5) (P = 0.014), 3-Dexametasone dose: stable (60.5 vs 51.2), increase (28.9 vs 4.7), reduction (10.5 vs 44.2) (P < 0.001). CONCLUSION: ORR was significantly higher in the BEV Arm for both for general RANO criteria as for each individual criterion (MRI, clinical stability and dexametasone doses.

Project description:Several randomized trials have indicated that combination chemotherapy applied in metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) does not significantly improve overall survival when compared to the sequential use of cytotoxic agents (CAIRO, MRC Focus, FFCD 2000-05). The present study investigates the question whether this statement holds true also for bevacizumab-based first-line treatment including escalation- and de-escalation strategies.The AIO KRK 0110/ML22011 trial is a two-arm, multicenter, open-label randomized phase III trial comparing the efficacy and safety of capecitabine plus bevacizumab (Cape-Bev) versus capecitabine plus irinotecan plus bevacizumab (CAPIRI-Bev) in the first-line treatment of metastatic colorectal cancer. Patients with unresectable metastatic colorectal cancer, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status 0-1, will be assigned in a 1:1 ratio to receive either capecitabine 1250 mg/m(2) bid for 14d (d1-14) plus bevacizumab 7.5 mg/kg (d1) q3w (Arm A) or capecitabine 800 mg/m(2) BID for 14d (d1-14), irinotecan 200 mg/m(2) (d1) and bevacizumab 7.5 mg/kg (d1) q3w (Arm B). Patients included into this trial are required to consent to the analysis of tumour tissue and blood for translational investigations. In Arm A, treatment escalation from Cape-Bev to CAPIRI-Bev is recommended in case of progressive disease (PD). In Arm B, de-escalation from CAPIRI-Bev to Cape-Bev is possible after 6 months of treatment or in case of irinotecan-associated toxicity. Re-escalation to CAPIRI-Bev after PD is possible. The primary endpoint is time to failure of strategy (TFS). Secondary endpoints are overall response rate (ORR), overall survival, progression-free survival, safety and quality of life.The AIO KRK 0110 trial is designed for patients with disseminated, but asymptomatic mCRC who are not potential candidates for surgical resection of metastasis. Two bevacizumab-based strategies are compared: one starting as single-agent chemotherapy (Cape-Bev) allowing escalation to CAPIRI-Bev and another starting with combination chemotherapy (CAPIRI-Bev) and allowing de-escalation to Cape-Bev and subsequent re-escalation if necessary.ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier NCT01249638 EudraCT-No.: 2009-013099-38.

Project description:BackgroundBevacizumab has promising activity against recurrent glioblastoma (GBM). However, acquired resistance to this agent results in tumor recurrence. We hypothesized that vorinostat, a histone deacetylase (HDAC) inhibitor with anti-angiogenic effects, would prevent acquired resistance to bevacizumab.MethodsThis multicenter phase II trial used a Bayesian adaptive design to randomize patients with recurrent GBM to bevacizumab alone or bevacizumab plus vorinostat with the primary endpoint of progression-free survival (PFS) and secondary endpoints of overall survival (OS) and clinical outcomes assessment (MD Anderson Symptom Inventory Brain Tumor module [MDASI-BT]). Eligible patients were adults (≥18 y) with histologically confirmed GBM recurrent after prior radiation therapy, with adequate organ function, KPS ≥60, and no prior bevacizumab or HDAC inhibitors.ResultsNinety patients (bevacizumab + vorinostat: 49, bevacizumab: 41) were enrolled, of whom 74 were evaluable for PFS (bevacizumab + vorinostat: 44, bevacizumab: 30). Median PFS (3.7 vs 3.9 mo, P = 0.94, hazard ratio [HR] 0.63 [95% CI: 0.38, 1.06, P = 0.08]), median OS (7.8 vs 9.3 mo, P = 0.64, HR 0.93 [95% CI: 0.5, 1.6, P = 0.79]) and clinical benefit were similar between the 2 arms. Toxicity (grade ≥3) in 85 evaluable patients included hypertension (n = 37), neurological changes (n = 2), anorexia (n = 2), infections (n = 9), wound dehiscence (n = 2), deep vein thrombosis/pulmonary embolism (n = 2), and colonic perforation (n = 1).ConclusionsBevacizumab combined with vorinostat did not yield improvement in PFS or OS or clinical benefit compared with bevacizumab alone or a clinical benefit in adults with recurrent GBM. This trial is the first to test a Bayesian adaptive design with adaptive randomization and Bayesian continuous monitoring in patients with primary brain tumor and demonstrates the feasibility of using complex Bayesian adaptive design in a multicenter setting.

Dataset Information

AT-11FINAL RESULTS FROM THE RANDOMIZED PHASE II TRIAL AVAREG (ML25739) WITH BEVACIZUMAB (BEV) OR FOTEMUSTINE (FTM) IN RECURRENT GBM

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets