A phase II study of feasibility and toxicity of bevacizumab in combination with temozolomide in patients with recurrent glioblastoma

The efficacy of stereotactic radiotherapy followed by bevacizumab and temozolomide in the treatment of recurrent glioblastoma: a case report

Glioblastoma (GBM) is the most common and aggressive malignant brain tumor among adults. Despite advancements in multimodality therapy for GBM, the overall prognosis remains poor, with an extremely high risk of recurrence. Currently, there is no established consensus on the optimal treatment option for recurrent GBM, which may include reoperation, reirradiation, chemotherapy, or a combination of the above. Bevacizumab is considered a first-line treatment option for recurrent GBM, as is temozolomide. However, in recurrent GBM, it is necessary to balance the risks and benefits of reirradiation in combination with bevacizumab and temozolomide. Herein, we report the case of a patient with recurrent GBM after standard treatment who benefited from stereotactic radiotherapy followed by bevacizumab and temozolomide maintenance therapy. Following 16 months of concurrent chemoradiotherapy (CCRT), the patient was diagnosed with recurrent GBM by a 3-T contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). The addition of localized radiotherapy to the ongoing treatment regimen of bevacizumab, in combination with temozolomide therapy, prolonged the patient's disease-free survival to over 2 years, achieving a significant long-term outcome, with no notable adverse effects observed. This clinical case may provide a promising new option for patients with recurrent GBM.

Clinical activity and safety of sintilimab, bevacizumab, and TMZ in patients with recurrent glioblastoma

PURPOSE

There are limited and no standard therapies for recurrent glioblastoma. We herein report the antitumour activity and safety of sintilimab, bevacizumab and temozolomide (TMZ) in recurrent glioblastoma.

METHODS

We retrospectively analysed eight patients with recurrent glioblastoma treated with sintilimab (200 mg) every three weeks + bevacizumab (10 mg/kg) every three weeks + TMZ (200 mg/m²orally) (5 days orally every 28 days for a total of four weeks). The primary objective was investigator-assessed median progression-free survival(mPFS). Secondary objectives were to assess the 6-month PFS, objective response rate (ORR) and duration of response (DOR) accroding to RANO criteria.

RESULTS

The mPFS time for 8 patients was 3.340 months (95% CI: 2.217-4.463), The longest PFS was close to 9 months. Five patients were assessed to have achieved partial response (PR), with an overall remission rate of 62.5%, Four patients experienced a change in tumour volume at the best response time of greater than 60% shrinkage from baseline, and one patient remained progression free upon review, with a DOR of more than 6.57 months. The 6-month PFS was 25% (95% CI: 5.0-55.0%). Three patients had a treatment-related adverse events, though no grade 4 or 5 adverse events occurred.

CONCLUSION

In this small retrospective study, the combination regimen of sintilimab, bevacizumab and TMZ showed promising antitumour activity in treatment of recurrent glioblastoma, with a good objective remission rate.

Congress of Neurological Surgeons systematic review and evidence-based guidelines update on the role of targeted therapies and immunotherapies in the management of progressive glioblastoma

The following questions and recommendations are pertinent to the following: TARGET POPULATION: These recommendations apply to adults with progressive GBM who have undergone standard primary treatment with surgery and/or chemoradiation. QUESTION 1: In adults with progressive glioblastoma is the use of bevacizumab as monotherapy superior to standard salvage cytotoxic chemotherapy as measured by progression free survival and overall survival?

RECOMMENDATION

Level III: Treatment with bevacizumab is suggested in the treatment of progressive GBM, as it provides improved disease control compared to historical controls as measured by best imaging response and progression free survival at 6 months, while not providing evidence for improvement in overall survival. QUESTION 2: In adults with progressive glioblastoma is the use of bevacizumab as combination therapy with cytotoxic agents superior to standard salvage cytotoxic chemotherapy as measured by progression free survival and overall survival?

RECOMMENDATION

Level III: There is insufficient evidence to show benefit or harm of bevacizumab in combination with cytotoxic therapies in progressive glioblastoma due to a lack of evidence supporting a clearly defined benefit without significant toxicity. QUESTION 3: In adults with progressive glioblastoma is the use of bevacizumab as a combination therapy with targeted agents superior to standard salvage cytotoxic chemotherapy as measured by progression free survival and overall survival?

