Explore the vast range of titles available.

Glioblastoma is a highly vascularised tumour and there are few treatment options after disease recurrence. Regorafenib is an oral multikinase inhibitor of angiogenic, stromal, and oncogenic receptor tyrosine kinases. We aimed to assess the efficacy and safety of regorafenib in the treatment of recurrent glioblastoma. REGOMA is a randomised, multicentre, open-label phase 2 trial done in ten centres in Italy. Eligible patients (aged ≥18 years) with histologically confirmed glioblastoma, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status 0 or 1, and documented disease progression after surgery followed by radiotherapy and temozolomide chemoradiotherapy were randomly assigned (1:1) by a web-based system, stratified by centre and surgery at recurrence (yes vs no), to receive regorafenib 160 mg once daily for the first 3 weeks of each 4-week cycle or lomustine 110 mg/m2 once every 6 weeks until disease progression, death, unacceptable toxicity, or consent withdrawal. The primary endpoint was overall survival in the intention-to-treat population. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02926222, and is currently in follow-up. Between Nov 27, 2015, and Feb 23, 2017, 124 patients were screened and 119 eligible patients were randomly assigned to receive regorafenib (n=59) or lomustine (n=60). Median follow-up was 15·4 months (IQR 13·8–18·1). At the analysis cutoff date, 99 (83%) of 119 patients had died: 42 (71%) of 59 in the regorafenib group and 57 (95%) of 60 in the lomustine group. Overall survival was significantly improved in the regorafenib group compared with the lomustine group, with a median overall survival of 7·4 months (95% CI 5·8–12·0) in the regorafenib group and 5·6 months (4·7–7·3) in the lomustine group (hazard ratio 0·50, 95% CI 0·33–0·75; log-rank p=0·0009). Grade 3–4 treatment-related adverse events occurred in 33 (56%) of 59 patients treated with regorafenib and 24 (40%) of 60 with lomustine. The most frequent grade 3 or 4 adverse events related to regorafenib were hand–foot skin reaction, increased lipase, and blood bilirubin increased (in six [10%] of 59 patients each). In the lomustine group, the most common grade 3 or 4 adverse events were decreased platelet count (eight [13%] of 60 patients), decreased lymphocyte count (eight [13%]), and neutropenia (seven [12%]). No death was considered by the investigators to be drug related. REGOMA showed an encouraging overall survival benefit of regorafenib in recurrent glioblastoma. This drug might be a new potential treatment for these patients and should be investigated in an adequately powered phase 3 study. Veneto Institute of Oncology and Bayer Italy.

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 .).

There is an urgent need for more effective therapies for glioblastoma. Data from a previous unrandomised phase 2 trial suggested that lomustine-temozolomide plus radiotherapy might be superior to temozolomide chemoradiotherapy in newly diagnosed glioblastoma with methylation of the MGMT promoter. In the CeTeG/NOA-09 trial, we aimed to further investigate the effect of lomustine-temozolomide therapy in the setting of a randomised phase 3 trial. In this open-label, randomised, phase 3 trial, we enrolled patients from 17 German university hospitals who were aged 18–70 years, with newly diagnosed glioblastoma with methylated MGMT promoter, and a Karnofsky Performance Score of 70% and higher. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) with a predefined SAS-generated randomisation list to standard temozolomide chemoradiotherapy (75 mg/m2 per day concomitant to radiotherapy [59–60 Gy] followed by six courses of temozolomide 150–200 mg/m2 per day on the first 5 days of the 4-week course) or to up to six courses of lomustine (100 mg/m2 on day 1) plus temozolomide (100–200 mg/m2 per day on days 2–6 of the 6-week course) in addition to radiotherapy (59–60 Gy). Because of the different schedules, patients and physicians were not masked to treatment groups. The primary endpoint was overall survival in the modified intention-to-treat population, comprising all randomly assigned patients who started their allocated chemotherapy. The prespecified test for overall survival differences was a log-rank test stratified for centre and recursive partitioning analysis class. The trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01149109. Between June 17, 2011, and April 8, 2014, 141 patients were randomly assigned to the treatment groups; 129 patients (63 in the temozolomide and 66 in the lomustine-temozolomide group) constituted the modified intention-to-treat population. Median overall survival was improved from 31·4 months (95% CI 27·7–47·1) with temozolomide to 48·1 months (32·6 months–not assessable) with lomustine-temozolomide (hazard ratio [HR] 0·60, 95% CI 0·35–1·03; p=0·0492 for log-rank analysis). A significant overall survival difference between groups was also found in a secondary analysis of the intention-to-treat population (n=141, HR 0·60, 95% CI 0·35–1·03; p=0·0432 for log-rank analysis). Adverse events of grade 3 or higher were observed in 32 (51%) of 63 patients in the temozolomide group and 39 (59%) of 66 patients in the lomustine-temozolomide group. There were no treatment-related deaths. Our results suggest that lomustine-temozolomide chemotherapy might improve survival compared with temozolomide standard therapy in patients with newly diagnosed glioblastoma with methylated MGMT promoter. The findings should be interpreted with caution, owing to the small size of the trial. German Federal Ministry of Education and Research.

