Patrick Y. Wen

Malignant gliomas, the most common type of primary brain tumor in adults, are associated with disproportionate cancer-related morbidity and mortality. Recently, there have been important advances in our understanding of the molecular pathogenesis of malignant gliomas and progress in treating them. This review summarizes the diagnosis and management of these tumors in adults, highlighting new advances.

Currently, the most widely used criteria for assessing response to therapy in high-grade gliomas are based on two-dimensional tumor measurements on computed tomography (CT) or magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), in conjunction with clinical assessment and corticosteroid dose (the Macdonald Criteria). It is increasingly apparent that there are significant limitations to these criteria, which only address the contrast-enhancing component of the tumor. For example, chemoradiotherapy for newly diagnosed glioblastomas results in transient increase in tumor enhancement (pseudoprogression) in 20% to 30% of patients, which is difficult to differentiate from true tumor progression. Antiangiogenic agents produce high radiographic response rates, as defined by a rapid decrease in contrast enhancement on CT/MRI that occurs within days of initiation of treatment and that is partly a result of reduced vascular permeability to contrast agents rather than a true antitumor effect. In addition, a subset of patients treated with antiangiogenic agents develop tumor recurrence characterized by an increase in the nonenhancing component depicted on T2-weighted/fluid-attenuated inversion recovery sequences. The recognition that contrast enhancement is nonspecific and may not always be a true surrogate of tumor response and the need to account for the nonenhancing component of the tumor mandate that new criteria be developed and validated to permit accurate assessment of the efficacy of novel therapies. The Response Assessment in Neuro-Oncology Working Group is an international effort to develop new standardized response criteria for clinical trials in brain tumors. In this proposal, we present the recommendations for updated response criteria for high-grade gliomas.

PURPOSE: We evaluated the efficacy of bevacizumab, alone and in combination with irinotecan, in patients with recurrent glioblastoma in a phase II, multicenter, open-label, noncomparative trial. PATIENTS AND METHODS: One hundred sixty-seven patients were randomly assigned to receive bevacizumab 10 mg/kg alone or in combination with irinotecan 340 mg/m(2) or 125 mg/m(2) (with or without concomitant enzyme-inducing antiepileptic drugs, respectively) once every 2 weeks. Primary end points were 6-month progression-free survival and objective response rate, as determined by independent radiology review. Secondary end points included safety and overall survival. RESULTS: In the bevacizumab-alone and the bevacizumab-plus-irinotecan groups, estimated 6-month progression-free survival rates were 42.6% and 50.3%, respectively; objective response rates were 28.2% and 37.8%, respectively; and median overall survival times were 9.2 months and 8.7 months, respectively. There was a trend for patients who were taking corticosteroids at baseline to take stable or decreasing doses over time. Of the patients treated with bevacizumab alone or bevacizumab plus irinotecan, 46.4% and 65.8%, respectively, experienced grade > or = 3 adverse events, the most common of which were hypertension (8.3%) and convulsion (6.0%) in the bevacizumab-alone group and convulsion (13.9%), neutropenia (8.9%), and fatigue (8.9%) in the bevacizumab-plus-irinotecan group. Intracranial hemorrhage was noted in two patients (2.4%) in the bevacizumab-alone group (grade 1) and in three patients (3.8%) patients in the bevacizumab-plus-irinotecan group (grades 1, 2, and 4, respectively). CONCLUSION: Bevacizumab, alone or in combination with irinotecan, was well tolerated and active in recurrent glioblastoma.