RECOMMENDATION

There is insufficient evidence to support a recommendation regarding this question. QUESTION 4: In adults with progressive glioblastoma is the use of targeted agents as monotherapy superior to standard salvage cytotoxic chemotherapy as measured by progression free survival and overall survival?

RECOMMENDATION

There is insufficient evidence to support a recommendation regarding this question. QUESTION 5: In adults with progressive glioblastoma is the use of targeted agents in combination with cytotoxic therapies superior to standard salvage cytotoxic chemotherapy as measured by progression free survival and overall survival?

RECOMMENDATION

There is insufficient evidence to support a recommendation regarding this question. QUESTION 6: In adults with progressive glioblastoma is the use of immunotherapy monotherapy superior to standard salvage cytotoxic chemotherapy as measured by progression free survival and overall survival?

RECOMMENDATION

There is insufficient evidence to support a recommendation regarding this question. QUESTION 7: In adults with progressive glioblastoma is the use of immunotherapy in combination with targeted agents superior to standard salvage cytotoxic chemotherapy as measured by progression free survival and overall survival?

RECOMMENDATION

There is insufficient evidence to support a recommendation regarding this question. QUESTION 8: In adults with progressive glioblastoma is the use of immunotherapy in combination with bevacizumab superior to standard salvage cytotoxic chemotherapy as measured by progression free survival and overall survival?

RECOMMENDATION

There is insufficient evidence to support a recommendation regarding this question.

Viral and other therapies for recurrent glioblastoma: is a 24-month durable response unusual?

A phase I trial of an engineered poliovirus for the treatment of recurrent glioblastoma (GBM) has attracted attention due to 8 survivors reaching the 24-month and 5 reaching the 36-month survival landmarks.1 Genetically engineered viruses (oncolytic viruses) have been in trials for GBM for almost two decades.2 These replication-competent (tumor-selective, oncolytic, replication-conditional) viruses or replication-defective viral vectors (gene therapy) deliver cytotoxic payloads to tumors, leading to immunogenic death and intratumoral inflammatory responses. This transforms the tumor microenvironment from immunologically naïve ("cold") to inflamed ("hot"), increasing immune cell recognition of tumor antigens and the durable responses observed in virotherapy.3,4 Several current and past virotherapy trials have reported a "tail" of apparent responders at the 24-month landmark. Other modalities have also reported a "tail" of seemingly long-term survivors. These trials seem to show that these responder "tails" characterize a defined subset of GBM patients.

The prognosis for patients with newly diagnosed glioblastoma receiving bevacizumab combination therapy: a meta-analysis

Background

A combination of temozolomide (TMZ) and radiotherapy and subsequent adjuvant chemotherapy is the gold standard of treatment for glioblastoma (GB). Bevacizumab (BEV), a humanized monoclonal antibody that blocks the effects of vascular endothelial growth factor A, has produced impressive response rates for recurrent GB and has been approved as second-line therapy. The efficacy and safety of BEV in newly diagnosed GB are not known.

Aim

This systematic meta-analysis was undertaken to evaluate the value of combination therapy involving BEV in newly diagnosed GB.

Methods

Electronic databases were searched for eligible literature up to October 2017. Randomized controlled trials assessing the efficacy and safety of BEV in patients with newly diagnosed GB were included, of which the main outcomes were progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), and adverse events (AEs). All the data were pooled with the corresponding 95% confidence intervals (CIs) using RevMan software. Sensitivity analyses and heterogeneity were quantitatively evaluated.

Results

A total of six randomized controlled trials were included in this analysis. The experimental BEV group had significantly improved the overall PFS (OR =0.46, 95% CI =0.26–0.81, P=0.007), as well as PFS at 6 months (OR =3.47, 95% CI =2.85–4.22, P<0.00001) and PFS at 12 months (OR =2.02, 95% CI =1.66–2.46, P<0.00001), respectively. However, there were no significant differences in PFS at 24 months with BEV (OR =0.95, 95% CI =0.61–1.48, P=0.82). OS at 6 months (P=0.07) and 24 months (P=0.07) was not significantly improved with BEV in patients with newly diagnosed GB. However, the meta-analysis on the OS at 12 months showed differences with BEV (OR =1.24, 95% CI =1.03–1.50, P=0.02).

