Explore the vast range of titles available.

The CATNON trial investigated the benefit of the addition of concurrent or adjuvant temozolomide to radiotherapy in individuals with anaplastic astrocytoma. We report the long-term follow-up of the study focusing on the individuals with isocitrate dehydrogenase (IDH) mutated (IDHmt) tumours. This randomised, open-label, phase 3 study in 137 institutions across Australia, Europe, and North America included participants aged 18 years or older with newly diagnosed 1p/19q non-co-deleted anaplastic gliomas and a WHO performance status of 0–2. Participants were randomly assigned (1:1:1:1) centrally using a minimisation technique to radiotherapy alone (59·4 Gy in 33 fractions), radiotherapy with concurrent oral temozolomide (75 mg/m2 per day), radiotherapy with adjuvant oral temozolomide (12 4-week cycles of 150–200 mg/m2 temozolomide given on days 1–5), or radiotherapy with both concurrent and adjuvant temozolomide. Participants were stratified by institution, WHO performance status score, age, 1p loss of heterozygosity, the presence of oligodendroglial elements on microscopy, and MGMT promoter methylation status. The primary endpoint was overall survival adjusted by stratification factors at randomisation in the intention-to-treat population. The eighth amendment of the study protocol (June 27, 2011) incorporated analysis of IDH mutational status into the study. We report the intention-to-treat analysis and the exploratory analysis within the population of participants with astrocytoma with an IDH mutation. As the safety data have been published previously, no safety data are reported. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT00626990, and is completed. Between Dec 4, 2007, and Sept 11, 2015, 1407 participants were registered and 751 participants were randomly allocated, 444 of whom were diagnosed with an IDHmt tumour. After a median follow-up for overall survival of 10·9 years (IQR 9·5–12·7), in the intention-to-treat population, adjuvant temozolomide improved overall survival compared with no adjuvant temozolomide (hazard ratio [HR] 0·65 [95% CI 0·54–0·77]), but concurrent did not compared with no concurrent temozolomide (HR 0·91 [0·76–1·08]). In univariable analysis of the participants with an IDHmt tumour, concurrent temozolomide had no statistically significant effect on overall survival (median 9·7 years [8·2–12·5] vs 7·2 years [6·2–9·4]; HR 0·81 [0·63–1·04]), but median overall survival was 12·5 years (95% CI 9·4–15·0) with adjuvant temozolomide compared with 6·0 years (5·1–7·2) with no adjuvant temozolomide (HR 0·54 [0·42–0·69]). No benefit of temozolomide, neither concurrent nor adjuvant, was observed in participants with IDH wild-type tumours. Methylation-based subtyping and several DNA alterations (eg, amplification of PDGFRA and CDK4, homozygous deletion of CDKN2A, and total copy number variation) were associated with worse outcome, none of which was predictive for benefit to temozolomide. Long-term follow-up confirms that radiotherapy followed by 12 cycles of adjuvant temozolomide without concurrent temozolomide during radiotherapy improves survival for individuals with aggressive IDHmt astrocytoma. MSD.

Bevacizumab is frequently used in the treatment of recurrent WHO grade II and III glioma, but without supporting evidence from randomised trials. Therefore, we assessed the use of bevacizumab in patients with first recurrence of grade II or III glioma who did not have 1p/19q co-deletion. The TAVAREC trial was a randomised, open-label phase 2 trial done at 32 centres across Europe in patients with locally diagnosed grade II or III glioma without 1p/19q co-deletion, with a first and contrast-enhancing recurrence after initial radiotherapy or chemotherapy, or both. Previous chemotherapy must have been stopped at least 6 months before enrolment and radiotherapy must have been stopped at least 3 months before enrolment. Random group assignment was done electronically through the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer web-based system, stratified by a minimisation procedure using institution, initial histology (WHO grade II vs III), WHO performance status (0 or 1 vs 2), and previous treatment (radiotherapy, chemotherapy, or both). Patients were assigned to receive either temozolomide (150–200 mg/m2, orally) monotherapy on days 1–5 every 4 weeks for a maximum of 12 cycles, or the same temozolomide regimen in combination with bevacizumab (10 mg/kg, intravenously) every 2 weeks until progression. The primary endpoint was overall survival at 12 months in the per-protocol population. Safety analyses were done in all patients who started their allocated treatment. The study is registered at EudraCT (2009–017422–39) and ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT01164189), and is complete. Between Feb 8, 2011, and July 31, 2015, 155 patients were enrolled and randomly assigned to receive either monotherapy (n=77) or combination therapy (n=78). Overall survival in the per-protocol population at 12 months was achieved by 44 (61% [80% CI 53–69]) of 72 patients in the temozolomide group and 38 (55% [47–69]) of 69 in the combination group. The most frequent toxicity was haematological: 17 (23%) of 75 patients in the monotherapy group and 25 (33%) of 76 in the combination group developed grade 3 or 4 haematological toxicity. Other than haematological toxicities, the most common adverse events were nervous system disorders (59 [79%] of 75 patients in the monotherapy group vs 65 [86%] of 76 in the combination group), fatigue (53 [70%] vs 61 [80%]), and nausea (39 [52%] vs 43 [56%]). Infections were more frequently reported in the combination group (29 [38%] of 76 patients) than in the monotherapy group (17 [23%] of 75). One treatment-related death was reported in the combination group (infection after intratumoral haemorrhage during a treatment-related grade 4 thrombocytopenia). We found no evidence of improved overall survival with bevacizumab and temozolomide combination treatment versus temozolomide monotherapy. The findings from this study provide no support for further phase 3 studies on the role of bevacizumab in this disease. Roche Pharmaceuticals.

