Risk of Adverse Vascular Events in Newly Diagnosed Glioblastoma Multiforme Patients Treated with Bevacizumab: a Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Epidemiology, biology, and management of venous thromboembolism in gliomas: An interdisciplinary review

Patients with diffuse glioma are at high risk of developing venous thromboembolism (VTE) over the course of the disease, with up to 30% incidence in patients with glioblastoma (GBM) and a lower but nonnegligible risk in lower-grade gliomas. Recent and ongoing efforts to identify clinical and laboratory biomarkers of patients at increased risk offer promise, but to date, there is no proven role for prophylaxis outside of the perioperative period. Emerging data suggest a higher risk of VTE in patients with isocitrate dehydrogenase (IDH) wild-type glioma and the potential mechanistic role of IDH mutation in the suppression of production of the procoagulants tissue factor and podoplanin. According to published guidelines, therapeutic anticoagulation with low molecular weight heparin (LMWH) or alternatively, direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) in patients without increased risk of gastrointestinal or genitourinary bleeding is recommended for VTE treatment. Due to the elevated risk of intracranial hemorrhage (ICH) in GBM, anticoagulation treatment remains challenging and at times fraught. There are conflicting data on the risk of ICH with LMWH in patients with glioma; small retrospective studies suggest DOACs may convey lower ICH risk than LMWH. Investigational anticoagulants that prevent thrombosis without impairing hemostasis, such as factor XI inhibitors, may carry a better therapeutic index and are expected to enter clinical trials for cancer-associated thrombosis.

The Role of EGFR Amplification in Deep Venous Thrombosis Occurrence in IDH Wild-Type Glioblastoma

Introduction: Glioblastoma (GBM) patients have a 20-30 incidence of venous thromboembolic events. EGFR is a widely used prognostic marker for many cancers. Recent lung cancer studies have described relationships between EGFR amplification and an increased incidence of thromboembolic complications. We aim to explore this relationship in glioblastoma patients. Methods: Two hundred ninety-three consecutive patients with IDH wild-type GBM were included in the analysis. The amplification status of EGFR was measured using fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH). Centromere 7 (CEP7) expression was recorded to calculate the EGFR-to-CEP7 ratio. All data were collected retrospectively through chart review. Molecular data were obtained through the surgical pathology report at the time of biopsy. Results: There were 112 subjects who were EGFR-amplified (38.2%) and 181 who were non-amplified (61.8%). EGFR amplification status was not significantly correlated with VTE risk overall (p = 0.2001). There was no statistically significant association between VTE and EGFR status after controlling for Bevacizumab therapy (p = 0.1626). EGFR non-amplified status was associated with an increased VTE risk in subjects greater than 60 years of age (p = 0.048). Conclusions: There was no significant difference in occurrence of VTE in patients with glioblastoma, regardless of EGFR amplification status. Patients older than 60 years of age with EGFR amplification experienced a lower rate of VTE, contrary to some reports on non-small-cell lung cancer linking EGFR amplification to VTE risk.

A Phase II Trial of Atezolizumab Plus Carboplatin Plus Pemetrexed Plus Bevacizumab in the Treatment of Patients with Stage IV Non-Squamous Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer: Big Ten Cancer Research Consortium (BTCRC)- LUN 17-139

INTRODUCTION

LUN17-139 evaluated the safety and efficacy of Atezolizumab (A) plus Carboplatin (C) plus Pemetrexed (Pem) plus Bevacizumab (B) (ACBPem) in treatment naïve patients with stage IV non-squamous non-small cell lung cancer (Ns-NSCLC).

PATIENTS AND METHODS

In this multicenter, single-arm phase II trial, all patients received A (1200-mg, D1) + C (AUC 5, D1) + Pem (500-mg/m2, D1) + B (15-mg/kg D1) q3 week x4. If no PD (progressive disease), patients received maintenance ABPem until PD or intolerable side effects. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS). The positive PFS result was considered as PFS>6m (historical control). Secondary endpoints included objective response rate (ORR), disease control rate (DCR) defined by complete response (CR) + partial response (PR) + stable disease (SD) ≥ 2 months, overall survival (OS), and safety.

