What next for newly diagnosed glioblastoma?
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Domingo-Musibay E
PROVIDER: S-EPMC4976851 | biostudies-literature | 2015
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Publications
What next for newly diagnosed glioblastoma?
Domingo-Musibay Evidio E Galanis Evanthia E
Future oncology (London, England) 20151112 24
Glioblastoma is the most common primary brain tumor in adults. Despite current multimodality treatment including surgical resection and temozolomide-based chemoradiotherapy, median survival is only 14-16 months. Characterization of molecular alterations in glioblastoma has identified prognostic subgroups and therapeutic opportunities for clinical trials across glioblastoma subsets. Following a number of negative Phase III trials testing temozolomide dose intensification and angiogenesis inhibiti ...[more]
Similar Datasets
Project description:Glioblastoma is an aggressive and inevitably recurrent primary intra-axial brain tumor with a dismal prognosis. The current mainstay of treatment involves maximally safe surgical resection followed by radiotherapy over a 6-week period with concomitant temozolomide chemotherapy followed by temozolomide maintenance. This review provides a summary of the epidemiological, clinical, histologic and genetic characteristics of newly diagnosed disease as well as the current standard of care and potential future therapeutic prospects.
| S-EPMC7892469 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Purpose of reviewElderly patients with newly diagnosed glioblastoma (eGBM) carry a worse prognosis compared with their younger counterparts. eGBM garners special attention due to the unique challenges, including increased treatment-associated toxicity, less relative benefit from aggressive therapy, medical comorbidities, and immunosuppression. The pivotal GBM trials excluded patients > 70 years old and the optimal treatment approach remains unsettled for eGBM. In this review, we analyze the historical evidence-based data for treating eGBM and discuss the future direction for managing this vulnerable population.Recent findingsTreatment for eGBM continues to evolve. Therapy choice is guided by performance status and presence of O6-methylguanine-DNA-methyltransferase (MGMT) promoter methylation. For eGBM with good performance status, combinatorial hypofractionated radiation therapy (hRT) and temozolomide should be recommended. For those with poor performance status, further stratification based on MGMT promoter methylation test result is recommended. Single-agent temozolomide is a viable treatment option for MGMT methylated tumors (mMGMT); in particular, those classified with receptor tyrosine kinase II methylation. hRT alone can be considered in MGMT unmethylated (uMGMT) eGBM patients. As precision oncology continues to advance, effective targeted and immunotherapy may emerge as new treatment options for eGBM. Management of elderly patients with newly diagnosed GBM carries a unique set of challenges. Progress has been made in defining the optimal therapeutic approach for these patients, but many questions remain to be answered.
| S-EPMC8817659 | biostudies-literature
Project description:PurposeInnovative, efficient treatments are desperately needed for people with glioblastoma (GBM).MethodsSixteen patients (median age 65.8 years) with newly diagnosed, small-sized, not safely resectable supratentorial GBM underwent interstitial photodynamic therapy (iPDT) as upfront eradicating local therapy followed by standard chemoradiation. 5-aminolevulinic acid (5-ALA) induced protoporphyrin IX was used as the photosensitizer. The tumors were irradiated with light at 635 nm wavelength via stereotactically implanted cylindrical diffuser fibers. Outcome after iPDT was retrospectively compared with a positively-selected in-house patient cohort (n = 110) who underwent complete tumor resection followed by chemoradiation.ResultsMedian progression-free survival (PFS) was 16.4 months, and median overall survival (OS) was 28.0 months. Seven patients (43.8%) experienced long-term PFS > 24 months. Median follow-up was 113.9 months for the survivors. Univariate regression revealed MGMT-promoter methylation but not age as a prognostic factor for both OS (p = 0.04 and p = 0.07) and PFS (p = 0.04 and p = 0.67). Permanent iPDT-associated morbidity was seen in one iPDT patient (6.3%). Patients treated with iPDT experienced superior PFS and OS compared to patients who underwent complete tumor removal (p < 0.01 and p = 0.01, respectively). The rate of long-term PFS was higher in iPDT-treated patients (43.8% vs. 8.9%, p < 0.01).ConclusioniPDT is a feasible treatment concept and might be associated with long-term PFS in a subgroup of GBM patients, potentially via induction of so far unknown immunological tumor-controlling processes.
| S-EPMC10050060 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Glioblastoma is a refractory malignancy with limited treatment options at tumor recurrence. Only a small proportion of patients survive 2 years or longer with the current standard of care. Gene expression profiling can segregate newly diagnosed patients into groups with different prognoses, and these biomarkers are being incorporated into a new generation of personalized clinical trials. Using the experience from recently completed large scale, multi-faceted, randomized glioblastoma clinical trials, a new clinical trial paradigm is being established to move promising therapies forward into the newly diagnosed treatment setting. Upcoming trials using the immune check-point inhibitors are an example of this changing paradigm and these and other immunotherapies have potential as promising new treatment modalities for newly diagnosed GB patients.