Temozolomide (TMZ) remains the frontline chemotherapy for gliomas; yet its clinical efficacy is significantly compromised by inherent instability and the emergence of resistance mechanisms. To surmount these challenges, we engineered a squalenoylated TMZ nanoparticle (SQ-TMZ NPs) via conjugation of TMZ with squalene, enabling enhanced drug stability and improved therapeutic potency against glioblastoma cells. The resulting SQ-TMZ NPs exhibited a precisely controlled nanoscale architecture (~126 nm), demonstrating exceptional stability under physiological and storage conditions, with minimal hemolytic toxicity (<5%). Notably, these nanoparticles conferred superior cytotoxicity in TMZ-resistant glioblastoma T98G cells, attributed to the amplification of intracellular reactive oxygen species (ROS) and DNA damage, along with MGMT (O-6-methylguanine-DNA methyltransferase) expression suppression. Furthermore, in vivo imaging confirmed their efficient blood–brain barrier (BBB) penetration and selective tumor accumulation. This study presents a transformative approach by integrating prodrug self-assembly with targeted drug delivery to not only enhance TMZ stability but also decisively reverse glioblastoma resistance, offering a compelling therapeutic advancement.

Background Preclinical data suggest some cannabinoids may exert antitumour effects against glioblastoma (GBM). Safety and preliminary efficacy of nabiximols oromucosal cannabinoid spray plus dose-intense temozolomide (DIT) was evaluated in patients with first recurrence of GBM. Methods Part 1 was open-label and Part 2 was randomised, double-blind, and placebo-controlled. Both required individualised dose escalation. Patients received nabiximols (Part 1, n  = 6; Part 2, n  = 12) or placebo (Part 2 only, n  = 9); maximum of 12 sprays/day with DIT for up to 12 months. Safety, efficacy, and temozolomide (TMZ) pharmacokinetics (PK) were monitored. Results The most common treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs; both parts) were vomiting, dizziness, fatigue, nausea and headache. Most patients experienced TEAEs that were grade 2 or 3 (CTCAE). In Part 2, 33% of both nabiximols- and placebo-treated patients were progression-free at 6 months. Survival at 1 year was 83% for nabiximols- and 44% for placebo-treated patients ( p  = 0.042), although two patients died within the first 40 days of enrolment in the placebo arm. There were no apparent effects of nabiximols on TMZ PK. Conclusions With personalised dosing, nabiximols had acceptable safety and tolerability with no drug–drug interaction identified. The observed survival differences support further exploration in an adequately powered randomised controlled trial. Clinical trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov: Part 1– NCT01812603; Part 2– NCT01812616.

