Bevacizumab Alone and in Combination With Irinotecan in Recurrent GlioblastomaPURPOSE: 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.
The role of stereotactic radiosurgery in the management of patients with newly diagnosed brain metastases: a systematic review and evidence-based clinical practice guidelineQUESTION: Should patients with newly-diagnosed metastatic brain tumors undergo stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) compared with other treatment modalities? Target population These recommendations apply to adults with newly diagnosed solid brain metastases amenable to SRS; lesions amenable to SRS are typically defined as measuring less than 3 cm in maximum diameter and producing minimal (less than 1 cm of midline shift) mass effect. Recommendations SRS plus WBRT vs. WBRT alone Level 1 Single-dose SRS along with WBRT leads to significantly longer patient survival compared with WBRT alone for patients with single metastatic brain tumors who have a KPS > or = 70.Level 1 Single-dose SRS along with WBRT is superior in terms of local tumor control and maintaining functional status when compared to WBRT alone for patients with 1-4 metastatic brain tumors who have a KPS > or =70.Level 2 Single-dose SRS along with WBRT may lead to significantly longer patient survival than WBRT alone for patients with 2-3 metastatic brain tumors.Level 3 There is class III evidence demonstrating that single-dose SRS along with WBRT is superior to WBRT alone for improving patient survival for patients with single or multiple brain metastases and a KPS<70 [corrected].Level 4 There is class III evidence demonstrating that single-dose SRS along with WBRT is superior to WBRT alone for improving patient survival for patients with single or multiple brain metastases and a KPS < 70. SRS plus WBRT vs. SRS alone Level 2 Single-dose SRS alone may provide an equivalent survival advantage for patients with brain metastases compared with WBRT + single-dose SRS. There is conflicting class I and II evidence regarding the risk of both local and distant recurrence when SRS is used in isolation, and class I evidence demonstrates a lower risk of distant recurrence with WBRT; thus, regular careful surveillance is warranted for patients treated with SRS alone in order to provide early identification of local and distant recurrences so that salvage therapy can be initiated at the soonest possible time. Surgical Resection plus WBRT vs. SRS +/- WBRT Level 2 Surgical resection plus WBRT, vs. SRS plus WBRT, both represent effective treatment strategies, resulting in relatively equal survival rates. SRS has not been assessed from an evidence-based standpoint for larger lesions (>3 cm) or for those causing significant mass effect (>1 cm midline shift). Level 3: Underpowered class I evidence along with the preponderance of conflicting class II evidence suggests that SRS alone may provide equivalent functional and survival outcomes compared with resection + WBRT for patients with single brain metastases, so long as ready detection of distant site failure and salvage SRS are possible. SRS alone vs. WBRT alone Level 3 While both single-dose SRS and WBRT are effective for treating patients with brain metastases, single-dose SRS alone appears to be superior to WBRT alone for patients with up to three metastatic brain tumors in terms of patient survival advantage.
A phase II, multicenter trial of rindopepimut (CDX-110) in newly diagnosed glioblastoma: the ACT III studyBACKGROUND: The epidermal growth factor receptor variant III deletion mutation, EGFRvIII, is expressed in ∼30% of primary glioblastoma and linked to poor long-term survival. Rindopepimut consists of the unique EGFRvIII peptide sequence conjugated to keyhole limpet hemocyanin. In previous phase II trials (ACTIVATE/ACT II), rindopepimut was well tolerated with robust EGFRvIII-specific immune responses and promising progression-free and overall survival. This multicenter, single-arm phase II clinical trial (ACT III) was performed to confirm these results. METHODS: Rindopepimut and standard adjuvant temozolomide chemotherapy were administered to 65 patients with newly diagnosed EGFRvIII-expressing (EGFRvIII+) glioblastoma after gross total resection and chemoradiation. RESULTS: Progression-free survival at 5.5 months (∼8.5 mo from diagnosis) was 66%. Relative to study entry, median overall survival was 21.8 months, and 36-month overall survival was 26%. Extended rindopepimut vaccination (up to 3.5+ years) was well tolerated. Grades 1-2 injection site reactions were frequent. Anti-EGFRvIII antibody titers increased ≥4-fold in 85% of patients, and increased with duration of treatment. EGFRvIII was eliminated in 4/6 (67%) tumor samples obtained after >3 months of therapy. CONCLUSIONS: This study confirms, in a multicenter setting, the preliminary results seen in previous phase II trials of rindopepimut. A pivotal, double-blind, randomized, phase III trial ("ACT IV") is under way.