Conclusion

Our study indicates that addition of BEV for newly diagnosed GB resulted in a superior PFS rate. However, the combination therapy involving BEV did not improve OS. Future investigations are needed to analyze whether BEV helps improve OS efficacy.

Nivolumab with or without ipilimumab in patients with recurrent glioblastoma: results from exploratory phase I cohorts of CheckMate 143

Background

Immunotherapies have demonstrated efficacy across a diverse set of tumors supporting further evaluation in glioblastoma. The objective of this study was to evaluate the safety/tolerability and describe immune-mediated effects of nivolumab ± ipilimumab in patients with recurrent glioblastoma. Exploratory efficacy outcomes are also reported.

Methods

Patients were randomized to receive nivolumab 3 mg/kg every 2 weeks (Q2W; NIVO3) or nivolumab 1 mg/kg + ipilimumab 3 mg/kg every 3 weeks (Q3W) for 4 doses, then nivolumab 3 mg/kg Q2W (NIVO1+IPI3). An alternative regimen of nivolumab 3 mg/kg + ipilimumab 1 mg/kg Q3W for 4 doses, then nivolumab 3 mg/kg Q2W (NIVO3+IPI1) was investigated in a nonrandomized arm.

Results

Forty patients were enrolled (NIVO3, n = 10; NIVO1+IPI3, n = 10; NIVO3+IPI1, n = 20). The most common treatment-related adverse events (AEs) were fatigue (NIVO3, 30%; NIVO1+IPI3, 80%; NIVO3+IPI1, 55%) and diarrhea (10%, 70%, 30%, respectively). AEs leading to discontinuation occurred in 10% (NIVO3), 30% (NIVO1+IPI3), and 20% (NIVO3+IPI1) of patients. Three patients achieved a partial response (NIVO3, n = 1; NIVO3+IPI1, n = 2) and 8 had stable disease for ≥12 weeks (NIVO3, n = 2; NIVO1+IPI3, n = 2; NIVO3+IPI1, n = 4 [Response Assessment in Neuro-Oncology criteria]). Most patients (68%) had tumor-cell programmed death ligand-1 expression ≥1%. Immune-mediated effects mimicking radiographic progression occurred in 2 patients.

Conclusions

Nivolumab monotherapy was better tolerated than nivolumab + ipilimumab; the tolerability of the combination was influenced by ipilimumab dose. These safety and exploratory findings merit further investigation of immunotherapies in glioblastoma.

Clinical outcomes in recurrent glioblastoma with bevacizumab therapy: An analysis of the literature

Bevacizumab (BEV) is a common treatment for recurrent glioblastoma (GBM). After progression on BEV, there is no consensus on subsequent therapy, as multiple chemotherapy trials have failed to demonstrate discernible activity for salvage. A previous review (995 patients) estimated a progression free survival (PFS) on BEV of 4.2months (SD±2.1) with an overall survival (OS) after progression on BEV at 3.8months (SD±1). We endeavored to establish a more rigorous historical control, both as a benchmark for efficacy, and a prognostic tool for clinical practice. A comprehensive literature review was performed utilizing PubMed and societal presentation abstracts. A total 2388 patients from 53 arms of 42 studies were analyzed in three groups: 1) thirty-two studies in which survival post-BEV was determined by subtracting PFS from OS (2045 patients): PFS on BEV=4.38months (95% CI 4.09-4.68); OS post-BEV=3.36months (95% CI 3.12-3.66); 2) two studies (94 patients) in which OS post-BEV is reported: OS=3.26 (95% CI 2.39-4.42); 3) eight studies of salvage therapy after progression on BEV (249 patients): of OS post-BEV=4.46months (95% CI 3.68-5.54). These estimates provide a firm historical control for PFS on BEV, as well as OS after disease progression on BEV therapy.