Neuroblastoma is the most common extracranial solid tumour in children. Relapsed or refractory neuroblastoma is associated with a poor outcome. We assessed the combination of irinotecan–temozolomide and dasatinib–rapamycin (RIST) in patients with relapsed or refractory neuroblastoma. The multicentre, open-label, randomised, controlled, phase 2, RIST-rNB-2011 trial recruited from 40 paediatric oncology centres in Germany and Austria. Patients aged 1–25 years with high-risk relapsed (defined as recurrence of all stage IV and MYCN amplification stages, after response to treatment) or refractory (progressive disease during primary treatment) neuroblastoma, with Lansky and Karnofsky performance status at least 50%, were assigned (1:1) to RIST (RIST group) or irinotecan–temozolomide (control group) by block randomisation, stratified by MYCN status. We compared RIST (oral rapamycin [loading 3 mg/m2 on day 1, maintenance 1 mg/m2 on days 2–4] and oral dasatinib [2 mg/kg per day] for 4 days with 3 days off, followed by intravenous irinotecan [50 mg/m2 per day] and oral temozolomide [150 mg/m2 per day] for 5 days with 2 days off; one course each of rapamycin–dasatinib and irinotecan–temozolomide for four cycles over 8 weeks, then two courses of rapamycin–dasatinib followed by one course of irinotecan–temozolomide for 12 weeks) with irinotecan–temozolomide alone (with identical dosing as experimental group). The primary endpoint of progression-free survival was analysed in all eligible patients who received at least one course of therapy. The safety population consisted of all patients who received at least one course of therapy and had at least one post-baseline safety assessment. This trial is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT01467986, and is closed to accrual. Between Aug 26, 2013, and Sept 21, 2020, 129 patients were randomly assigned to the RIST group (n=63) or control group (n=66). Median age was 5·4 years (IQR 3·7–8·1). 124 patients (78 [63%] male and 46 [37%] female) were included in the efficacy analysis. At a median follow-up of 72 months (IQR 31–88), the median progression-free survival was 11 months (95% CI 7–17) in the RIST group and 5 months (2–8) in the control group (hazard ratio 0·62, one-sided 90% CI 0·81; p=0·019). Median progression-free survival in patients with amplified MYCN (n=48) was 6 months (95% CI 4–24) in the RIST group versus 2 months (2–5) in the control group (HR 0·45 [95% CI 0·24-0·84], p=0·012); median progression-free survival in patients without amplified MYCN (n=76) was 14 months (95% CI 9–7) in the RIST group versus 8 months (4–15) in the control group (HR 0·84 [95% CI 0·51–1·38], p=0·49). The most common grade 3 or worse adverse events were neutropenia (54 [81%] of 67 patients given RIST vs 49 [82%] of 60 patients given control), thrombocytopenia (45 [67%] vs 41 [68%]), and anaemia (39 [58%] vs 38 [63%]). Nine serious treatment-related adverse events were reported (five patients given control and four patients given RIST). There were no treatment-related deaths in the control group and one in the RIST group (multiorgan failure). RIST-rNB-2011 demonstrated that targeting of MYCN-amplified relapsed or refractory neuroblastoma with a pathway-directed metronomic combination of a multkinase inhibitor and an mTOR inhibitor can improve progression-free survival and overall survival. This exclusive efficacy in MYCN-amplified, relapsed neuroblastoma warrants further investigation in the first-line setting. Deutsche Krebshilfe.

Background Glioblastoma, IDH wildtype is the most common primary malignant brain tumor in adults. Despite best available treatment, prognosis remains poor. Current standard therapy consists of surgical tumor removal followed by radiotherapy and chemotherapy with the alkylating agent temozolomide. Antisecretory factor (AF), an endogenous protein, may potentiate the effect of temozolomide and alleviate cerebral edema. Salovum® is an egg-yolk powder enriched for AF and is classified as a medical food in the European Union. Salovum® has shown preliminary clinical effect on glioblastoma in a recent pilot study. Here, we aim to assess if add-on Salovum® to temozolomide therapy can improve outcomes in patients with newly diagnosed glioblastoma. Methods This is a multi-center, double-blinded, randomized, placebo-controlled phase II-III clinical trial to investigate superiority of Salovum® over placebo as add-on treatment for glioblastoma during concomitant and adjuvant temozolomide therapy. Patients with newly diagnosed glioblastoma that are planned for temozolomide treatment are screened for eligibility and randomized to receive Salovum® ( n  = 150) or placebo ( n  = 150). An interim analysis will be performed after 80 included patients to guide whether to continue or terminate. Primary endpoint is 12-month overall survival. Secondary outcome is 24-month overall survival. Discussion This study will likely produce high-grade evidence to support or reject Salovum® as add-on treatment for glioblastoma. Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov NCT05669820 . Registered on January 3, 2023.

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.