RESULTS

Thirty patients were enrolled from November 2018 to October 2020. The study was closed early due to 3 patient deaths, possibly related to treatment. Median age 64 (range 38-83); Men/Women 20/10; PD-L1 TPS < 1%/1-49%/ ≥ 50% (8/15/7). The median follow-up was 20.3 months ( 1-28.1). ORR 42.9% (95% CI, 24.5-62.8%), DCR 96.4% (95% CI, 81.7-99.9%). The median PFS and OS were 11.3m (5.5-14.9,P > .05) and 22.4m (22.4-NR), respectively. Four patients had G4 toxicity (anemia, febrile-neutropenia, severe neutropenia, sepsis), and 3 patients had G5 toxicity (thromboembolism, sepsis, colonic perforation).

CONCLUSION

ABCPem was associated with increased PFS compared to historical controls but this difference did not meet the statistical significance. Three on-treatment deaths and 5 thromboembolic events prompted early closure.

Evaluation of lung toxicity with bevacizumab using the spontaneous reporting database

This study was undertaken to determine the risk of bevacizumab-induced lung toxicity, time to onset, and post hoc outcomes using the Japanese Adverse Drug Event Report database. We analysed data for the period between April 2004 and March 2021. Data on lung toxicities were extracted, and relative risk of adverse events (AEs) was estimated using the reporting odds ratio. We analysed 5,273,115 reports and identified 20,399 reports of AEs caused by bevacizumab. Of these, 1679 lung toxicities were reportedly associated with bevacizumab. Signals were detected for nine lung toxicities. A histogram of times to onset showed occurrence from 35 to 238 days, but some cases occurred even more than one year after the start of administration. Approximately 20% of AEs were thromboembolic events. Among these, pulmonary embolism was the most frequently reported and fatal cases were also reported. The AEs showing the highest fatality rates were pulmonary haemorrhage, pulmonary infarction, and pulmonary thrombosis. In conclusion, we focused on lung toxicities caused by bevacizumab as post-marketing AEs. Some cases could potentially result in serious outcomes, patients should be monitored for signs of onset of AEs not only at the start of administration, but also over a longer period of time.

Circulating biomarkers for management of cancer therapeutics related cardiac dysfunction

Cancer therapeutics related cardiac dysfunction (CTRCD) has emerged as a major cause of morbidity and mortality in cancer survivors. Effective clinical management of CTRCD is impeded by a lack of sensitive diagnostic and prognostic strategies. Circulating molecular markers could potentially address this need as they are often indicative of cardiac stress before cardiac damage can be detected clinically. A growing understanding of the underlying physiological mechanisms for CTRCD has inspired research efforts to identify novel pathophysiologically-relevant biomarkers that may also guide development of cardio-protective therapeutic approaches. The purpose of this review is to evaluate current circulating biomarkers of cardiac stress and their potential role in diagnosis and management of CTRCD. We also discuss some emerging avenues for CTRCD-focused biomarker investigations.

Venous Thrombotic Events and Anticoagulation in Brain Tumor Patients

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Brain tumor patients have a 20-30% risk of venous thromboembolism (VTE), with management complicated by risk of intracranial hemorrhage (ICH). Here we review the epidemiology, pathogenesis, and recommended management of VTE in brain tumors.

RECENT FINDINGS

New risk factors and molecular mechanisms of VTE in brain tumor patients have emerged, including the protective effect of IDH mutation in gliomas and the potential role of podoplanin-mediated platelet aggregation in thrombogenesis in these tumors. Recent studies show that the risk of ICH is not significantly higher in brain tumor patients receiving anticoagulation. Based on systemic cancer trials, direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) may be a suitable alternative to traditional heparin treatment, but the applicability of these findings to brain tumors is unclear. Anticoagulation is indicated in the treatment of VTE for brain tumor patients, and appears to be reasonably safe; based on retrospective evidence, DOACs may be a reasonable agent.

Repeated superselective intraarterial bevacizumab after blood brain barrier disruption for newly diagnosed glioblastoma: a phase I/II clinical trial

PURPOSE

Pre-clinical evidence suggests bevacizumab (BV) depletes the GBM peri-vascular cancer-stem cell niche. This phase I/II study assesses the safety and efficacy of repeated doses of superselective intra-arterial cerebral infusion (SIACI) of BV after blood-brain barrier disruption (BBBD).

