Tumor-Treating Fields for the treatment of glioblastoma: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Efficacy of tumour-treating fields therapy in recurrent glioblastoma: A narrative review of current evidence

Recurrent Glioblastoma presents a formidable challenge in oncology due to its aggressive nature and limited treatment options. Tumour-Treating Fields (TTFields) Therapy, a novel therapeutic modality, has emerged as a promising approach to address this clinical conundrum. This review synthesizes the current evidence surrounding the efficacy of TTFields Therapy in the context of recurrent Glioblastoma. Diverse academic databases were explored to identify relevant studies published within the last decade. Strategic keyword selection facilitated the inclusion of studies focusing on TTFields Therapy's efficacy, treatment outcomes, and patient-specific factors. The review reveals a growing body of evidence suggesting the potential clinical benefits of TTFields Therapy for patients with recurrent Glioblastoma. Studies consistently demonstrate its positive impact on overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS). The therapy's safety profile remains favorable, with mild to moderate skin reactions being the most commonly reported adverse events. Our analysis highlights the importance of patient selection criteria, with emerging biomarkers such as PTEN mutation status influencing therapy response. Additionally, investigations into combining TTFields Therapy with other treatments, including surgical interventions and novel approaches, offer promising avenues for enhancing therapeutic outcomes. The synthesis of diverse studies underscores the potential of TTFields Therapy as a valuable addition to the armamentarium against recurrent Glioblastoma. The narrative review comprehensively explains the therapy's mechanisms, clinical benefits, adverse events, and future directions. The insights gathered herein serve as a foundation for clinicians and researchers striving to optimize treatment strategies for patients facing the challenging landscape of recurrent Glioblastoma.

Association of Tumor Treating Fields (TTFields) therapy with survival in newly diagnosed glioblastoma: a systematic review and meta-analysis

PURPOSE

Tumor Treating Fields (TTFields) therapy, an electric field-based cancer treatment, became FDA-approved for patients with newly diagnosed glioblastoma (GBM) in 2015 based on the randomized controlled EF-14 study. Subsequent approvals worldwide and increased adoption over time have raised the question of whether a consistent survival benefit has been observed in the real-world setting, and whether device usage has played a role.

METHODS

We conducted a literature search to identify clinical studies evaluating overall survival (OS) in TTFields-treated patients. Comparative and single-cohort studies were analyzed. Survival curves were pooled using a distribution-free random-effects method.

RESULTS

Among nine studies, seven (N = 1430 patients) compared the addition of TTFields therapy to standard of care (SOC) chemoradiotherapy versus SOC alone and were included in a pooled analysis for OS. Meta-analysis of comparative studies indicated a significant improvement in OS for patients receiving TTFields and SOC versus SOC alone (HR: 0.63; 95% CI 0.53-0.75; p < 0.001). Among real-world post-approval studies, the pooled median OS was 22.6 months (95% CI 17.6-41.2) for TTFields-treated patients, and 17.4 months (95% CI 14.4-21.6) for those not receiving TTFields. Rates of gross total resection were generally higher in the real-world setting, irrespective of TTFields use. Furthermore, for patients included in studies reporting data on device usage (N = 1015), an average usage rate of ≥ 75% was consistently associated with prolonged survival (p < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Meta-analysis of comparative TTFields studies suggests survival may be improved with the addition of TTFields to SOC for patients with newly diagnosed GBM.

Multiomics integration reveals the effect of Orexin A on glioblastoma

Objectives: This study involved a multi-omics analysis of glioblastoma (GBM) samples to elaborate the potential mechanism of drug treatment. Methods: The GBM cells treated with or without orexin A were acquired from sequencing analysis. Differentially expressed genes/proteins/metabolites (DEGs/ DEPs/ DEMs) were screened. Next, combination analyses were conducted to investigate the common pathways and correlations between the two groups. Lastly, transcriptome-proteome-metabolome association analysis was carried out to determine the common pathways, and the genes in these pathways were analyzed through Kaplan-Meier (K-M) survival analysis in public databases. Cell and animal experiments were performed to investigate the anti-glioma activity of orexin A. Results: A total of 1,527 DEGs, 52 DEPs, and 153 DEMs were found. Moreover, the combination analyses revealed that 6, 4, and 1 common pathways were present in the transcriptome-proteome, proteome-metabolome, and transcriptome-metabolome, respectively. Certain correlations were observed between the two data sets. Finally, 11 common pathways were discovered in association analysis, and 138 common genes were screened out in these common pathways. Six genes showed significant differences in terms of survival in both TCGA and CGGA. In addition, orexin A inhibited the proliferation, migration, and invasion of glioma in vitro and in vivo. Conclusion: Eleven common KEGG pathways with six common genes were found among different omics participations, revealing the underlying mechanisms in different omics and providing theoretical basis and reference for multi-omics research on drug treatment.