Treatment options for recurrent glioblastoma are scarce, with second-line chemotherapy showing only modest activity against the tumour. Despite the absence of well controlled trials, bevacizumab is widely used in the treatment of recurrent glioblastoma. Nonetheless, whether the high response rates reported after treatment with this drug translate into an overall survival benefit remains unclear. We report the results of the first randomised controlled phase 2 trial of bevacizumab in recurrent glioblastoma. The BELOB trial was an open-label, three-group, multicentre phase 2 study undertaken in 14 hospitals in the Netherlands. Adult patients (≥18 years of age) with a first recurrence of a glioblastoma after temozolomide chemoradiotherapy were randomly allocated by a web-based program to treatment with oral lomustine 110 mg/m2 once every 6 weeks, intravenous bevacizumab 10 mg/kg once every 2 weeks, or combination treatment with lomustine 110 mg/m2 every 6 weeks and bevacizumab 10 mg/kg every 2 weeks. Randomisation of patients was stratified with a minimisation procedure, in which the stratification factors were centre, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status, and age. The primary outcome was overall survival at 9 months, analysed by intention to treat. A safety analysis was planned after the first ten patients completed two cycles of 6 weeks in the combination treatment group. This trial is registered with the Nederlands Trial Register (www.trialregister.nl, number NTR1929). Between Dec 11, 2009, and Nov 10, 2011, 153 patients were enrolled. The preplanned safety analysis was done after eight patients had been treated, because of haematological adverse events (three patients had grade 3 thrombocytopenia and two had grade 4 thrombocytopenia) which reduced bevacizumab dose intensity; the lomustine dose in the combination treatment group was thereafter reduced to 90 mg/m2. Thus, in addition to the eight patients who were randomly assigned to receive bevacizumab plus lomustine 110 mg/m2, 51 patients were assigned to receive bevacizumab alone, 47 to receive lomustine alone, and 47 to receive bevacizumab plus lomustine 90 mg/m2. Of these patients, 50 in the bevacizumab alone group, 46 in the lomustine alone group, and 44 in the bevacizumab and lomustine 90 mg/m2 group were eligible for analyses. 9-month overall survival was 43% (95% CI 29–57) in the lomustine group, 38% (25–51) in the bevacizumab group, 59% (43–72) in the bevacizumab and lomustine 90 mg/m2 group, 87% (39–98) in the bevacizumab and lomustine 110 mg/m2 group, and 63% (49–75) for the combined bevacizumab and lomustine groups. After the reduction in lomustine dose in the combination group, the combined treatment was well tolerated. The most frequent grade 3 or worse toxicities were hypertension (13 [26%] of 50 patients in the bevacizumab group, three [7%] of 46 in the lomustine group, and 11 [25%] of 44 in the bevacizumab and lomustine 90 mg/m2 group), fatigue (two [4%], four [9%], and eight [18%]), and infections (three [6%], two [4%], and five [11%]). At the time of this analysis, 144/148 (97%) of patients had died and three (2%) were still on treatment. The combination of bevacizumab and lomustine met prespecified criteria for assessment of this treatment in further phase 3 studies. However, the results in the bevacizumab alone group do not justify further studies of this treatment. Roche Nederland and KWF Kankerbestrijding.