METHODS

Date of surgery was day 0. Evaluated patients received repeated SIACI bevacizumab (15 mg/kg) with BBBD at days 30 ± 7, 120 ± 7, and 210 ± 7 along with 6 weeks of standard chemoradiation. Response assessment in neuro-oncology criteria and the Kaplan-Meier product-limit method was used to evaluate progression free and overall survival (PFS and OS, respectively).

RESULTS

Twenty-three patients with a median age of 60.5 years (SD = 12.6; 24.7-78.3) were included. Isocitrate dehydrogenase mutation was found in 1/23 (4%) patients. MGMT status was available for 11/23 patients (7 unmethylated; 3 methylated; 1 inconclusive). Median tumor volume was 24.0 cm3 (SD = 31.1, 1.7-48.3 cm³). Median PFS was 11.5 months (95% CI 7.7-25.9) with 6, 12, 24 and 60 month PFS estimated to be 91.3% (95% CI 69.5-97.8), 47.4% (26.3-65.9), 32.5% (14.4-52.2) and 5.4% (0.4-21.8), respectively. Median OS was 23.1 months (95% CI 12.2-36.9) with 12, 24, and 36 month OS as 77.3% (95% CI 53.6-89.9), 45.0% (22.3-65.3) and 32.1% (12.5-53.8), respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Repeated dosing of IA BV after BBBD offers an encouraging outcome in terms of PFS and OS. Phase III trials are warranted to determine whether repeated IA BV combined with Stupp protocol is superior to Stupp protocol alone for newly diagnosed GBM.

Seizures, Edema, Thrombosis, and Hemorrhages: An Update Review on the Medical Management of Gliomas

Patients affected with gliomas develop a complex set of clinical manifestations that deeply impact on quality of life and overall survival. Brain tumor-related epilepsy is frequently the first manifestation of gliomas or may occur during the course of disease; the underlying mechanisms have not been fully explained and depend on both patient and tumor factors. Novel treatment options derive from the growing use of third-generation antiepileptic drugs. Vasogenic edema and elevated intracranial pressure cause a considerable burden of symptoms, especially in high-grade glioma, requiring an adequate use of corticosteroids. Patients with gliomas present with an elevated risk of tumor-associated venous thromboembolism whose prophylaxis and treatment are challenging, considering also the availability of new oral anticoagulant drugs. Moreover, intracerebral hemorrhages can complicate the course of the illness both due to tumor-specific characteristics, patient comorbidities, and side effects of antithrombotic and antitumoral therapies. This paper aims to review recent advances in these clinical issues, discussing the medical management of gliomas through an updated literature review.

Single-shot bevacizumab for cerebral radiation injury

Background

Cerebral radiation injury, including subacute radiation reactions and later stage radiation necrosis, is a severe side effect of brain tumor radiotherapy. A protocol of four infusions of the monoclonal antibody bevacizumab has been shown to be a highly effective treatment. However, bevacizumab is costly and can cause severe complications including thrombosis, bleeding and gastrointestinal perforations.

Methods

We performed a retrospective analysis of patients treated in our clinic for cerebral radiation injury who received only a singular treatment with bevacizumab. Single-shot was defined as a singular administration of bevacizumab without a second administration during an interval of at least 6 weeks.

Results

We identified 11 patients who had received a singular administration of bevacizumab to treat cerebral radiation injury. Prior radiation had been administered to treat gliomas (ten patients) or breast cancer brain metastases (one patient). 9 of 10 patients with available MRIs showed a marked reduction of edema at first follow-up. Discontinuation of Dexamethasone was possible in 6 patients and a significant dose reduction could be achieved in all other patients. One patient developed pulmonary artery embolism 2 months after bevacizumab administration. The median time to treatment failure of any cause was 3 months.

Conclusions

Single-shot bevacizumab therefore has meaningful activity in cerebral radiation injury, but durable control is rarely achieved. In patients where a complete protocol of four infusions with bevacizumab is not feasible due to medical contraindications or lack of reimbursement, single-shot bevacizumab treatment may be considered.

Cardiovascular Toxicity of Targeted Therapies for Cancer: An Overview of Systematic Reviews

Background

Several targeted therapies for cancer have been associated with cardiovascular toxicity. The evidence for this association has not been synthesized systematically nor has the quality of evidence been considered. We synthesized systematic review evidence of cardiovascular toxicity of individual targeted agents.