| S-EPMC4673777 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundThe impact of prolonging temozolomide (TMZ) maintenance beyond six cycles in newly diagnosed glioblastoma (GBM) remains a topic of discussion. We investigated the effects of prolonged TMZ maintenance on progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS).Patients and methodsIn this retrospective single-center cohort study, we included patients with GBM who were treated with radiation therapy with concomitant and adjuvant TMZ. For analysis, patients were considered who either completed six TMZ maintenance cycles (group B), continued with TMZ therapy beyond six cycles (group C), or stopped TMZ maintenance therapy within the first six cycles (group A). Patients with progression during the first six TMZ maintenance cycles were excluded.ResultsClinical data from 107 patients were included for Kaplan-Meier analyses and 102 for Cox regressions. Median PFS times were 8.1 months (95% confidence interval [CI] 6.1-12.4) in group A, 13.7 months (95% CI 10.6-17.5) in group B, and 20.9 months (95% CI 15.2-43.5) in group C. At first progression, response rates of TMZ/lomustine rechallenge were 47% in group B and 13% in group C. Median OS times were 12.7 months (95% CI 10.3-16.8) in group A, 25.2 months (95% CI 17.7-55.5) in group B, and 28.6 months (95% CI 24.4-open) in group C. Nevertheless, multivariate Cox regression for patients in group C compared with group B that accounted for imbalances of other risk factors showed no different relative risk (RR) for OS (RR 0.77, p = .46).ConclusionOur data do not support a general extension of TMZ maintenance therapy beyond six cycles. The Oncologist 2017;22:570-575 IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: Radiation therapy with concomitant and adjuvant temozolomide (TMZ) maintenance therapy is still the standard of care in patients below the age of 65 years in newly diagnosed glioblastoma. However, in clinical practice, many centers continue TMZ maintenance therapy beyond six cycles. The impact of this continuation is controversial and has not yet been addressed in prospective randomized clinical trials. We compared the effect of more than six cycles of TMZ in comparison with exactly six cycles on overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) by multivariate analysis and found a benefit in PFS but not OS. Thus, our data do not suggest prolonging TMZ maintenance therapy beyond six cycles, which should be considered in neurooncological practice.
| S-EPMC5423504 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Glioblastoma is an aggressive primary tumor of the central nervous system. This review will focus on clinical developments and management of newly diagnosed disease, including a discussion about the incorporation of molecular features into the classification of glioblastoma. Such advances will continue to shape our thinking about the disease and how to best manage it. With regards to treatment, the role of surgical resection, radiotherapy, chemotherapy, and tumor-treating fields will be presented. Pivotal studies defining our current standard of care will be highlighted, as will key ongoing trials that may influence our management of glioblastoma in the near future.
| S-EPMC7278092 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundGlioblastoma is the most aggressive primary brain cancer with a poor prognosis. Despite numerous studies in the past 17 years, effective treatment options for glioblastoma remain limited. In this study, we aimed to identify and compare phase III clinical trials for glioblastoma in terms of efficacy and baseline characteristics.MethodsA systematic literature search was conducted using PubMed and ClinicalTrials.gov to identify phase III clinical trials for glioblastoma in adult patients. The target population included adult patients aged 18 years and above (younger cohort) and patients ≥60 years of age (elderly cohort). The search results were screened based on predefined inclusion criteria, and the included trials were analyzed for their study design, baseline characteristics, and survival results.ResultsEleven trials met the inclusion criteria in the younger cohort. Of these, three reported a statistically significant improvement in overall survival (OS), including the EORTC/NCIC study (NCT00006353), EF-14 (NCT00916409), and CeTeG (NCT01149109). Of the 11 trials, eight were open-label randomized trials, including all of the positive ones, while three negative trials employed treatment blinding and a placebo control. The baseline characteristics of the trials [such as extent of resection, age, gender, and O(6)-methylguanine-DNA-methyltransferase (MGMT) promoter methylation status] did not significantly differ between positive and negative trials. Isocitrate dehydrogenase (IDH) mutation status was analyzed in only two trials, with a small percentage of IDH-mutated tumors in each. Additionally, three more trials in the elderly cohort showed a statistically significant improvement of OS, the NOA-08 trial, the ISRCTN81470623-trial by Malmström et al. and NCT00482677-trial by Perry et al. Their baseline characteristics and implications are also analyzed.ConclusionThis analysis of phase III clinical trials for glioblastoma conducted since 2005 showed that the majority of trials did not result in a significant improvement in OS. Among the trials included in this analysis, only the EORTC/NCIC, EF-14, and CeTeG studies demonstrated a positive OS outcome in the younger cohort.
