Explore the vast range of titles available.

Bevacizumab is approved for the treatment of patients with progressive glioblastoma on the basis of uncontrolled data. Data from a phase 2 trial suggested that the addition of bevacizumab to lomustine might improve overall survival as compared with monotherapies. We sought to determine whether the combination would result in longer overall survival than lomustine alone among patients at first progression of glioblastoma. We randomly assigned patients with progression after chemoradiation in a 2:1 ratio to receive lomustine plus bevacizumab (combination group, 288 patients) or lomustine alone (monotherapy group, 149 patients). The methylation status of the promoter of O -methylguanine-DNA methyltransferase (MGMT) was assessed. Health-related quality of life and neurocognitive function were evaluated at baseline and every 12 weeks. The primary end point of the trial was overall survival. A total of 437 patients underwent randomization. The median number of 6-week treatment cycles was three in the combination group and one in the monotherapy group. With 329 overall survival events (75.3%), the combination therapy did not provide a survival advantage; the median overall survival was 9.1 months (95% confidence interval [CI], 8.1 to 10.1) in the combination group and 8.6 months (95% CI, 7.6 to 10.4) in the monotherapy group (hazard ratio for death, 0.95; 95% CI, 0.74 to 1.21; P=0.65). Locally assessed progression-free survival was 2.7 months longer in the combination group than in the monotherapy group: 4.2 months versus 1.5 months (hazard ratio for disease progression or death, 0.49; 95% CI, 0.39 to 0.61; P<0.001). Grade 3 to 5 adverse events occurred in 63.6% of the patients in the combination group and 38.1% of the patients in the monotherapy group. The addition of bevacizumab to lomustine affected neither health-related quality of life nor neurocognitive function. The MGMT status was prognostic. Despite somewhat prolonged progression-free survival, treatment with lomustine plus bevacizumab did not confer a survival advantage over treatment with lomustine alone in patients with progressive glioblastoma. (Funded by an unrestricted educational grant from F. Hoffmann-La Roche and by the EORTC Cancer Research Fund; EORTC 26101 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01290939 ; Eudra-CT number, 2010-023218-30 .).

Immunotherapy is a promising area of therapy in patients with neuro-oncological malignancies. However, early-phase studies show unique challenges associated with the assessment of radiological changes in response to immunotherapy reflecting delayed responses or therapy-induced inflammation. Clinical benefit, including long-term survival and tumour regression, can still occur after initial disease progression or after the appearance of new lesions. Refinement of the response assessment criteria for patients with neuro-oncological malignancies undergoing immunotherapy is therefore warranted. Herein, a multinational and multidisciplinary panel of neuro-oncology immunotherapy experts describe immunotherapy Response Assessment for Neuro-Oncology (iRANO) criteria based on guidance for the determination of tumour progression outlined by the immune-related response criteria and the RANO working group. Among patients who demonstrate imaging findings meeting RANO criteria for progressive disease within 6 months of initiating immunotherapy, including the development of new lesions, confirmation of radiographic progression on follow-up imaging is recommended provided that the patient is not significantly worse clinically. The proposed criteria also include guidelines for the use of corticosteroids. We review the role of advanced imaging techniques and the role of measurement of clinical benefit endpoints including neurological and immunological functions. The iRANO guidelines put forth in this Review will evolve successively to improve their usefulness as further experience from immunotherapy trials in neuro-oncology accumulate.

Response criteria for paediatric high-grade glioma vary historically and across different cooperative groups. The Response Assessment in Neuro-Oncology working group developed response criteria for adult high-grade glioma, but these were not created to meet the unique challenges in children with the disease. The Response Assessment in Pediatric Neuro-Oncology (RAPNO) working group, consisting of an international panel of paediatric and adult neuro-oncologists, clinicians, radiologists, radiation oncologists, and neurosurgeons, was established to address issues and unique challenges in assessing response in children with CNS tumours. We established a subcommittee to develop response assessment criteria for paediatric high-grade glioma. Current practice and literature were reviewed to identify major challenges in assessing the response of paediatric high-grade gliomas to various treatments. For areas in which scientific investigation was scarce, consensus was reached through an iterative process. RAPNO response assessment recommendations include the use of MRI of the brain and the spine, assessment of clinical status, and the use of corticosteroids or antiangiogenics. Imaging standards for brain and spine are defined. Compared with the recommendations for the management of adult high-grade glioma, for paediatrics there is inclusion of diffusion-weighted imaging and a higher reliance on T2-weighted fluid-attenuated inversion recovery. Consensus recommendations and response definitions have been established and, similar to other RAPNO recommendations, prospective validation in clinical trials is warranted.

Paediatric low-grade gliomas (also known as pLGG) are the most common type of CNS tumours in children. In general, paediatric low-grade gliomas show clinical and biological features that are distinct from adult low-grade gliomas, and the developing paediatric brain is more susceptible to toxic late effects of the tumour and its treatment. Therefore, response assessment in children requires additional considerations compared with the adult Response Assessment in Neuro-Oncology criteria. There are no standardised response criteria in paediatric clinical trials, which makes it more difficult to compare responses across studies. The Response Assessment in Pediatric Neuro-Oncology working group, consisting of an international panel of paediatric and adult neuro-oncologists, clinicians, radiologists, radiation oncologists, and neurosurgeons, was established to address issues and unique challenges in assessing response in children with CNS tumours. We established a subcommittee to develop consensus recommendations for response assessment in paediatric low-grade gliomas. Final recommendations were based on literature review, current practice, and expert opinion of working group members. Consensus recommendations include imaging response assessments, with additional guidelines for visual functional outcomes in patients with optic pathway tumours. As with previous consensus recommendations, these recommendations will need to be validated in prospective clinical trials.

In patients with glioblastoma, the addition of bevacizumab to radiotherapy and temozolomide induction therapy and the use of bevacizumab maintenance therapy did not influence overall survival. Freedom from progression was slightly increased but at the cost of increased toxic effects. Tumor progression in glioblastoma, the most common primary brain cancer, 1 , 2 is associated with deterioration in neurocognitive function, 3 , 4 decreased functional independence, 5 and a progressive decrease in health-related quality of life. 6 , 7 After surgical resection, the standard of care for patients with newly diagnosed glioblastoma and a good Karnofsky performance score (≥70, on a scale of 0 to 100, with higher numbers indicating better functioning) is concurrent radiotherapy and temozolomide, followed by adjuvant temozolomide. 8 – 11 The prognosis remains poor; no further improvements in outcomes have been documented since the introduction of radiotherapy–temozolomide therapy in 2005. Glioblastomas are characterized by overexpression . . .

Inhibition of angiogenesis is a valuable treatment strategy for ovarian cancer. Pazopanib is an anti-angiogenic drug active in ovarian cancer. We assessed the effect of adding pazopanib to paclitaxel for patients with platinum-resistant or platinum-refractory advanced ovarian cancer. We did this open-label, randomised phase 2 trial at 11 hospitals in Italy. We included patients with platinum-resistant or platinum-refractory ovarian cancer previously treated with a maximum of two lines of chemotherapy, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status 0–1, and no residual peripheral neurotoxicity. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive weekly paclitaxel 80 mg/m2 with or without pazopanib 800 mg daily, and stratified by centre, number of previous lines of chemotherapy, and platinum-free interval status. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival, assessed in the modified intention-to-treat population. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01644825. This report is the final analysis; the trial is completed. Between Dec 15, 2010, and Feb 8, 2013, we enrolled 74 patients: 37 were randomly assigned to receive paclitaxel and pazopanib and 37 were randomly assigned to receive paclitaxel only. One patient, in the paclitaxel only group, withdrew from the study and was excluded from analyses. Median follow-up was 16·1 months (IQR 12·5–20·8). Progression-free survival was significantly longer in the pazopanib plus paclitaxel group than in the paclitaxel only group (median 6·35 months [95% CI 5·36–11·02] vs 3·49 months [2·01–5·66]; hazard ratio 0·42 [95% CI 0·25–0·69]; p=0·0002). We recorded no unexpected toxic effects or deaths from toxic effects. Adverse events were more common in the pazopanib and paclitaxel group than in the paclitaxel only group. The most common grade 3–4 adverse events were neutropenia (11 [30%] in the pazopanib group vs one [3%] in the paclitaxel group), fatigue (four [11%] vs two [6%]), leucopenia (four [11%] vs one [3%]), hypertension (three [8%] vs none [0%]), raised aspartate aminotransferase or alanine aminotransferase (three [8%] vs none), and anaemia (two [5%] vs five [14%]). One patient in the pazopanib group had ileal perforation. Our findings suggest that a phase 3 study of the combination of weekly paclitaxel plus pazopanib for patients with platinum-resistant or platinum-refractory advanced ovarian cancer is warranted. National Cancer Institute of Napoli and GlaxoSmithKline.

The DNA repair enzyme O 6 -methylguanine-DNA methyltransferase (MGMT) antagonizes the effects of alkylating agents, and its expression is associated with resistance to cancer therapy based on these compounds. Weller et al . consider the prognostic and predictive value of MGMT gene silencing in gliomas and describe the assays that are commonly used to evaluate MGMT status, focusing particularly on MGMT promoter methylation, which is the key mechanism of MGMT gene silencing. The DNA repair enzyme O 6 -methylguanine-DNA methyltransferase (MGMT) antagonizes the genotoxic effects of alkylating agents. MGMT promoter methylation is the key mechanism of MGMT gene silencing and predicts a favorable outcome in patients with glioblastoma who are exposed to alkylating agent chemotherapy. This biomarker is on the verge of entering clinical decision-making and is currently used to stratify or even select glioblastoma patients for clinical trials. In other subtypes of glioma, such as anaplastic gliomas, the relevance of MGMT promoter methylation might extend beyond the prediction of chemosensitivity, and could reflect a distinct molecular profile. Here, we review the most commonly used assays for evaluation of MGMT status, outline the prerequisites for standardized tests, and evaluate reasons for difficulties in reproducibility. We critically discuss the prognostic and predictive value of MGMT silencing, reviewing trials in which patients with different types of glioma were treated with various chemotherapy schedules, either upfront or at recurrence. Standardization of MGMT testing requires comparison of different technologies across laboratories and prospectively validated cut-off values for prognostic or predictive effects. Moreover, future clinical trials will need to determine, for each subtype of glioma, the degree to which MGMT promoter methylation is predictive or prognostic, and whether testing should become routine clinical practice. Key Points MGMT ( O 6 -methylguanine-DNA methyltransferase) promoter methylation has become the most powerful molecular prognosticator in malignant gliomas MGMT promoter methylation is predictive for response to alkylating agent chemotherapy in glioblastoma Methylation-specific PCR is the only validated technique to derive prognostic information from determination of the MGMT status The MGMT status has become a parameter for stratification of patients with glioma within clinical trials

Assessment of EGFR mutation in non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients is mandatory for optimization of pharmacologic treatment. In this respect, mutation analysis of circulating tumor cells (CTCs) may be desirable since they may provide real-time information on patient's disease status. Blood samples were collected from 37 patients enrolled in the TRIGGER study, a prospective phase II multi-center trial of erlotinib treatment in advanced NSCLC patients with activating EGFR mutations in tumor tissue. 10 CTC preparations from breast cancer patients without EGFR mutations in their primary tumors and 12 blood samples from healthy subjects were analyzed as negative controls. CTC preparations, obtained by the Veridex CellSearch System, were subjected to ultra-deep next generation sequencing (NGS) on the Roche 454 GS junior platform. CTCs fulfilling all Veridex criteria were present in 41% of the patients examined, ranging in number between 1 and 29. In addition to validated CTCs, potential neoplastic elements were seen in 33 cases. These included cells not fulfilling all Veridex criteria (also known as \"suspicious objects\") found in 5 (13%) of 37 cases, and isolated or clustered large naked nuclei with irregular shape observed in 33 (89%) cases. EGFR mutations were identified by NGS in CTC preparations of 31 (84%) patients, corresponding to those present in matching tumor tissue. Twenty-five (96%) of 26 deletions at exon 19 and 6 (55%) of 11 mutations at exon 21 were detectable (P = 0.005). In 4 (13%) cases, multiple EGFR mutations, suggesting CTC heterogeneity, were documented. No mutations were found in control samples. We report for the first time that the CellSearch System coupled with NGS is a very sensitive and specific diagnostic tool for EGFR mutation analysis in CTC preparations with potential clinical impact.

The optimal treatment for patients with low-grade glioma (LGG) WHO grade II remains controversial. Overall survival ranges from 2 to over 15 years depending on molecular and clinical factors. Hence, risk-adjusted treatments are required for optimizing outcome and quality of life. We aim at identifying mechanisms and associated molecular markers predictive for benefit from radiotherapy (RT) or temozolomide (TMZ) in LGG patients treated in the randomized phase III trial EORTC 22033. As candidate biomarkers for these genotoxic treatments, we considered the DNA methylome of 410 DNA damage response (DDR) genes. We first identified 62 functionally relevant CpG sites located in the promoters of 24 DDR genes, using the LGG data from The Cancer Genome Atlas. Then we tested their association with outcome [progression-free survival (PFS)] depending on treatment in 120 LGG patients of EORTC 22033, whose tumors were mutant for isocitrate dehydrogenase 1 or 2 (IDHmt), the molecular hallmark of LGG. The results suggested that seven CpGs of four DDR genes may be predictive for longer PFS in one of the treatment arms that comprised MGMT , MLH3 , RAD21 , and SMC4 . Most interestingly, the two CpGs identified for MGMT are the same, previously selected for the MGMT-STP27 score that is used to determine the methylation status of the MGMT gene. This score was higher in the LGG with 1p/19q codeletion, in this and other independent LGG datasets. It was predictive for PFS in the TMZ, but not in the RT arm of EORTC 22033. The results support the hypothesis that a high score predicts benefit from TMZ treatment for patients with IDHmt LGG, regardless of the 1p/19q status. This MGMT methylation score may identify patients who benefit from first-line treatment with TMZ, to defer RT for long-term preservation of cognitive function and quality of life.

A randomised trial published by the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) and the National Cancer Institute of Canada (NCIC) Clinical Trials Group (trial 26981-22981/CE.3) showed that addition of temozolomide to radiotherapy in the treatment of patients with newly diagnosed glioblastoma significantly improved survival. We aimed to undertake an exploratory subanalysis of the EORTC and NCIC data to confirm or identify new prognostic factors for survival in adult patients with glioblastoma, derive nomograms that predict an individual patient's prognosis, and suggest stratification factors for future trials. Data from 573 patients with newly diagnosed glioblastoma who were randomly assigned to radiotherapy alone or to the same radiotherapy plus temozolomide in the EORTC and NCIC trial were included in this subanalysis. Survival modelling was done in three patient populations: intention-to-treat population of all randomised patients (population 1); patients assigned temozolomide and radiotherapy (population 2, n=287); and patients assigned temozolomide and radiotherapy who had assessment of MGMT promoter methylation status and who had undergone tumour resection (population 3, n=103). Cox proportional hazards models were fitted with and without O6-methylguanine-DNA methyltransferase ( MGMT) promoter methylation status. Nomograms were developed to predict an individual patient's median and 2-year survival probabilities. No nomogram was developed in the radiotherapy-alone group because combined treatment is now the new standard of care. Independent of the MGMT promoter methylation status, analysis in all randomised patients (population 1) identified combined treatment with temozolomide, more extensive tumour resection, younger age, Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE) score of 27 or higher, and no corticosteroid treatment at baseline as independent prognostic factors correlated with improved survival outcome. In patients assigned temozolomide and radiotherapy (population 2), younger age, better performance status, more extensive tumour resection, and MMSE score of 27 or higher were associated with better survival. In patients who had tumours resected, who were assigned temozolomide and radiotherapy, and who had available MGMT promoter methylation status (population 3), methylated MGMT, better performance status, and MMSE score of 27 or higher were associated with improved survival. Nomograms were developed and are available at http://www.eortc.be/tools/gbmcalculator. MGMT promoter methylation status, age, performance status, extent of resection, and MMSE are suggested as eligibility or stratification factors for future trials in patients with newly diagnosed glioblastoma. Stratifying by MGMT promoter methylation status should be mandatory in all glioblastoma trials that use alkylating chemotherapy. Nomograms can be used to predict an individual patient's prognosis, and they integrate pertinent molecular information that is consistent with a paradigm shift towards individualised patient management.