Methods

We searched MEDLINE, Embase, and the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews for systematic reviews with meta-analyses of cardiovascular outcomes for individual agents published to May 2020. We selected reviews according to prespecified eligibility criteria (International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews CRD42017080014). We classified evidence of cardiovascular toxicity as sufficient, probable, possible, or indeterminate for specific cardiovascular outcomes based on statistical significance, study quality, and size.

Results

From 113 systematic reviews, we found at least probable systematic review evidence of cardiovascular toxicity for 18 agents, including high- and all-grade hypertension for bevacizumab, ramucirumab, axitinib, cediranib, pazopanib, sorafenib, sunitinib, vandetanib, aflibercept, abiraterone, and enzalutamide, and all-grade hypertension for nintedanib; high- and all-grade arterial thromboembolism (includes cardiac and/or cerebral events) for bevacizumab and abiraterone, high-grade arterial thromboembolism for trastuzumab, and all-grade arterial thromboembolism for sorafenib and tamoxifen; high- and all-grade venous thromboembolism (VTE) for lenalidomide and thalidomide, high-grade VTE for cetuximab and panitumumab, and all-grade VTE for bevacizumab; high- and all-grade left ventricular ejection fraction decline or congestive heart failure for bevacizumab and trastuzumab, and all-grade left ventricular ejection fraction decline/congestive heart failure for pazopanib and sunitinib; and all-grade corrected QT interval prolongation for vandetanib.

Conclusions

Our review provides an accessible summary of the cardiovascular toxicity of targeted therapy to assist clinicians and patients when managing cardiovascular health.

Risk of Adverse Vascular Events in Patients with Malignant Glioma Treated with Bevacizumab Plus Irinotecan: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

BACKGROUND

Bevacizumab plus irinotecan is a new beneficial chemotherapy strategy for patients with malignant glioma. The purpose of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to comprehensively assess the risk of adverse vascular events in adults with malignant glioma treated with bevacizumab plus irinotecan.

METHODS

The Cochrane Library, Embase and PubMed were searched, and relevant trials were identified up to June 2018. Two investigators screened all titles and abstracts for possible inclusion and extracted data independently. Six studies were included, and 5 of them in the control group using bevacizumab alone or bevacizumab with temozolomide. Three systems were used to assess the quality of evidence and the level of recommendation. The Oxford Centre for Evidence-Based Medicine Levels of Evidence (2009) system was used to classify the evidence into 5 levels (classes I-V). The star system from the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale was used to assess methodological quality. The GRADE profiler was used to evaluate the overall body of evidence.

RESULTS

Our data show that bevacizumab plus irinotecan therapy does not significantly affect the risk of systemic adverse events (odds ratio [OR], 1.17; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.43-3.18). Patients treated with bevacizumab plus irinotecan had a similar risk of hematotoxicity (OR, 1.06; 95% CI, 0.26-4.38), thrombocytopenia (OR, 1.07; 95% CI, 0.25-4.63), and hypertension (OR, 1.34; 95% CI, 0.28-6.36) compared with the control group (those treated without irinotecan). Thrombosis occurred more frequently in patients treated with bevacizumab plus irinotecan compared with the control group (OR, 3.23; 95% CI, 1.47-7.12).

CONCLUSIONS

The risk of systemic adverse events was not significantly different between patients with malignant glioma treated with bevacizumab plus irinotecan and the control group. The risks of hematotoxicity, thrombocytopenia, and hypertension were similar in the 2 groups. The risk of thrombosis was higher in patients treated with bevacizumab plus irinotecan. Monitoring for thrombosis and administering anticoagulant therapy as necessary merit promotion for patients with malignant glioma receiving treatment with bevacizumab plus irinotecan.