| S-EPMC10558397 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Glioblastoma (GBM) is a challenging diagnosis with almost universally poor prognosis. Though the survival advantage of postoperative radiation (RT) is well established, around 90% of patients will fail in the RT field. The high likelihood of local failure suggests the efficacy of RT needs to be improved to improve clinical outcomes. Radiosensitizers are an established method of enhancing RT cell killing through the addition of a pharmaceutical agent. Though the majority of trials using radiosensitizers have historically been unsuccessful, there continues to be interest with a variety of approaches having been employed. Epidermal growth factor receptor inhibitors, histone deacetylase inhibitors, antiangiogenic agents, and a number of other molecularly targeted agents have all been investigated as potential methods of radiosensitization in the temozolomide era. Outcomes have varied both in terms of toxicity and survival, but some agents such as valproic acid and bortezomib have demonstrated promising results. However, reporting of results in phase 2 trials in newly diagnosed GBM have been inconsistent, with no standard in reporting progression-free survival and toxicity. There is a pressing need for investigation of new agents; however, nearly all phase 3 trials of GBM patients of the past 25 years have demonstrated no improvement in outcomes. One proposed explanation for this is the selection of agents lacking sufficient preclinical data and/or based on poorly designed phase 2 trials. Radiosensitization may represent a viable strategy for improving GBM outcomes in newly diagnosed patients, and further investigation using agents with promising phase 2 data is warranted.
| S-EPMC7274183 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundConcurrent treatment with temozolomide and radiotherapy followed by maintenance temozolomide is the standard of care for patients with newly diagnosed glioblastoma. Bevacizumab, a humanized monoclonal antibody against vascular endothelial growth factor A, is currently approved for recurrent glioblastoma. Whether the addition of bevacizumab would improve survival among patients with newly diagnosed glioblastoma is not known.MethodsIn this randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial, we treated adults who had centrally confirmed glioblastoma with radiotherapy (60 Gy) and daily temozolomide. Treatment with bevacizumab or placebo began during week 4 of radiotherapy and was continued for up to 12 cycles of maintenance chemotherapy. At disease progression, the assigned treatment was revealed, and bevacizumab therapy could be initiated or continued. The trial was designed to detect a 25% reduction in the risk of death and a 30% reduction in the risk of progression or death, the two coprimary end points, with the addition of bevacizumab.ResultsA total of 978 patients were registered, and 637 underwent randomization. There was no significant difference in the duration of overall survival between the bevacizumab group and the placebo group (median, 15.7 and 16.1 months, respectively; hazard ratio for death in the bevacizumab group, 1.13). Progression-free survival was longer in the bevacizumab group (10.7 months vs. 7.3 months; hazard ratio for progression or death, 0.79). There were modest increases in rates of hypertension, thromboembolic events, intestinal perforation, and neutropenia in the bevacizumab group. Over time, an increased symptom burden, a worse quality of life, and a decline in neurocognitive function were more frequent in the bevacizumab group.ConclusionsFirst-line use of bevacizumab did not improve overall survival in patients with newly diagnosed glioblastoma. Progression-free survival was prolonged but did not reach the prespecified improvement target. (Funded by the National Cancer Institute; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00884741.).
| S-EPMC4201043 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Integrins αvβ3 and αvβ5 regulate angiogenesis and invasiveness in cancer, potentially by modulating activation of the transforming growth factor (TGF)-β pathway. The randomized phase III CENTRIC and phase II CORE trials explored the integrin inhibitor cilengitide in patients with newly diagnosed glioblastoma with versus without O6-methylguanine DNA methyltransferase (MGMT) promoter methylation. These trials failed to meet their primary endpoints.Immunohistochemistry was used to assess the levels of the target integrins of cilengitide, αvβ3 and αvβ5 integrins, of αvβ8 and of their putative target, phosphorylation of SMAD2, in tumor tissues from CENTRIC (n=274) and CORE (n=224).αvβ3 and αvβ5 expression correlated well in tumor and endothelial cells, but showed little association with αvβ8 or pSMAD2 levels. In CENTRIC, there was no interaction between the biomarkers and treatment for prediction of outcome. In CORE, higher αvβ3 levels in tumor cells were associated with improved progression-free survival by central review and with improved overall survival in patients treated with cilengitide.Integrins αvβ3, αvβ5 and αvβ8 are differentially expressed in glioblastoma. Integrin levels do not correlate with the activation level of the canonical TGF-β pathway. αvβ3 integrin expression may predict benefit from integrin inhibition in patients with glioblastoma lacking MGMT promoter methylation.
| S-EPMC4924768 | biostudies-literature