Eighteen years' experience with tumor treating fields in the treatment of newly diagnosed glioblastoma

Introduction

The prognosis of glioblastoma remains unfavorable. TTFields utilize low intensity electric fields (frequency 150-300 kHz) that disrupt cellular processes critical for cancer cell viability and tumor progression. TTFields are delivered via transducer arrays placed on the patients' scalp. Methods: Between the years 2004 and 2022, 55 patients (20 female), aged 21.9-77.8 years (mean age 47.3±11.8 years; median 47.6 years) were treated with TTFields for newly-diagnosed GBM, and compared to 54 control patients (20 females), aged 27.0-76.7 years (mean age 51.4±12.2 years; median 51.7 years) (p=0.08). All patients underwent gross total or partial resection of GBM. One patient had biopsy only. When available, MGMT promoter methylation status and IDH mutation was detected.

Results

Patients on TTFields therapy demonstrated improvements in PFS and OS relative to controls (hazard ratio: 0.64, p=0.031; and 0.61, p=0.028 respectively). TTFields average time on therapy was 74.8% (median 82%): median PFS of these patients was 19.75 months. Seven patients with TTFields usage ≤60% (23-60%, mean 46.3%, median 53%) had a median PFS of 7.95 months (p=0.0356). Control patients with no TTFields exposure had a median PFS of 12.45 months. Median OS of TTF patients was 31.67 months compared to 24.80 months for controls.

Discussion

This is the most extensive study on newly-diagnosed GBM patients treated with TTFields, covering a period of 18 years at a single center and presenting not only data from clinical trials but also a group of 36 patients treated with TTFields as a part of routine clinical practice.

Updates in IDH-Wildtype Glioblastoma

Glioblastoma is the most aggressive primary brain tumor with a poor prognosis. The 2021 WHO CNS5 classification has further stressed the importance of molecular signatures in diagnosis although therapeutic breakthroughs are still lacking. In this review article, updates on the current and novel therapies in IDH-wildtype GBM will be discussed.

Stereotactic Radiosurgery for Recurrent Glioblastoma Multiforme: A Retrospective Multi-Institutional Experience

Introduction

Glioblastoma multiforme (GBM) is the most common and lethal primary malignancy of the central nervous system. Despite standard therapy protocols, such as aggressive surgical resection, radiotherapy, and chemotherapy, GBM's aggressive nature produces low survival rates. Tumor recurrence and progression are nearly universal. Stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) has been studied as an alternative treatment for recurrent GBM as a minimally invasive option that might prolong survival. The objective of this retrospective study was to evaluate the efficacy of SRS as a treatment modality considering overall survival (OS) in patients with GBM who had tumor recurrence and were treated with SRS in three different institutions.

Materials and methods

We retrospectively reviewed patients who received SRS for recurrent GBM between 1992 and 2020. A total of 46 patients were included in this study. We recorded age at diagnosis, the extent of surgical resection, radiation treatment, chemotherapy regimen, Karnofsky Performance Status at the time of SRS and at last follow-up, use of adjuvant chemotherapy after SRS, and response evaluation criteria in solid tumors. Primary endpoints were OS after initial diagnosis and OS from the date of the SRS procedure.

Results

Patients received SRS at a median of 10 months (range, 1 to 94 months) after their initial diagnoses. Median follow-up was seven months from the time of SRS and 22.8 months since diagnosis. The estimated median OS for all patients was nine months (range, 1 to 42 months) after SRS and 23.8 months (range, 4 to 102 months) after diagnosis. Median OS after SRS was seven months for patients treated from 1992 to 2011 and nine months for those treated from 2012 to 2020 (p = 0.008; X² = 7.008). Median OS for younger patients (i.e., those aged <50 years) was 37.1 months compared to 18.6 months for older patients (i.e., those aged >50 years; p = 0.04; X² = 3.870). Patients who received SRS after 10 months since diagnosis had a median OS of 36.2 months versus those who received SRS sooner than 10 months, who had an OS of 15 months (p = 0.004; X² = 8.145). Radiosurgery doses larger than 15 Gy correlated with a median survival of nine months versus seven months in those treated with doses <15 Gy (p = 0.01; X² = 6.756). Lastly, patients who received adjuvant bevacizumab (BEV) and or chemotherapy after SRS had a median survival of 12 months versus seven months for patients who did not receive any additional therapy after SRS (p = 0.04; X² = 4.196).

Conclusion

SRS focal recurrent GBM in selected patients may improve OS, especially when combined with adjuvant therapy such as BEV and chemotherapy. Other prognostic variables proved relevant such as patients' age, the dose delivered, and surgery-to-SRS time that translates to the time of recurrence. Our results were consistent with the published literature and added to the accumulating evidence regarding SRS in recurrent GBM; however, extensive, multi-center studies are required to make definitive recommendations on this treatment approach.