Temozolomide promotes immune escape of GBM cells via upregulating PD-L1

Glioblastoma multiforme (GBM) is the most common malignant primary brain tumor with poor prognosis, and currently effective therapeutic strategies are still limited. Although temozolomide (TMZ) is commonly used for GBM therapy and its mechanism was well characterized, while its side effects were required comprehensive investigation. In the present study, we revealed that TMZ-challenged GBM cells strongly suppressed pro-inflammatory cytokines expression in activated periphery blood mononuclear cells (PBMC), which depended on enhanced transcription of CD274 (encoding PD-L1), but not other immune checkpoints, such as CD276, HVEM and galectin-9. Moreover, abundance of membranous PD-L1 was also increased in TMZ-treated GBM cells. When PD-L1 expression was knocked down by short hairpin RNA (shRNA), inhibitory effect of TMZ-treated GBM cells on PBMC became weakened, suggesting that PD-L1 was crucial for immune inhibition capacity of TMZ-treated GBM cells. Additionally, actinomycin D reduced PD-L1 expression in GBM cells after TMZ challenge, indicating that PD-L1 induction occurred at transcriptional level. The immunoblotting results demonstrated that STAT3 signaling was involved in TMZ-mediated PD-L1 induction, and attenuated expression of PD-L1 was observed using STAT3 inhibitor VI or STAT3 shRNA. Finally, the animal study showed that combination of TMZ and PD-1 antibody therapy strongly inhibited tumor growth and achieved the improved survival rate of GBM mice. Accordingly, this study revealed the classical chemotherapy drug TMZ promoted GBM cells immune escape, even TMZ combine with PD-1 antibody treatment not further improve survival ratio of recurrent GBM patients compared with traditional therapy methods, while our animal study provided evidence that combination of TMZ and PD-1 antibody was a promising way to treat GBM, these contradictory results indicate improving the PD-1 antibody delivery efficiency can exert strong combinational therapy outcomes.

Venous Thromboembolism in Brain Tumors: Risk Factors, Molecular Mechanisms, and Clinical Challenges

Venous thromboembolism (VTE) is a common complication in patients with primary brain tumors, with up to 20% of patients per year having a VTE event. Clinical risk factors for VTE include glioblastoma subtype, paresis, or surgery. Furthermore, specific factors playing a role in tumor biology were recently identified to predispose to prothrombotic risk. For instance, mutations in the isocitrate dehydrogenase 1 (IDH1) gene, which occurs in a subgroup of glioma, correlate with risk of VTE, with low incidence in patients with presence of an IDH1 mutation compared with those with IDH1 wild-type status. In addition, expression of the glycoprotein podoplanin on brain tumors was associated with both intratumoral thrombi and high risk of VTE. As podoplanin has the ability to activate platelets, a mechanistic role of podoplanin-mediated platelet activation in VTE development has been suggested. From a clinical point of view, the management of patients with primary brain tumors and VTE is challenging. Anticoagulation is required to treat patients; however, it is associated with increased risk of intracranial hemorrhage. This review focuses on describing the epidemiology, risk factors, and mechanisms of brain tumor-associated thrombosis and discusses clinical challenges in the prevention and treatment of VTE in patients with brain tumors.

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.

Targeting Malignant Brain Tumors with Antibodies

Antibodies have been shown to be a potent therapeutic tool. However, their use for targeting brain diseases, including neurodegenerative diseases and brain cancers, has been limited, particularly because the blood–brain barrier (BBB) makes brain tissue hard to access by conventional antibody-targeting strategies. In this review, we summarize new antibody therapeutic approaches to target brain tumors, especially malignant gliomas, as well as their potential drawbacks. Many different brain delivery platforms for antibodies have been studied such as liposomes, nanoparticle-based systems, cell-penetrating peptides (CPPs), and cell-based approaches. We have already shown the successful delivery of single-chain fragment variable (scFv) with CPP as a linker between two variable domains in the brain. Antibodies normally face poor penetration through the BBB, with some variants sufficiently passing the barrier on their own. A “Trojan horse” method allows passage of biomolecules, such as antibodies, through the BBB by receptor-mediated transcytosis (RMT). Such examples of therapeutic antibodies are the bispecific antibodies where one binding specificity recognizes and binds a BBB receptor, enabling RMT and where a second binding specificity recognizes an antigen as a therapeutic target. On the other hand, cell-based systems such as stem cells (SCs) are a promising delivery system because of their tumor tropism and ability to cross the BBB. Genetically engineered SCs can be used in gene therapy, where they express anti-tumor drugs, including antibodies. Different types and sources of SCs have been studied for the delivery of therapeutics to the brain; both mesenchymal stem cells (MSCs) and neural stem cells (NSCs) show great potential. Following the success in treatment of leukemias and lymphomas, the adoptive T-cell therapies, especially the chimeric antigen receptor-T cells (CAR-Ts), are making their way into glioma treatment as another type of cell-based therapy using the antibody to bind to the specific target(s). Finally, the current clinical trials are reviewed, showing the most recent progress of attractive approaches to deliver therapeutic antibodies across the BBB aiming at the specific antigen.