Patients with grade 2 glioma were randomly assigned to radiation therapy alone or radiation therapy plus six cycles of chemotherapy. The median overall survival with radiation therapy plus chemotherapy was 13.3 years, as compared with 7.8 years with radiation therapy alone. Grade 2 gliomas are relatively uncommon, constituting 5 to 10% of all primary brain tumors in adults. Progressive neurologic symptoms eventually develop in nearly all patients, and nearly all patients die prematurely. At the time of the initiation of our trial, studies had shown that chemotherapy caused tumor regressions in patients with recurrent low-grade gliomas, with regimens that included procarbazine, lomustine (also called CCNU), and vincristine, 1 carmustine (also called BCNU) plus interferon, 2 and mechlorethamine, vincristine, and procarbazine. 3 Similarly, the combination of procarbazine, CCNU, and vincristine, when administered as initial therapy, has been shown to result in tumor regressions. 4 – 6 The . . .

Background Chemotherapy with lomustine is widely considered as standard treatment option for progressive glioblastoma. The value of adding radiotherapy to second-line chemotherapy is not known. Methods EORTC-2227-BTG (LEGATO, NCT05904119) is an investigator-initiated, pragmatic (PRECIS-2 score: 34 out of 45), randomized, multicenter phase III trial in patients with first progression of glioblastoma. A total of 411 patients will be randomized in a 1:1 ratio to lomustine (110 mg/m 2 every 6 weeks) or lomustine (110 mg/m 2 every 6weeks) plus radiotherapy (35 Gy in 10 fractions). Main eligibility criteria include histologic confirmation of glioblastoma, isocitrate dehydrogenase gene ( IDH ) wild-type per WHO 2021 classification, first progression at least 6 months after the end of prior radiotherapy, radiologically measurable disease according to RANO criteria with a maximum tumor diameter of 5 cm, and WHO performance status of 0–2. The primary efficacy endpoint is overall survival (OS) and secondary endpoints include progression-free survival, response rate, neurocognitive function, health-related quality of life, and health economic parameters. LEGATO is funded by the European Union’s Horizon Europe Research program, was activated in March 2024 and will enroll patients in 43 sites in 11 countries across Europe with study completion projected in 2028. Discussion EORTC-2227-BTG (LEGATO) is a publicly funded pragmatic phase III trial designed to clarify the efficacy of adding reirradiation to chemotherapy with lomustine for the treatment of patients with first progression of glioblastoma. Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov NCT05904119. Registered before start of inclusion, 23 May 2023

Purpose The blood brain barrier compromises glioblastoma chemotherapy. However high blood concentrations of lipophilic, alkylating drugs result in brain uptake, but cause myelosuppression. We hypothesised that nanoparticles could achieve therapeutic brain concentrations without dose-limiting myelosuppression. Methods Mice were dosed with either intravenous lomustine Molecular Envelope Technology (MET) nanoparticles (13 mg kg −1 ) or ethanolic lomustine (6.5 mg kg −1 ) and tissues analysed. Efficacy was assessed in an orthotopic U-87 MG glioblastoma model, following intravenous MET lomustine (daily 13 mg kg −1 ) or ethanolic lomustine (daily 1.2 mg kg −1 - the highest repeated dose possible). Myelosuppression and MET particle macrophage uptake were also investigated. Results The MET formulation resulted in modest brain targeting (brain/ bone AUC 0-4h ratios for MET and ethanolic lomustine = 0.90 and 0.53 respectively and brain/ liver AUC 0-4h ratios for MET and ethanolic lomustine = 0.24 and 0.15 respectively). The MET formulation significantly increased mice (U-87 MG tumours) survival times; with MET lomustine, ethanolic lomustine and untreated mean survival times of 33.2, 22.5 and 21.3 days respectively and there were no material treatment-related differences in blood and femoral cell counts. Macrophage uptake is slower for MET nanoparticles than for liposomes. Conclusions Particulate drug formulations improved brain tumour therapy without major bone marrow toxicity.