The CATNON trial investigated the addition of concurrent, adjuvant, and both current and adjuvant temozolomide to radiotherapy in adults with newly diagnosed 1p/19q non-co-deleted anaplastic gliomas. The benefit of concurrent temozolomide chemotherapy and relevance of mutations in the IDH1 and IDH2 genes remain unclear. This randomised, open-label, phase 3 study done in 137 institutions across Australia, Europe, and North America included patients aged 18 years or older with newly diagnosed 1p/19q non-co-deleted anaplastic gliomas and a WHO performance status of 0–2. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1:1:1) centrally using a minimisation technique to radiotherapy alone (59·4 Gy in 33 fractions; three-dimensional conformal radiotherapy or intensity-modulated radiotherapy), radiotherapy with concurrent oral temozolomide (75 mg/m2 per day), radiotherapy with adjuvant oral temozolomide (12 4-week cycles of 150–200 mg/m2 temozolomide given on days 1–5), or radiotherapy with both concurrent and adjuvant temozolomide. Patients were stratified by institution, WHO performance status score, age, 1p loss of heterozygosity, the presence of oligodendroglial elements on microscopy, and MGMT promoter methylation status. The primary endpoint was overall survival adjusted by stratification factors at randomisation in the intention-to-treat population. A second interim analysis requested by the independent data monitoring committee was planned when two-thirds of total required events were observed to test superiority or futility of concurrent temozolomide. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT00626990. Between Dec 4, 2007, and Sept 11, 2015, 751 patients were randomly assigned (189 to radiotherapy alone, 188 to radiotherapy with concurrent temozolomide, 186 to radiotherapy and adjuvant temozolomide, and 188 to radiotherapy with concurrent and adjuvant temozolomide). Median follow-up was 55·7 months (IQR 41·0–77·3). The second interim analysis declared futility of concurrent temozolomide (median overall survival was 66·9 months [95% CI 45·7–82·3] with concurrent temozolomide vs 60·4 months [45·7–71·5] without concurrent temozolomide; hazard ratio [HR] 0·97 [99·1% CI 0·73–1·28], p=0·76). By contrast, adjuvant temozolomide improved overall survival compared with no adjuvant temozolomide (median overall survival 82·3 months [95% CI 67·2–116·6] vs 46·9 months [37·9–56·9]; HR 0·64 [95% CI 0·52–0·79], p<0·0001). The most frequent grade 3 and 4 toxicities were haematological, occurring in no patients in the radiotherapy only group, 16 (9%) of 185 patients in the concurrent temozolomide group, and 55 (15%) of 368 patients in both groups with adjuvant temozolomide. No treatment-related deaths were reported. Adjuvant temozolomide chemotherapy, but not concurrent temozolomide chemotherapy, was associated with a survival benefit in patients with 1p/19q non-co-deleted anaplastic glioma. Clinical benefit was dependent on IDH1 and IDH2 mutational status. Merck Sharpe & Dohme.

Glioblastoma is the most frequently diagnosed type of primary brain tumour in adults. These aggressive tumours are characterised by inherent treatment resistance and disease progression, contributing to ~ 190 000 brain tumour‐related deaths globally each year. Current therapeutic interventions consist of surgical resection followed by radiotherapy and temozolomide chemotherapy, but average survival is typically around 1 year, with < 10% of patients surviving more than 5 years. Recently, a fourth treatment modality of intermediate‐frequency low‐intensity electric fields [called tumour‐treating fields (TTFields)] was clinically approved for glioblastoma in some countries after it was found to increase median overall survival rates by ~ 5 months in a phase III randomised clinical trial. However, beyond these treatments, attempts to establish more effective therapies have yielded little improvement in survival for patients over the last 50 years. This is in contrast to many other types of cancer and highlights glioblastoma as a recognised tumour of unmet clinical need. Previous work has revealed that glioblastomas contain stem cell‐like subpopulations that exhibit heightened expression of DNA damage response (DDR) factors, contributing to therapy resistance and disease relapse. Given that radiotherapy, chemotherapy and TTFields‐based therapies all impact DDR mechanisms, this Review will focus on our current knowledge of the role of the DDR in glioblastoma biology and treatment. We also discuss the potential of effective multimodal targeting of the DDR combined with standard‐of‐care therapies, as well as emerging therapeutic targets, in providing much‐needed improvements in survival rates for patients. Glioblastoma remains a cancer of unmet clinical need. Current treatment incorporates DNA damaging therapies which activate an intricate, multifaceted DNA damage response (DDR). This Review discusses the role of the DDR in the complex biology and therapeutic response of glioblastoma. Additionally, novel multimodal approaches to target the DDR alongside standard‐of‐care therapies are presented, towards the goal of improving patient survival.