Add-on bevacizumab can prevent early clinical deterioration and prolong survival in newly diagnosed partially resected glioblastoma patients with a poor performance status

Purpose

The AVAglio trial established the beneficial effect of add-on bevacizumab (BEV) for the treatment of newly diagnosed glioblastomas (nd-GBMs) that led to the approval of BEV for the treatment of these patients in Japan. However, the rationality of using BEV as a first-line treatment for nd-GBMs remains controversial. The purpose of this study was to analyze the outcomes of a case series of nd-GBM patients.

Patients and methods

The outcomes of 69 nd-GBM patients treated after 2006 were retrospectively analyzed. Clinical and genetic analyses were performed, and estimates of progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) were calculated using the Kaplan–Meier method. Since add-on BEV therapy was only used for partially resected GBMs (pr-GBMs) after its approval in 2013, the patients were subdivided into 3 treatment groups: Type I, partial removal with temozolomide (TMZ)/BEV and concurrent radiotherapy (CCRT); Type II, partial removal with TMZ and CCRT; and Type III, gross total removal with TMZ and CCRT.

Results

The PFS rate of Type I patients was significantly higher than that of Type II patients (P=0.014), but comparable to that of Type III patients. Differences in OS rates between Type I and Type II patients were less apparent (P=0.075), although the median OS of Type I patients was ~8 months higher than that of Type II patients (17.4 vs 9.8 months, respectively). The clinical deterioration rate during initial treatment was significantly (P=0.024) lower in Type I than in Type II patients (7.7% vs 47.4%, respectively). Differences in OS rates between Type I and Type II patients with a poor performance status (PS) were significant (P=0.017).

Conclusion

Our findings suggest that add-on BEV can prevent early clinical deterioration of pr-GBM patients and contribute to a prolonged survival, especially for those with a poor PS.

The Prognosis of Anti-Angiogenesis Treatments Combined with Standard Therapy for Newly Diagnosed Glioblastoma: A Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

Although bevacizumab (BV) has been approved as second-line therapy for recurrent glioblastoma (GB), the efficacy and safety of BV for patients with newly diagnosed GB remain unclear.

METHODOLOGY/PRINCIPAL FINDINGS

We systematically searched electronic databases (PubMed, EMBASE, OVID, etc.) to identify related studies published from January 1966 and August 2016. Eight randomized controlled trials including a total of 2,185 patients with GB were included. We found that the median progression-free survival (PFS) was higher in the BV group than in the standard therapy (ST) group (pooled hazard ratio, 0.73; 95%CI, 0.62-0.86; P = 0.0001). Compared with ST, BV improved the PFS rate at 6 months (OR 3.33, 95% CI 2.73-4.06, p<0.00001) and 12 months (OR 2.10, 95% CI 1.74-2.54, p<0.00001). There were no significant differences in median overall survival between the BV and ST groups (OR, 1.01; 95%CI, 0.83-1.23; P = 0.95). The BV group had higher survival rates at 6 months (OR, 1.41; 95% CI, 1.09-1.84; P = 0.01) and 12 months (OR, 1.23; 95% CI, 1.02-1.48; P = 0.03), but a low survival rate at the 36-month follow-up (OR, 0.57; 95% CI, 0.32-0.98; P = 0.04). For the incidence of adverse events, three adverse outcomes were found to be significantly different between BV and ST groups, including hypertension (8.37% vs. 1.62%, p<0.000001), proteinuria (7.65% vs. 0%, p<0.001), and fatigue (14.54% vs. 9.01%, p = 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS/SIGNIFICANCE

Our study indicates that combination of BV with ST for newly diagnosed GB did not improve the median overall survival but result in longer median PFS, maintaining the quality of life and functional status. However, the long-term use of BV is associated with a higher incidence of adverse events and mortality.

STUDY REGISTRATION

This research was registered at PROSPERO. (Registration Number: CRD42016038247).