Dataset Information

Lessons from anti-vascular endothelial growth factor and anti-vascular endothelial growth factor receptor trials in patients with glioblastoma.

ABSTRACT: Treatment of glioblastoma (GBM), the most common primary malignant brain tumor in adults, remains a significant unmet need in oncology. Historically, cytotoxic treatments provided little durable benefit, and tumors recurred within several months. This has spurred a substantial research effort to establish more effective therapies for both newly diagnosed and recurrent GBM. In this context, antiangiogenic therapy emerged as a promising treatment strategy because GBMs are highly vascular tumors. In particular, GBMs overexpress vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF), a proangiogenic cytokine. Indeed, many studies have demonstrated promising radiographic response rates, delayed tumor progression, and a relatively safe profile for anti-VEGF agents. However, randomized phase III trials conducted to date have failed to show an overall survival benefit for antiangiogenic agents alone or in combination with chemoradiotherapy. These results indicate that antiangiogenic agents may not be beneficial in unselected populations of patients with GBM. Unfortunately, biomarker development has lagged behind in the process of drug development, and no validated biomarker exists for patient stratification. However, hypothesis-generating data from phase II trials that reveal an association between increased perfusion and/or oxygenation (ie, consequences of vascular normalization) and survival suggest that early imaging biomarkers could help identify the subset of patients who most likely will benefit from anti-VEGF agents. In this article, we discuss the lessons learned from the trials conducted to date and how we could potentially use recent advances in GBM biology and imaging to improve outcomes of patients with GBM who receive antiangiogenic therapy.

SUBMITTER: Lu-Emerson C

PROVIDER: S-EPMC4517055 | biostudies-literature | 2015 Apr

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Lessons from anti-vascular endothelial growth factor and anti-vascular endothelial growth factor receptor trials in patients with glioblastoma.

Lu-Emerson Christine C Duda Dan G DG Emblem Kyrre E KE Taylor Jennie W JW Gerstner Elizabeth R ER Loeffler Jay S JS Batchelor Tracy T TT Jain Rakesh K RK

Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology 20150223 10

Treatment of glioblastoma (GBM), the most common primary malignant brain tumor in adults, remains a significant unmet need in oncology. Historically, cytotoxic treatments provided little durable benefit, and tumors recurred within several months. This has spurred a substantial research effort to establish more effective therapies for both newly diagnosed and recurrent GBM. In this context, antiangiogenic therapy emerged as a promising treatment strategy because GBMs are highly vascular tumors. I ...[more]

PMID: 25713439

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundNeovascular glaucoma (NVG) is a potentially blinding secondary glaucoma. It is caused by the formation of abnormal new blood vessels which prevent normal drainage of aqueous from the anterior segment of the eye. Anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (anti-VEGF) agents are specific inhibitors of the primary mediators of neovascularization. Studies have reported the effectiveness of anti-VEGFs for the control of intraocular pressure (IOP) in NVG.ObjectivesTo compare the IOP lowering effects of intraocular anti-VEGF agents to no anti-VEGF treatment, as an adjunct to existing modalities for the treatment of NVG.Search methodsWe searched CENTRAL (which contains the Cochrane Eyes and Vision Group Trials Register) (The Cochrane Library 2012, Issue 12), Ovid MEDLINE, Ovid MEDLINE In-Process and Other Non-Indexed Citations, Ovid MEDLINE Daily, Ovid OLDMEDLINE, (January 1950 to January 2013), EMBASE (January 1980 to January 2013), Latin American and Caribbean Literature on Health Sciences (LILACS) (January 1982 to January 2013), the metaRegister of Controlled Trials (mRCT) (www.controlled-trials.com), ClinicalTrials.gov (www.clinicaltrials.gov/) and the WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP) (www.who.int/ictrp/search/en). We did not use any date or language restrictions in the electronic searches for trials. We last searched the electronic databases on 11 January 2013.Selection criteriaWe included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and quasi-RCTs of people treated with anti-VEGF agents for NVG.Data collection and analysisTwo authors independently assessed the search results for trials to be included in the review. Discrepancies were resolved by discussion with a third author. Since no trial met our inclusion criteria, no assessment of risk of bias or meta-analysis was undertaken.Main resultsNo RCTs were found that met the inclusion criteria for this review. Two RCTs of anti-VEGF agents for treating NVG were not included in the review due to the heterogeneity and uncontrolled assignment of adjunct treatments received by the study participants.Authors' conclusionsCurrently available evidence is insufficient to evaluate the effectiveness of anti-VEGF treatments, such as intravitreal ranibizumab or bevacizumab, as an adjunct to conventional treatment in lowering IOP in NVG. Well designed RCTs are needed to address this issue, particularly trials that evaluate long-term (at least six months) benefits and risks since the effects of anti-VEGF agents may be short-term only. An RCT comparing anti-VEGF agents with no anti-VEGF agents taking into account the need for co-interventions, such as panretinal photocoagulation (PRP), glaucoma shunt procedures, cyclodestructive procedures, cataract surgery, and deep vitrectomy, could be of use to investigate the additional beneficial effect of anti-VEGF agents in treating NVG. Since decisions for when and which co-interventions should be used are based on clinical criteria, they would not be appropriate for randomization. However, the design of a study on this topic should aim to balance groups by stratification of co-intervention at time of randomization or by enrolling a sufficient number of participants to conduct subgroup analysis by co-interventions (ideally 15 participants per treatment group for each subgroup). Alternatively, the inclusion criteria for a trial could limit participants to those who receive the same co-intervention.

