A safety run-in and randomized phase 2 study of cilengitide combined with chemoradiation for newly diagnosed glioblastoma (NABTT 0306).

BACKGROUND: Cilengitide is a selective integrin inhibitor that is well tolerated and has demonstrated biologic activity in patients with recurrent malignant glioma. The primary objectives of this randomized phase 2 trial were to determine the safety and efficacy of cilengitide when combined with radiation and temozolomide for patients with newly diagnosed glioblastoma multiforme and to select a dose for comparative clinical testing. METHODS: In total, 112 patients were accrued. Eighteen patients received standard radiation and temozolomide with cilengitide in a safety run-in phase followed by a randomized phase 2 trial with 94 patients assigned to either a 500 mg dose group or 2000 mg dose group. The trial was designed to estimate overall survival benefit compared with a New Approaches to Brain Tumor Therapy (NABTT) Consortium internal historic control and data from the published European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) trial EORTC 26981. RESULTS: Cilengitide at all doses studied was well tolerated with radiation and temozolomide. The median survival was 19.7 months for all patients, 17.4 months for the patients in the 500 mg dose group, 20.8 months for patients in the 2000 mg dose group, 30 months for patients who had methylated O6-methylguanine-DNA methyltransferase (MGMT) status, and 17.4 months for patients who had unmethylated MGMT status. For patients aged ≤70 years, the median survival and survival at 24 months was superior to what was observed in the EORTC trial (20.7 months vs 14.6 months and 41% vs 27%, respectively; P = .008). CONCLUSIONS: Cilengitide was well tolerated when combined with standard chemoradiation and may improve survival for patients newly diagnosed with glioblastoma multiforme regardless of MGMT methylation status. The authors concluded that, from an efficacy and safety standpoint, future trials of this agent in this population should use the 2000 mg dose. Cancer 2012. © 2012 American Cancer Society.

Stratégies thérapeutiques pour le traitement des gliomes [Therapeutic strategies for the management of gliomas]

The management of gliomas remains challenging and requires a multidisciplinary approach that involves neurosurgeons, radiation therapists and oncologists. For patients with glioblastomas, progress has been made in recent years with the introduction of a combined modality treatment associating radiation therapy and concomitant chemotherapy with the novel alkylating agent temozolomide. This combination resulted in a significant prolongation of survival and increase in the number of patients with survival well beyond two years. Since then, interest in developing new agents in this disease has dramatically increased. In parallel, molecular markers, such as methylation status of MGMT or identification of the translocation of 1p and 19q in oligodendrogliomas have allowed to identify distinct subtypes with exquisite response to treatment or different prognosis. These developments have implications for the development of clinical trials of new potential drug treatments. In this article, we provide a review of the current management of low- and high-grade gliomas, including astrocytomas, oligodendrogliomas and glioblastomas and provide an outlook into future potential therapies.

Patterns of care in recurrent glioblastoma in Switzerland: a multicentre national approach based on diagnostic nodes.

Despite moderate improvements in outcome of glioblastoma after first-line treatment with chemoradiation recent clinical trials failed to improve the prognosis of recurrent glioblastoma. In the absence of a standard of care we aimed to investigate institutional treatment strategies to identify similarities and differences in the pattern of care for recurrent glioblastoma. We investigated re-treatment criteria and therapeutic pathways for recurrent glioblastoma of eight neuro-oncology centres in Switzerland having an established multidisciplinary tumour-board conference. Decision algorithms, differences and consensus were analysed using the objective consensus methodology. A total of 16 different treatment recommendations were identified based on combinations of eight different decision criteria. The set of criteria implemented as well as the set of treatments offered was different in each centre. For specific situations, up to 6 different treatment recommendations were provided by the eight centres. The only wide-range consensus identified was to offer best supportive care to unfit patients. A majority recommendation was identified for non-operable large early recurrence with unmethylated MGMT promoter status in the fit patients: here bevacizumab was offered. In fit patients with late recurrent non-operable MGMT promoter methylated glioblastoma temozolomide was recommended by most. No other majority recommendations were present. In the absence of strong evidence we identified few consensus recommendations in the treatment of recurrent glioblastoma. This contrasts the limited availability of single drugs and treatment modalities. Clinical situations of greatest heterogeneity may be suitable to be addressed in clinical trials and second opinion referrals are likely to yield diverging recommendations.