Introduction Anaplastic oligodendrogliomas are rare diffuse gliomas. Although radiotherapy (RT) combined with procarbazine, lomustine, and vincristine (PCV) has been the historical standard, temozolomide (TMZ) has been increasingly used. Objective To compare the efficacy of RT combined with PCV versus RT combined with TMZ in adult with anaplastic oligodendroglioma. Methods A systematic search of PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Library was conducted up to March 2025. Eligible studies included patients with 1p/19q-codeleted anaplastic oligodendroglioma treated with RT + PCV, RT + TMZ, or RT alone. Studies comparing RT alone to RT + PCV or RT + TMZ were used to create indirect comparisons, with RT as a common comparator. A frequentist network meta-analysis with a random-effects model was used to estimate hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS). Risk of bias was assessed with RoB 2 and ROBINS-I. The protocol was registered in PROSPERO (CRD420251012169). No funding was received. Results Eight studies comprising 2,416 patients were included. The network meta-analysis, compared with RT alone, RT + PCV significantly improved OS (HR: 0.617; 95% CI 0.465–0.819; p  = 0.0009), and PFS (HR: 0.547; 95% CI 0.415–0.721; p  < 0.0001), while RT + TMZ showed a trend toward improved OS (HR: 0.913; 95% CI 0.666–1.252; p  = 0.421) and PFS (HR: 1.270; 95% CI 0.870–1.855; p  = 0.215), without statistical significance. In the comparison between RT + PCV and RT + TMZ, RT + PCV demonstrated superior OS (HR: 0.676; 95% CI, 0.585–0.781; p  < 0.0001) and better PFS (HR: 0.431; 95% CI, 0.325–0.570; p  < 0.0001). Limitations include the small number of randomized trials directly comparing key outcomes, and the fact that most studies predated current molecular diagnostic criteria, with toxicity data often reported in heterogeneous populations. Conclusion In patients with anaplastic oligodendroglioma, RT combined with PCV provides superior survival outcomes compared to radiotherapy combined with TMZ.

PurposeIn the EF-14 trial for newly diagnosed glioblastoma (ndGBM) patients addition of Tumour Treating Fields (TTFields) to temozolomide treatment resulted in a significantly improved overall survival (OS). In the NOA-09/CeTeG trial, combination of lomustine and temozolomide was superior to temozolomide monotherapy in patients with O6-methylguanine DNA methyltransferase (MGMT) promoter methylated (MGMTm) ndGBM. We evaluated combination of these two treatment modalities in patients with MGMTm ndGBM. There have been so far no data on the combination of these two efficient regimens.MethodsThis bicentric retrospective analysis investigated 16 patients. Parameters evaluated included safety outcome as measured by Common Toxicity Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE), clinical outcomes, and compliance to treatment.ResultsHematologic adverse events CTCAE ≥ 3 were observed in seven, hepatotoxic adverse events of CTCAE ≥ 3 in four patients. Mild to moderate skin toxicity was detected in six patients. At data cutoff, patients demonstrated a median progression-free survival (PFS) of 20 months. The usage rate of TTFields showed a high median adherence (83%) to the therapy.ConclusionsThis analysis provides first indication that the combination of TTFields/lomustine/temozolomide is safe and feasible. The observed survival outcomes might suggest potential beneficial effects.

Galunisertib, a Transforming growth factor-βRI (TGF-βRI) kinase inhibitor, blocks TGF-β-mediated tumor growth in glioblastoma. In a three-arm study of galunisertib (300 mg/day) monotherapy (intermittent dosing; each cycle =14 days on/14 days off), lomustine monotherapy, and galunisertib plus lomustine therapy, baseline tumor tissue was evaluated to identify markers associated with tumor stage (e.g., histopathology, Ki67, glial fibrillary acidic protein) and TGF-β-related signaling (e.g., pSMAD2). Other pharmacodynamic assessments included chemokine, cytokine, and T cell subsets alterations. 158 patients were randomized to galunisertib plus lomustine (n = 79), galunisertib (n = 39) and placebo+lomustine (n = 40). In 127 of these patients, tissue was adequate for central pathology review and biomarker work. Isocitrate dehydrogenase (IDH1) negative glioblastoma patients with baseline pSMAD2+ in cytoplasm had median overall survival (OS) 9.5 months vs. 6.9 months for patients with no tumor pSMAD2 expression (p = 0.4574). Eight patients were IDH1 R132H+ and had a median OS of 10.4 months compared to 6.9 months for patients with negative IDH1 R132H (p = 0.5452). IDH1 status was associated with numerically higher plasma macrophage-derived chemokine (MDC/CCL22), higher whole blood FOXP3, and reduced tumor CD3+ T cell counts. Compared to the baseline, treatment with galunisertib monotherapy preserved CD4+ T cell counts, eosinophils, lymphocytes, and the CD4/CD8 ratio. The T-regulatory cell compartment was associated with better OS with MDC/CCL22 as a prominent prognostic marker.