Salacz, Michael

Abstract BACKGROUND Standard of care (SOC) and patient survival in glioblastoma have changed little in the past 17 years. We evaluated in a phase 3 trial whether adding an autologous tumor lysate-loaded dendritic cell vaccine (murcidencel) to SOC extends survival. Patients and METHODS Newly diagnosed glioblastoma patients were randomized 2:1 to either murcidencel or placebo. Under a crossover design, all patients could receive murcidencel following tumor recurrence. All parties remained blinded regarding treatments before recurrence. Patients thus received murcidencel at new diagnosis (nGBM) or at recurrence (rGBM) following crossover from placebo. The primary and secondary endpoints compare overall survival (OS) with contemporaneous, matched external controls. Four sets of analyses were conducted to ensure rigorous matching of the controls, reduce biases, and confirm the robustness of the results. RESULTS 331 patients were enrolled. With the crossover, 89% received murcidencel. Median OS (mOS) for nGBM patients (n = 232) was 19.3 months from randomization (22.4 months from surgery) with murcidencel vs. 16.5 months from randomization in the controls (HR = 0.80, p = 0.002). Survival at 48 months from randomization was 15.7% vs. 9.9%, and at 60 months was 13% vs. 5.7%. For rGBM (n = 64), mOS was 13.2 months from relapse vs. 7.8 months in the controls (HR = 0.58, p < 0.001). Survival at 24 months post-recurrence was 20.7% vs. 9.6%, and at 30 months post-recurrence was 11.1% vs 5.1%. In nGBM patients with methylated MGMT (n = 90), mOS was 30.2 months from randomization (33 months from surgery) with murcidencel vs. 21.3 months from randomization in the controls (HR = 0.74, p = 0.027). The treatment was well tolerated, with only 5 serious adverse events deemed at least possibly related to the vaccine. CONCLUSION Clinically meaningful and statistically significant survival extension was seen in both nGBM and rGBM patients treated with murcidencel and SOC compared with contemporaneous, matched external controls who received SOC alone.

In part one of this two-part paper, we present eight principles that we believe must be considered for more effective treatment of the currently incurable cancers. These are addressed by multidrug adjunctive cancer treatment (MDACT), which uses multiple repurposed non-oncology drugs, not primarily to kill malignant cells, but rather to reduce the malignant cells’ growth drives. Previous multidrug regimens have used MDACT principles, e.g., the CUSP9v3 glioblastoma treatment. MDACT is an amalgam of (1) the principle that to be effective in stopping a chain of events leading to an undesired outcome, one must break more than one link; (2) the principle of Palmer et al. of achieving fractional cancer cell killing via multiple drugs with independent mechanisms of action; (3) the principle of shaping versus decisive operations, both being required for successful cancer treatment; (4) an idea adapted from Chow et al., of using multiple cytotoxic medicines at low doses; (5) the idea behind CUSP9v3, using many non-oncology CNS-penetrant drugs from general medical practice, repurposed to block tumor survival paths; (6) the concept from chess that every move creates weaknesses and strengths; (7) the principle of mass—by adding force to a given effort, the chances of achieving the goal increase; and (8) the principle of blocking parallel signaling pathways. Part two gives an example MDACT regimen, gMDACT, which uses six repurposed drugs—celecoxib, dapsone, disulfiram, itraconazole, pyrimethamine, and telmisartan—to interfere with growth-driving elements common to cholangiocarcinoma, colon adenocarcinoma, glioblastoma, and non-small-cell lung cancer. gMDACT is another example of—not a replacement for—previous multidrug regimens already in clinical use, such as CUSP9v3. MDACT regimens are designed as adjuvants to be used with cytotoxic drugs.