Effectiveness of the bevacizumab-irinotecan regimen in the treatment of recurrent glioblastoma multiforme: Comparison with other second-line treatments without this regimen

Clinical study of apatinib plus temozolomide for the treatment of recurrent high-grade gliomas

OBJECTIVES

Recurrent high-grade glioma, a malignant tumor of the brain or spinal cord associated with poor prognosis with a median survival of <6 months. Recurrent high-grade glioma does not have standard treatment even if some strategies have some effect in recurrent gliomas. Apatinib, as a tyrosine kinase inhibitor shown to be effective in treating the lung and gastric cancer. The present study investigated the efficacy and safety of apatinib in combination with dose-dense regimens of temozolomide for treating recurrent glioma.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Eighteen patients with recurrent high-grade glioma were enrolled and treated with apatinib (500 mg/day) and TMZ (50 mg/m²/day). Patients who achieved partial response or stable disease continued treatment. Administration of drug was terminated for patients with progressive disease, who could not tolerate toxicity, and who required discontinuation due to other medical conditions.

RESULTS

From the 18 cases, only 17 were included in the evaluation of the curative effect of the drug and in that four showed partial responses, ten had stable disease, remaining three exhibited progressive disease. The disease control rate was 82.3% (14/17). Progression-free and overall survival was found to be 4 months and 9.1 months, respectively. Three patients became transiently capable of self-care (Karnofsky performance status >70). Cognition and quality of life improved after treatment and from the safety perspective, three most common adverse reactions included epilepsy (24.1%), hypertension (20.7%), and fatigue (17.2%).

CONCLUSION

Apatinib and TMZ may represent an alternative treatment option for patients with recurrent high-gradeglioma, especially those with a low Karnofsky performance status. However, studies using a larger sample size are required to confirm these findings.

Treatment options for progression or recurrence of glioblastoma: a network meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Glioblastoma (GBM) is a highly malignant brain tumour that almost inevitably progresses or recurs after first line standard of care. There is no consensus regarding the best treatment/s to offer people upon disease progression or recurrence. For the purposes of this review, progression and recurrence are considered as one entity.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the effectiveness of further treatment/s for first and subsequent progression or recurrence of glioblastoma (GBM) among people who have received the standard of care (Stupp protocol) for primary treatment of the disease; and to prepare a brief economic commentary on the available evidence.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched MEDLINE and Embase electronic databases from 2005 to December 2019 and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL, in the Cochrane Library; Issue 12, 2019). Economic searches included the National Health Service Economic Evaluation Database (NHS EED) up to 2015 (database closure) and MEDLINE and Embase from 2015 to December 2019.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and comparative non-randomised studies (NRSs) evaluating effectiveness of treatments for progressive/recurrent GBM. Eligible studies included people with progressive or recurrent GBM who had received first line radiotherapy with concomitant and adjuvant temozolomide (TMZ).

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently selected studies and extracted data to a pre-designed data extraction form. We conducted network meta-analyses (NMA) and ranked treatments according to effectiveness for each outcome using the random-effects model and Stata software (version 15). We rated the certainty of evidence using the GRADE approach.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 42 studies: these comprised 34 randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and 8 non-randomised studies (NRSs) involving 5236 participants. We judged most RCTs to be at a low risk of bias and NRSs at high risk of bias. Interventions included chemotherapy, re-operation, re-irradiation and novel therapies either used alone or in combination. For first recurrence, we included 11 interventions in the network meta-analysis (NMA) for overall survival (OS), and eight in the NMA for progression-free survival (PFS). Lomustine (LOM; also known as CCNU) was the most common comparator and was used as the reference treatment. No studies in the NMA evaluated surgery, re-irradiation, PCV (procarbazine, lomustine, vincristine), TMZ re-challenge or best supportive care. We could not perform NMA for second or later recurrence due to insufficient data. Quality-of-life data were sparse. First recurrence (NMA findings) Median OS across included studies in the NMA ranged from 5.5 to 12.6 months and median progression-free survival (PFS) ranged from 1.5 months to 4.2 months. We found no high-certainty evidence that any treatments tested were better than lomustine. These treatments included the following. Bevacizumab plus lomustine: Evidence suggested probably little or no difference in OS between bevacizumab (BEV) combined with lomustine (LOM) and LOM monotherapy (hazard ratio (HR) 0.91, 0.75 to 1.10; moderate-certainty evidence), although BEV + LOM may improve PFS (HR 0.57, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.44 to 0.74; low-certainty evidence). Bevacizumab monotherapy: Low-certainty evidence suggested there may be little or no difference in OS (HR 1.22, 95% CI 0.84 to 1.76) and PFS (HR 0.90, 95% CI 0.58 to 1.38; low-certainty evidence) between BEV and LOM monotherapies; more evidence on BEV is needed. Regorafenib (REG): REG may improve OS compared with LOM (HR 0.50, 95% CI 0.33 to 0.76; low-certainty evidence). Evidence on PFS was very low certainty and more evidence on REG is needed. Temozolomide (TMZ) plus Depatux-M (ABT414): For OS, low-certainty evidence suggested that TMZ plus ABT414 may be more effective than LOM (HR 0.66, 95% CI 0.47 to 0.92) and may be more effective than BEV (HR 0.54, 95% CI 0.33 to 0.89; low-certainty evidence). This may be due to the TMZ component only and more evidence is needed. Fotemustine (FOM): FOM and LOM may have similar effects on OS (HR 0.89, 95% CI 0.51 to 1.57, low-certainty evidence). Bevacizumab and irinotecan (IRI): Evidence on BEV + irinotecan (IRI) versus LOM for both OS and PFS is very uncertain and there is probably little or no difference between BEV + IRI versus BEV monotherapy (OS: HR 0.95, 95% CI 0.70 to 1.30; moderate-certainty evidence). When treatments were ranked for OS, FOM ranked first, BEV + LOM second, LOM third, BEV + IRI fourth, and BEV fifth. Ranking does not take into account the certainty of the evidence, which also suggests there may be little or no difference between FOM and LOM. Other treatments Three studies evaluated re-operation versus no re-operation, with or without re-irradiation and chemotherapy, and these suggested possible survival advantages with re-operation within the context of being able to select suitable candidates for re-operation. A cannabinoid treatment in the early stages of evaluation, in combination with TMZ, merits further evaluation. Second or later recurrence Limited evidence from three heterogeneous studies suggested that radiotherapy with or without BEV may have a beneficial effect on survival but more evidence is needed. Evidence was insufficient to draw conclusions about the best radiotherapy dosage. Other evidence suggested that there may be little difference in survival with tumour-treating fields compared with physician's best choice of treatment. We found no reliable evidence on best supportive care. Severe adverse events (SAEs) The BEV+LOM combination was associated with significantly greater risk of SAEs than LOM monotherapy (RR 2.51, 95% CI 1.72 to 3.66, high-certainty evidence), and ranked joint worst with cediranib + LOM (RR 2.51, 95% CI 1.29 to 4.90; high-certainty evidence). LOM ranked best and REG ranked second best. Adding novel treatments to BEV was generally associated with a higher risk of severe adverse events compared with BEV alone.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