Molecularly Targeted Drugs Plus Radiotherapy and Temozolomide Treatment for Newly Diagnosed Glioblastoma: A Meta-Analysis and Systematic Review

Glioblastoma (GBM) is the most common primary malignant brain tumor that nearly always results in a bad prognosis. Temozolomide plus radiotherapy (TEM+RAD) is the most common treatment for newly diagnosed GBM. With the development of molecularly targeted drugs, several clinical trials were reported; however, the efficacy of the treatment remains controversial. So we attempted to measure the dose of the molecularly targeted drug that could improve the prognosis of those patients. The appropriate electronic databases (PubMed, MEDLINE, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Library) were searched for relevant studies. A meta-analysis was performed after determining which studies met the inclusion criteria. Six randomized, controlled trials (RCTs) were identified for this meta-analysis, comprising 2,637 GBM patients. The benefit of overall survival (OS) was hazard ratio (HZ), 0.936 [95% confidence interval (CI), 0.852–1.028]. The benefit with respect to progression-free survival (PFS) rate was HZ of 0.796 (95% CI, 0.701–0.903). OS benefit of cilengitide was HZ of 0.792 (95% CI, 0.642–0.977). The adverse effects higher than grade 3 were 57.7% in the experimental group and 44.1% in the placebo group (odds ratio, 1.679; 95% CI, 1.434–1.967). The addition of molecularly targeted drugs to TEM + RAD did not improve the OS of patients with GBM; however, it did improve PFS in patients treated by cilengitide who could not get improvement in OS. The rate of adverse effects was higher in the experimental group than in the placebo group.

Therapeutic options in recurrent glioblastoma--An update

INTRODUCTION

Standards of care are not yet defined in recurrent glioblastoma.

METHODS

We reviewed the literature on clinical trials for recurrent glioblastoma available in PubMed and American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO) abstracts until June 2015.

RESULTS

Evidence is limited due to the paucity of randomized controlled studies. Second surgery or re-irradiation are options for selected patients. Alkylating chemotherapy such as nitrosoureas or temozolomide and the vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) antibody, bevacizumab, exhibit comparable single agent activity. Phase III data exploring the benefit of combining bevacizumab and lomustine are emerging. Novel approaches in the fields of targeted therapy, immunotherapy, and tumor metabolism are coming forward. Several biomarkers are being explored, but, except for O(6)-methylguanine DNA methyltransferase (MGMT) promoter methylation, none has assumed a role in clinical practice.

CONCLUSION

Proper patient selection, development of predictive biomarkers and randomized controlled studies are required to develop evidence-based concepts for recurrent glioblastoma.

AshwaMAX and Withaferin A inhibits gliomas in cellular and murine orthotopic models

Glioblastoma multiforme (GBM) is an aggressive, malignant cancer Johnson and O'Neill (J Neurooncol 107: 359-364, 2012). An extract from the winter cherry plant (Withania somnifera ), AshwaMAX, is concentrated (4.3 %) for Withaferin A; a steroidal lactone that inhibits cancer cells Vanden Berghe et al. (Cancer Epidemiol Biomark Prev 23: 1985-1996, 2014). We hypothesized that AshwaMAX could treat GBM and that bioluminescence imaging (BLI) could track oral therapy in orthotopic murine models of glioblastoma. Human parietal-cortical glioblastoma cells (GBM2, GBM39) were isolated from primary tumors while U87-MG was obtained commercially. GBM2 was transduced with lentiviral vectors that express Green Fluorescent Protein (GFP)/firefly luciferase fusion proteins. Mutational, expression and proliferative status of GBMs were studied. Intracranial xenografts of glioblastomas were grown in the right frontal regions of female, nude mice (n = 3-5 per experiment). Tumor growth was followed through BLI. Neurosphere cultures (U87-MG, GBM2 and GBM39) were inhibited by AshwaMAX at IC50 of 1.4, 0.19 and 0.22 µM equivalent respectively and by Withaferin A with IC50 of 0.31, 0.28 and 0.25 µM respectively. Oral gavage, every other day, of AshwaMAX (40 mg/kg per day) significantly reduced bioluminescence signal (n = 3 mice, p < 0.02, four parameter non-linear regression analysis) in preclinical models. After 30 days of treatment, bioluminescent signal increased suggesting onset of resistance. BLI signal for control, vehicle-treated mice increased and then plateaued. Bioluminescent imaging revealed diffuse growth of GBM2 xenografts. With AshwaMAX, GBM neurospheres collapsed at nanomolar concentrations. Oral treatment studies on murine models confirmed that AshwaMAX is effective against orthotopic GBM. AshwaMAX is thus a promising candidate for future clinical translation in patients with GBM.