The role of surgical resection in the management of newly diagnosed brain metastases: a systematic review and evidence-based clinical practice guidelineQUESTION: Should patients with newly-diagnosed metastatic brain tumors undergo open surgical resection versus whole brain radiation therapy (WBRT) and/or other treatment modalities such as radiosurgery, and in what clinical settings? Target population These recommendations apply to adults with a newly diagnosed single brain metastasis amenable to surgical resection. Recommendations Surgical resection plus WBRT versus surgical resection alone Level 1 Surgical resection followed by WBRT represents a superior treatment modality, in terms of improving tumor control at the original site of the metastasis and in the brain overall, when compared to surgical resection alone. Surgical resection plus WBRT versus SRS +/- WBRT Level 2 Surgical resection plus WBRT, versus stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) plus WBRT, both represent effective treatment strategies, resulting in relatively equal survival rates. SRS has not been assessed from an evidence-based standpoint for larger lesions (>3 cm) or for those causing significant mass effect (>1 cm midline shift). Level 3 Underpowered class I evidence along with the preponderance of conflicting class II evidence suggests that SRS alone may provide equivalent functional and survival outcomes compared with resection + WBRT for patients with single brain metastases, so long as ready detection of distant site failure and salvage SRS are possible. Note The following question is fully addressed in the WBRT guideline paper within this series by Gaspar et al. Given that the recommendation resulting from the systematic review of the literature on this topic is also highly relevant to the discussion of the role of surgical resection in the management of brain metastases, this recommendation has been included below. Question Does surgical resection in addition to WBRT improve outcomes when compared with WBRT alone? Target population This recommendation applies to adults with a newly diagnosed single brain metastasis amenable to surgical resection; however, the recommendation does not apply to relatively radiosensitive tumors histologies (i.e., small cell lung cancer, leukemia, lymphoma, germ cell tumors and multiple myeloma). Recommendation Surgical resection plus WBRT versus WBRT alone Level 1 Class I evidence supports the use of surgical resection plus post-operative WBRT, as compared to WBRT alone, in patients with good performance status (functionally independent and spending less than 50% of time in bed) and limited extra-cranial disease. There is insufficient evidence to make a recommendation for patients with poor performance scores, advanced systemic disease, or multiple brain metastases.
The role of steroids in the management of brain metastases: a systematic review and evidence-based clinical practice guidelineQUESTION: Do steroids improve neurologic symptoms in patients with metastatic brain tumors compared to no treatment? If steroids are given, what dose should be used? Comparisons include: (1) steroid therapy versus none. (2) comparison of different doses of steroid therapy. TARGET POPULATION: These recommendations apply to adults diagnosed with brain metastases. RECOMMENDATIONS: Steroid therapy versus no steroid therapy Asymptomatic brain metastases patients without mass effect Insufficient evidence exists to make a treatment recommendation for this clinical scenario. Brain metastases patients with mild symptoms related to mass effect Level 3 Corticosteroids are recommended to provide temporary symptomatic relief of symptoms related to increased intracranial pressure and edema secondary to brain metastases. It is recommended for patients who are symptomatic from metastatic disease to the brain that a starting dose of 4-8 mg/day of dexamethasone be considered. Brain metastases patients with moderate to severe symptoms related to mass effect Level 3 Corticosteroids are recommended to provide temporary symptomatic relief of symptoms related to increased intracranial pressure and edema secondary to brain metastases. If patients exhibit severe symptoms consistent with increased intracranial pressure, it is recommended that higher doses such as 16 mg/day or more be considered. Choice of Steroid Level 3 If corticosteroids are given, dexamethasone is the best drug choice given the available evidence. Duration of Corticosteroid Administration Level 3 Corticosteroids, if given, should be tapered slowly over a 2 week time period, or longer in symptomatic patients, based upon an individualized treatment regimen and a full understanding of the long-term sequelae of corticosteroid therapy. Given the very limited number of studies (two) which met the eligibility criteria for the systematic review, these are the only recommendations that can be offered based on this methodology. Please see "Discussion" and "Summary" section for additional details.