For treatment of first recurrence of GBM, among people previously treated with surgery and standard chemoradiotherapy, the combination treatments evaluated did not improve overall survival compared with LOM monotherapy and were often associated with a higher risk of severe adverse events. Limited evidence suggested that re-operation with or without re-irradiation and chemotherapy may be suitable for selected candidates. Evidence on second recurrence is sparse. Re-irradiation with or without bevacizumab may be of value in selected individuals, but more evidence is needed.

Comparative studies of TIMP-1 immunohistochemistry, TIMP-1 FISH analysis and plasma TIMP-1 in glioblastoma patients

Tissue inhibitor of metalloproteinases-1 (TIMP-1) has been associated with poor prognosis and resistance towards chemotherapy in several cancer forms. In a previous study we found an association between a low TIMP-1 tumor immunoreactivity and increased survival for glioblastoma patients, when compared to moderate and high TIMP-1 tumor immunoreactivity. The aim of the present study was to further evaluate TIMP-1 as a biomarker in gliomas by studying TIMP-1 gene copy numbers by fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH) on 33 glioblastoma biopsies and by measuring levels of TIMP-1 in plasma obtained pre-operatively from 43 patients (31 gliomas including 21 glioblastomas) by enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA). The results showed TIMP-1 gene copy numbers per cell ranging from 1 to 5 and the TIMP-1/CEN-X ratio ranging between 0.7 and 1.09, suggesting neither amplification nor loss of the TIMP-1 gene. The TIMP-1 protein levels measured in plasma were not significantly higher than TIMP-1 levels measured in healthy subjects. No correlation was identified between TIMP-1 tumor cell immunoreactivities and the TIMP-1 gene copy numbers or the plasma TIMP-1 levels. In conclusion, high immunohistochemical TIMP-1 protein levels in glioblastomas were not caused by TIMP-1 gene amplification and TIMP-1 in plasma was low and not directly related to tumor TIMP-1 immunoreactivity. The study suggests that TIMP-1 immunohistochemistry is the method of choice for future clinical studies evaluating TIMP-1 as a biomarker in glioblastomas.

Cost-effectiveness analysis of the bevacizumab-irinotecan regimen in the treatment of primary glioblastoma multiforme recurrences

The purpose of the present study was to calculate the cost-effectiveness of the inclusion of the bevacizumab (BVZ) + irinotecan (CPT-11) regimen in the second-line of treatment for primary glioblastoma multiforme. A retrospective cohort study with a control group was performed in which the cost-effectiveness of a course of chemotherapy was calculated based on survival time and the incremental cost between the two lines of treatment. A total of 77 patients were included, 36 of who formed the BVZ/CPT-11 cohort. The median survival time for the non-BVZ control cohort was 13.23 months [95% confidence interval (CI), 11.79-14.68], while for the BVZ/CPT-11 treatment cohort, the median survival time was 17.63 months (95% CI, 15.38-19.89). Overall, each year of life gained for each patient treated with BVZ/CPT-11 would cost €46,401.99. These results demonstrate the effectiveness of the BVZ/CPT-11 combination, but its incremental cost compared with other lines of treatment or the best care available does not appear to be acceptable for public health systems in the current situation of budgetary adjustments.

Updates in the management of high-grade glioma

The management of high-grade glioma (HGG) has evolved significantly over the last decade. Patients are managed in a multidisciplinary team setting in order to ensure their care is guided by the most current evidenced based treatments. The outcome in patients with HGG, while still poor, has improved in terms of both survival and quality of life during illness. This review discusses a number of developments seen in the management of HGG over the last 5 years.