Project description:PURPOSE:To assess systemic vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF)-A levels after treatment with intravitreous aflibercept, bevacizumab, or ranibizumab. DESIGN:Comparative-effectiveness trial with participants randomly assigned to 2 mg aflibercept, 1.25 mg bevacizumab, or 0.3 mg ranibizumab after a re-treatment algorithm. PARTICIPANTS:Participants with available plasma samples (N = 436). METHODS:Plasma samples were collected before injections at baseline and 4-week, 52-week, and 104-week visits. In a preplanned secondary analysis, systemic-free VEGF levels from an enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay were compared across anti-VEGF agents and correlated with systemic side effects. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES:Changes in the natural log (ln) of plasma VEGF levels. RESULTS:Baseline free VEGF levels were similar across all 3 groups. At 4 weeks, mean ln(VEGF) changes were -0.30±0.61 pg/ml, -0.31±0.54 pg/ml, and -0.02±0.44 pg/ml for the aflibercept, bevacizumab, and ranibizumab groups, respectively. The adjusted differences between treatment groups (adjusted confidence interval [CI]; P value) were -0.01 (-0.12 to +0.10; P = 0.89), -0.31 (-0.44 to -0.18; P < 0.001), and -0.30 (-0.43 to -0.18; P < 0.001) for aflibercept-bevacizumab, aflibercept-ranibizumab, and bevacizumab-ranibizumab, respectively. At 52 weeks, a difference in mean VEGF changes between bevacizumab and ranibizumab persisted (-0.23 [-0.38 to -0.09]; P < 0.001); the difference between aflibercept and ranibizumab was -0.12 (P = 0.07) and between aflibercept and bevacizumab was +0.11 (P = 0.07). Treatment group differences at 2 years were similar to 1 year. No apparent treatment differences were detected at 52 or 104 weeks in the cohort of participants not receiving injections within 1 or 2 months before plasma collection. Participants with (N = 9) and without (N = 251) a heart attack or stroke had VEGF levels that appeared similar. CONCLUSIONS:These data suggest that decreases in plasma free-VEGF levels are greater after treatment with aflibercept or bevacizumab compared with ranibizumab at 4 weeks. At 52 and 104 weeks, a greater decrease was observed in bevacizumab versus ranibizumab. Results from 2 subgroups of participants who did not receive injections within at least 1 month and 2 months before collection suggest similar changes in VEGF levels after stopping injections. It is unknown whether VEGF levels return to normal as the drug is cleared from the system or whether the presence of the drug affects the assay's ability to accurately measure free VEGF. No significant associations between VEGF concentration and systemic factors were noted.

Dataset Information

Lessons from anti-vascular endothelial growth factor and anti-vascular endothelial growth factor receptor trials in patients with glioblastoma.

Publications

Lessons from anti-vascular endothelial growth factor and anti-vascular endothelial growth factor receptor trials in patients with glioblastoma.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets