Back to Authors

Weller, Michael

0000-0002-1748-174X

Mayo Clinic

University of Zurich

Citations 52

Abstract LB_A12: Initial results from 2 Phase I studies of NMS-03305293, a selective PARP1 inhibitor
Geurts, Marjolein , Gramatzki, Dorothee , Merler, Sara , Duca, Matteo, Saturno, Grazia, Crivori, Patrizia, Montagnoli, Alessia, Mahnke, Lisa, Jaeckle, Kurt A. , Zhang, Jian , Shi, Yehui , Kizilbash, Sani H. , Milella, Michele Stanislaw , Damian, Silvia , Damian, Silvia , Kizilbash, Sani H , Girardi, Fabio , Sener, Uğur , Roberti, Domenico , Fu, Siqing , Gaviani, Paola , Zhang, Jian , Guarneri, Valentina , Weller, Michael , Bent, Martin J. van den

Molecular Cancer Therapeutics | December 1, 2023 | Volume: 22 | Issue: 12_Supplement | Pages: LB_A12-LB_A12

10.1158/1535-7163.targ-23-lb_a12 Get It

Abstract Background PARP-1 has a well-established role in DNA repair. PARP-1 selective inhibitors are a new subclass of PARPi that offer potential for improved tolerability. NMS-03305293 (NMS-293) is an oral, brain-penetrant PARP-1 selective inhibitor with strong antitumor activity in BRCA mutated preclinical models. Furthermore, NMS-293 is synergistic with temozolomide (TMZ) in glioblastoma mouse models. Methods Two phase I/I-II dose-escalation/expansion studies assessed safety, tolerability, and preliminary antitumor activity of NMS-293. Both are actively recruiting. In PARPA-293-001 (NCT04182516), NMS-293 was administered orally, ranging from 20 mg (QD) to 160 mg (BID) for 21 or 28 days on 28-day cycle in adult patients with advanced/metastatic, relapsed/refractory solid tumors who have exhausted standard treatment options. In PARPA-293-002 (NCT04910022), NMS-293 was administered in a range of doses orally, QD or BID on days 1-7 plus TMZ 150mg/m2 QD on days 1-5 in repeated 28-day cycle in adult patients with recurrent diffuse gliomas. Tumor responses were measured by investigator-assessed RANO criteria. Results The unpooled safety database at the data-cut-off (02-AUG-23), includes 45 patients in PARPA-001 and 21 patients in PARPA-002. PARPA-001 showed an MTD of 100 mg BID for 28 days on a 28-day cycle, a dose with meaningful PK relative to preclinical activity. PARPA-002 dose finding is ongoing with no DLTs as of cutoff date. The most frequent (≥10%) any-grade treatment related adverse events (TRAEs) in PARPA-001 were reversible QTcF prolongation, nausea, asthenia, decreased appetite and vomiting, mainly mild/moderate. In PARPA-002, with discontinuous NMS-293 plus TMZ, no G≥3 TRAEs were reported. The most frequent (≥10%) any-grade TRAEs were: nausea, fatigue, vomiting, decreased appetite, and platelet count decreased, mainly G1 adverse events. Overall, no dose-dependent trends of myelosuppression have been observed. 14 recurrent glioma patients across dose levels in PARPA-002 were evaluable for tumor response. A patient with glioblastoma had confirmed partial response (PR) with duration 7.6+ weeks, remaining on treatment at cutoff date. A patient with grade 3 IDH-mutant astrocytoma had unconfirmed PR with ongoing tumor shrinkage at 16.1+ weeks. A patient with glioblastoma had complete radiological disappearance of enhancing non-target lesions, remaining on treatment at cutoff date. NMS-293 PK profiles showed an increase in exposure with the dose with approximately 5 to 13 hours half-life. Conclusion NMS-293, a PARP-1 selective, brain penetrant inhibitor was well tolerated in phase I clinical trials with no dose dependent trends of myelosuppression. Furthermore, NMS-293 showed encouraging clinical activity in combination with TMZ in difficult-to-treat recurrent glioma patients. Citation Format: Marjolein Geurts, Dorothee Gramatzki, Sara Merler, Matteo Duca, Fabio Girardi, Ugur T. Sener, Domenico Roberti, Grazia Saturno, Patrizia Crivori, Alessia Montagnoli, Lisa Mahnke, Siqing Fu, Paola Gaviani, Kurt A. Jaeckle, Jian Zhang, Yehui Shi, Valentina Guarneri, Michael Weller, Sani H. Kizilbash, Martin J. van den Bent, Michele Milella, Silvia Damian. Initial results from 2 Phase I studies of NMS-03305293, a selective PARP1 inhibitor [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the AACR-NCI-EORTC Virtual International Conference on Molecular Targets and Cancer Therapeutics; 2023 Oct 11-15; Boston, MA. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Mol Cancer Ther 2023;22(12 Suppl):Abstract nr LB_A12.
RANO 2.0: Update to the Response Assessment in Neuro-Oncology Criteria for High- and Low-Grade Gliomas in Adults
Wen, Patrick Y. , Bent, Martin J. van den , Youssef, Gilbert , Cloughesy, Timothy F. , Ellingson, Benjamin M. , Barboriak, Daniel P. , Groot, John de , Huang, Raymond Y. , Lassman, Andrew B. , Molinaro, Annette M. , Rahman, Rifaquat , Shankar, Lalitha , Macdonald, David R., Reardon, David A. , Vogelbaum, Michael A. , Chang, Susan M. , van den Bent, Martin J , Weller, Michael , Barboriak, Daniel P , de Groot, John , Huang, Raymond , Lassman, Andrew B , Mehta, Minesh P , Molinaro, Annette M. , Preusser, Matthias , Rahman, Rifaquat , Stupp, Roger , Villanueva-Meyer, Javier E. , Wick, Wolfgang , Reardon, David A , Vogelbaum, Michael A , Ellingson, Benjamin M , Cloughesy, Timothy F , Wen, Patrick Yung , Galanis, Evanthia , Gilbert, Mark R. , Mehta, Minesh P. , Preusser, Matthias , Stupp, Roger , Wick, Wolfgang

Journal of Clinical Oncology | September 29, 2023 | Volume: 41 | Issue: 33 | Pages: 5187-5199

10.1200/jco.23.01059 Get It

PURPOSE The Response Assessment in Neuro-Oncology (RANO) criteria for high-grade gliomas (RANO-HGG) and low-grade gliomas (RANO-LGG) were developed to improve reliability of response assessment in glioma trials. Over time, some limitations of these criteria were identified, and challenges emerged regarding integrating features of the modified RANO (mRANO) or the immunotherapy RANO (iRANO) criteria. METHODS Informed by data from studies evaluating the different criteria, updates to the RANO criteria are proposed (RANO 2.0). RESULTS We recommend a standard set of criteria for both high- and low-grade gliomas, to be used for all trials regardless of the treatment modalities being evaluated. In the newly diagnosed setting, the postradiotherapy magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), rather than the postsurgical MRI, will be used as the baseline for comparison with subsequent scans. Since the incidence of pseudoprogression is high in the 12 weeks after radiotherapy, continuation of treatment and confirmation of progression during this period with a repeat MRI, or histopathologic evidence of unequivocal recurrent tumor, are required to define tumor progression. However, confirmation scans are not mandatory after this period nor for the evaluation of treatment for recurrent tumors. For treatments with a high likelihood of pseudoprogression, mandatory confirmation of progression with a repeat MRI is highly recommended. The primary measurement remains the maximum cross-sectional area of tumor (two-dimensional) but volumetric measurements are an option. For IDH wild-type glioblastoma, the nonenhancing disease will no longer be evaluated except when assessing response to antiangiogenic agents. In IDH-mutated tumors with a significant nonenhancing component, clinical trials may require evaluating both the enhancing and nonenhancing tumor components for response assessment. CONCLUSION The revised RANO 2.0 criteria refine response assessment in gliomas.
Brain tumor-related epilepsy management: A Society for Neuro-oncology (SNO) consensus review on current management
Tobochnik, Steven , Inati, Sara K. , Koekkoek, Johan A F , McKhann, Guy M. , Riviello, James J. , Schiff, David , Tatum, William O. , Templer, Jessica W. , Wen, Patrick Y , Avila, Edward K , Tobochnik, Steven , Inati, Sara K , Koekkoek, Johan A F , McKhann, Guy M , Riviello, James J , Schiff, David , Tatum, William O , Templer, Jessica W , Weller, Michael , Wen, Patrick Y , Rudà, Roberta

Neuro-Oncology | September 12, 2023 | Volume: 26 | Issue: 1 | Pages: 7-24

10.1093/neuonc/noad154 Get It

Abstract Tumor-related epilepsy (TRE) is a frequent and major consequence of brain tumors. Management of TRE is required throughout the course of disease and a deep understanding of diagnosis and treatment is key to improving quality of life. Gross total resection is favored from both an oncologic and epilepsy perspective. Shared mechanisms of tumor growth and epilepsy exist, and emerging data will provide better targeted therapy options. Initial treatment with antiseizure medications (ASM) in conjunction with surgery and/or chemoradiotherapy is typical. The first choice of ASM is critical to optimize seizure control and tolerability considering the effects of the tumor itself. These agents carry a potential for drug–drug interactions and therefore knowledge of mechanisms of action and interactions is needed. A review of adverse effects is necessary to guide ASM adjustments and decision-making. This review highlights the essential aspects of diagnosis and treatment of TRE with ASMs, surgery, chemotherapy, and radiotherapy while indicating areas of uncertainty. Future studies should consider the use of a standardized method of seizure tracking and incorporating seizure outcomes as a primary endpoint of tumor treatment trials.
OS09.4.A RANO 2.0: UPDATE TO THE RESPONSE ASSESSMENT IN NEURO-ONCOLOGY (RANO) CRITERIA FOR HIGH- AND LOW-GRADE GLIOMAS IN ADULTS
Wen, Patrick Y. , Youssef, George , Barboriak, Daniel P. , DeGroot, John, Lassman, Andrew B. , Molinaro, Annette M. , Rahman, Rifaquat , Shankar, Lalitha , Sul, Joohee, Villanueva‐Meyer, Javier , Macdonald, David , Reardon, David A. , Vogelbaum, Michael A. , Chang, Susan M. , Barboriak, Daniel P , Wen, Patrick Yung , Bent, Martin J. van den , Youssef, G, Cloughesy, Timothy F. , Ellingson, Benjamin M. , Weller, Michael , Galanis, Evanthia , Gilbert, Mark R. , Huang, Raymond Y. , Mehta, Minesh P. , Molinaro, Annette M. , Preusser, Matthias , Stupp, Roger , Villanueva-Meyer, Javier E. , Wick, Wolfgang

Neuro-Oncology | September 8, 2023 | Volume: 25 | Issue: Supplement_2 | Pages: ii21-ii21

10.1093/neuonc/noad137.061 Get It

Abstract BACKGROUND The Response Assessment in Neuro-Oncology (RANO) criteria for high-grade gliomas (RANO-HGG) and low-grade gliomas (RANO-LGG) were developed to improve reliability of response assessment in glioma trials. Over time some limitations of these criteria were identified, and uncertainty emerged regarding integrating features of the modified RANO (mRANO) or the immunotherapy RANO (iRANO) criteria. MATERIAL AND METHODS Informed by data from a cohort of glioblastoma patients and other evaluations of RANO criteria that allowed evaluation of features of the different criteria, the RANO working group developed updates to the RANO criteria (RANO 2.0). RESULTS Based on the 2021 WHO classification of gliomas, we recommend a standard set of criteria for both high and low-grade gliomas, to be used for all trials regardless of the treatment modalities being evaluated. In the newly diagnosed setting, the post-radiotherapy MRI, rather than the post-surgical MRI, will be used as the baseline for future comparison. Since the incidence of pseudoprogression is high in the 12 weeks following radiotherapy, continuation of treatment and confirmation of progression during this period with a repeat MRI, or histopathologic evidence of unequivocal recurrent tumor, is required to define tumor progression. However, confirmation scans are not mandatory after this period nor for recurrent tumors. For treatments with a high likelihood of pseudoprogression, mandatory confirmation of progression with a repeat MRI is highly recommended. The primary measurement remains the maximum cross-sectional area of tumor (2-dimensional) but volumetric measurements are an option. For IDH-wildtype glioblastoma, the non-enhancing disease will no longer be evaluated. In IDH-mutated tumors with a significant non-enhancing component, clinical trials may require evaluating both the enhancing and non-enhancing tumor components for response assessment. CONCLUSION These criteria represent a work in progress that will hopefully improve the assessment of response in glioma trials. Future updates will incorporate novel developments, advanced imaging techniques, and endpoints as they become validated.
CLRM-07 RANO 2.0: PROPOSAL FOR AN UPDATE TO THE RESPONSE ASSESSMENT IN NEURO-ONCOLOGY (RANO) CRITERIA FOR HIGH- AND LOW-GRADE GLIOMAS IN ADULTS
Wen, Patrick Y. , Barboriak, Danial, DeGroot, John, Lassman, Andrew B. , Molinaro, Annette M. , Preusser, Mattias, Rahman, Rifaquat , Shankar, Lalitha , Sul, Joohee, Villanueva‐Meyer, Javier , Macdonald, David , Reardon, David A. , Vogelbaum, Michael A. , Chang, Susan M. , Wen, Patrick Yung , Bent, Martin J. van den , Youssef, Gilbert , Cloughesy, Timothy F. , Ellingson, Benjamin M. , Weller, Michael , Galanis, Evanthia , Gilbert, Mark R. , Huang, Raymond Y. , Mehta, Minesh P. , Molinaro, Annette M. , Stupp, Roger , Villanueva-Meyer, Javier E. , Wick, Wolfgang

Neuro-Oncology Advances | August 4, 2023 | Volume: 5 | Issue: Supplement_3 | Pages: iii8-iii8

10.1093/noajnl/vdad070.029 Get It

Abstract The Response Assessment in Neuro-Oncology (RANO) criteria for high-grade gliomas (RANO-HGG) and low-grade gliomas (RANO-LGG) were developed to improve the reliability of response assessment in glioma trials. Over time some limitations of these criteria were identified, and uncertainty emerged regarding integrating features of the modified RANO (mRANO) or the immunotherapy RANO (iRANO) criteria. Informed by data from a cohort of glioblastoma patients and other evaluations of RANO criteria that allowed evaluation of features of the different criteria, we propose updates to the RANO criteria (RANO 2.0). Based on the 2021 WHO classification of gliomas, we recommend a standard set of criteria for both high and low-grade gliomas, to be used for all trials regardless of the treatment modalities being evaluated. In the newly diagnosed setting, the post-radiotherapy MRI, rather than the post-surgical MRI, will be used as the baseline for future comparison. Since the incidence of pseudoprogression is high in the 12 weeks following radiotherapy, continuation of treatment and confirmation of progression during this period with a repeat MRI, or histopathologic evidence of unequivocal recurrent tumor, is required to define tumor progression. However, confirmation scans are not mandatory after this period nor for recurrent tumors. For treatments with a high likelihood of pseudoprogression, mandatory confirmation of progression with a repeat MRI is an option. The primary measurement remains the maximum cross-sectional area of tumor (2-dimensional) but volumetric measurements are an option. For IDH-wildtype glioblastoma, the non-enhancing disease will no longer be evaluated. In IDH-mutated tumors with a significant non-enhancing component, clinical trials may require evaluating both the enhancing and non-enhancing tumor components for response assessment.
RANO 2.0: Proposal for an update to the Response Assessment in Neuro-Oncology (RANO) criteria for high- and low-grade gliomas in adults.
Wen, Patrick Y. , Groot, John Frederick De, Lassman, Andrew B. , Molinaro, Annette M. , Shankar, Lalitha , Reardon, David A. , Vogelbaum, Michael A. , Chang, Susan M. , Wen, Patrick Yung , Bent, Martin J. van den , Youssef, Gilbert , Cloughesy, Timothy F. , Ellingson, Benjamin M. , Weller, Michael , Galanis, Evanthia , Barboriak, Daniel P. , Gilbert, Mark R. , Huang, Raymond Y. , Mehta, Minesh P. , Molinaro, Annette M. , Preusser, Matthias , Wick, Wolfgang

Journal of Clinical Oncology | June 4, 2023 | Volume: 41 | Issue: 16_suppl | Pages: 2017-2017

10.1200/jco.2023.41.16_suppl.2017 Get It

2017 Background: Response Assessment in Neuro-Oncology (RANO) criteria for high-grade and low-grade glioma (HGG and LGG) were developed to improve reliability of response assessment in glioma trials. Several limitations of the original RANO criteria have been reported. Methods: To address limitations of the original RANO criteria, a large cohort of patients with newly diagnosed and recurrent glioblastoma were evaluated comparing RANO-HGG with modified RANO (mRANO) and immunotherapy RANO (iRANO) criteria to inform the following proposed updates (RANO 2.0). Results: Based on the 2021 WHO classification of glioma, we recommend a single common set of criteria for all gliomas regardless of WHO grade and IDH mutational status. These criteria will be used for all trials regardless of the treatment modalities being evaluated. In newly diagnosed glioblastoma, the post-radiotherapy MRI, usually obtained approximately 4 weeks after completion of radiotherapy, rather than the post-surgical MRI as proposed in original RANO criteria, will be used as the baseline for comparison of subsequent scans. Since the incidence of pseudoprogression is high in the first 3 months following radiotherapy, confirmation of progression during this period with a repeat MRI (in 4-8 weeks) will be required for determining radiographic progression of disease (PD) if the patient is clinically stable. However, confirmation scans are not mandatory after this period nor for recurrent tumors since these scans do not appear to improve reliability in determining progression. For agents with a high likelihood of producing pseudoprogression such as viral therapies and some other immunotherapies, mandatory confirmation of progression with a repeat MRI is an option. The primary measurement will remain the 2-dimensional maximum cross-sectional area of tumor as the simplest method, but where resources are available, volumetric measurements are an option. For IDH wild-type tumors with contrast enhancement, non-enhancing tumor will no longer be evaluated with the possible exception of patients receiving antiangiogenic therapies. However, in tumors with a significant non-enhancing component, both the contrast enhancing and non-enhancing components will be evaluated as target lesions. Conclusions: We hope that these and other proposed changes by the RANO working group will improve response assessment in glioma clinical trials and help the development of more effective therapy for patients.
Objective response rate targets for recurrent glioblastoma clinical trials based on the historic association between objective response rate and median overall survival
Ellingson, Benjamin M. , Wen, Patrick Y. , Chang, Susan M. , Bent, Martin J. van den , Vogelbaum, Michael A. , Li, Shanpeng , Wick, Wolfgang , Lassman, Andrew B. , Galanis, Evanthia , Wick, Wolfgang , Lassman, Andrew B , Weller, Michael , Galanis, Evanthia , van den Bent, Martin J , Ellingson, Benjamin M , Wen, Patrick Yung , Li, Gang , Kim, Jiyoon , Youssef, Gilbert , Gilbert, Mark R. , Groot, John de , Cloughesy, Timothy F.

Neuro-Oncology | January 5, 2023 | Volume: 25 | Issue: 6 | Pages: 1017-1028

10.1093/neuonc/noad002 Get It

Abstract Durable objective response rate (ORR) remains a meaningful endpoint in recurrent cancer; however, the target ORR for single-arm recurrent glioblastoma trials has not been based on historic information or tied to patient outcomes. The current study reviewed 68 treatment arms comprising 4793 patients in past trials in recurrent glioblastoma in order to judiciously define target ORRs for use in recurrent glioblastoma trials. ORR was estimated at 6.1% [95% CI 4.23; 8.76%] for cytotoxic chemothera + pies (ORR = 7.59% for lomustine, 7.57% for temozolomide, 0.64% for irinotecan, and 5.32% for other agents), 3.37% for biologic agents, 7.97% for (select) immunotherapies, and 26.8% for anti-angiogenic agents. ORRs were significantly correlated with median overall survival (mOS) across chemotherapy (R2= 0.4078, P < .0001), biologics (R2= 0.4003, P = .0003), and immunotherapy trials (R2= 0.8994, P < .0001), but not anti-angiogenic agents (R2= 0, P = .8937). Pooling data from chemotherapy, biologics, and immunotherapy trials, a meta-analysis indicated a strong correlation between ORR and mOS (R2= 0.3900, P < .0001; mOS [weeks] = 1.4xORR + 24.8). Assuming an ineffective cytotoxic (control) therapy has ORR = 7.6%, the average ORR for lomustine and temozolomide trials, a sample size of ≥40 patients with target ORR>25% is needed to demonstrate statistical significance compared to control with a high level of confidence (P < .01) and adequate power (>80%). Given this historic data and potential biases in patient selection, we recommend that well-controlled, single-arm phase II studies in recurrent glioblastoma should have a target ORR >25% (which translates to a median OS of approximately 15 months) and a sample size of ≥40 patients, in order to convincingly demonstrate antitumor activity. Crucially, this response needs to have sufficient durability, which was not addressed in the current study.
NIMG-42. DURABLE OVERALL RESPONSE RATE (ORR) TARGETS FOR RECURRENT GLIOBLASTOMA (RGBM) CLINICAL TRIALS BASED ON THE HISTORIC ASSOCIATION BETWEEN ORR AND MEDIAN OVERALL SURVIVAL (MOS)
Wen, Patrick Y. , Chang, Susan M. , Vogelbaum, Michael A. , Li, Gang, Lassman, Andrew B. , Gilbert, Mark, Ellingson, Benjamin M. , Wen, Patrick Yung , Bent, Martin J. van den , Li, Shanpeng , Kim, Jiyoon , Youssef, Gilbert , Wick, Wolfgang , Groot, John de , Weller, Michael , Galanis, Evanthia , Cloughesy, Timothy F.

Neuro-Oncology | November 14, 2022 | Volume: 24 | Issue: Supplement_7 | Pages: vii172-vii173

10.1093/neuonc/noac209.660 Get It

Abstract Durable overall response rate (ORR) remains a meaningful endpoint in recurrent GBM; however, the target ORR for single arm recurrent GBM trials has not been based on historic information or tied to patient outcomes. The current study reviewed past trials in recurrent GBM in order to judiciously define target ORRs for use in recurrent GBM trials. After reviewing 69 treatment arms comprising 4,971 patients, ORR was 6.1%[95% CI 4.23; 8.76%] for cytotoxic chemotherapies (ORR=7.59% for CCNU, 7.57% for TMZ, 0.64% for CPT-11, and 5.32% for other agents), 3.37% for biologic agents, 7.97% for immunotherapies (select trials), and 26.8% for anti-angiogenic agents. ORRs were significantly correlated with median overall survival (mOS) across chemotherapy (R2=0.4078, P< 0.0001), biologics (R2=0.4003, P=0.0003), and immunotherapy trials (R2=0.8994, P< 0.0001), but not anti-angiogenic agents (R2=0, P=0.8937). Pooling data from chemotherapy, biologics, and immunotherapy trials, a meta-analysis indicated a strong correlation between ORR and mOS (R2=0.3164, P< 0.0001; mOS[weeks]=0.6xORR+28.9), suggesting an ORR >20% results in an mOS of > 40.9 weeks, which is double the survival estimate of a treatment with ORR=0% and ≥ 2 months longer than treatments with ORR=5%. Assuming an ineffective therapy (control) has ORR=5%, a trial of 32 patients with a target ORR=20% leads to the 95% confidence interval higher than the control group. We conclude that single arm phase II studies in recurrent GBM with ≥ 32 patients should have a target ORR ≥ 20%. This was associated with a median OS of approximately 1 year. Importantly, durability of response should also be considered and was not assessed in the current meta-analysis.
Isocitrate dehydrogenase (IDH) mutant gliomas: A Society for Neuro-Oncology (SNO) consensus review on diagnosis, management, and future directions
Miller, Julie J. , Castro, L. Nicolas Gonzalez , McBrayer, Samuel K. , Weller, Michael , Andronesi, Ovidiu C. , Baumert, Brigitta G. , Berger, Mitchel S. , Chang, Susan M. , Costello, J , Huang, Raymond Y. , Jenkins, Robert B. , Mellinghoff, Ingo K. , Platten, Michael , Reardon, David A. , Schiff, David , Yan, Hai , Bent, Martin J. van den , Kaelin, William G. , Wen, Patrick Y. , Gonzalez Castro, L Nicolas , Berger, Mitchell S , Bindra, Ranjit , Cahill, Daniel P. , Horbinski, Craig , Jenkins, RB , Wick, Wolfgang , Weller, Michael , van den Bent, Martin J , Platten, Michael , Mellinghoff, Ingo K , Huang, Raymond , Cloughesy, Timothy F. , Portnow, Jana , Barnholtz‐Sloan, Jill S. , Bi, Wenya Linda , Bindra, Ranjit S. , Horbinski, Craig , Ligon, Keith L , Nabors, Burt , Shi, Diana D. , Wick, Wolfgang , Deimling, Andreas von , Wen, Patrick Yung

Neuro-Oncology | August 24, 2022 | Volume: 25 | Issue: 1 | Pages: 4-25

10.1093/neuonc/noac207 Get It

Abstract Isocitrate dehydrogenase (IDH) mutant gliomas are the most common adult, malignant primary brain tumors diagnosed in patients younger than 50, constituting an important cause of morbidity and mortality. In recent years, there has been significant progress in understanding the molecular pathogenesis and biology of these tumors, sparking multiple efforts to improve their diagnosis and treatment. In this consensus review from the Society for Neuro-Oncology (SNO), the current diagnosis and management of IDH-mutant gliomas will be discussed. In addition, novel therapies, such as targeted molecular therapies and immunotherapies, will be reviewed. Current challenges and future directions for research will be discussed.
Prospective validation of a new imaging scorecard to assess leptomeningeal metastasis: A joint EORTC BTG and RANO effort.
Winklhofer, Sebastian , Lmalem, Hafida, Brandsma, Dieta , Kumthekar, Priya , Jaeckle, Kurt A. , Glantz, Michael , Wen, Patrick Y. , colleagues, EORTC RANO LM scorecard task force, including 38, Rhun, Émilie Le , Devos, Patrick , Smits, Marion , Tonn, Joerg-Christian , Preusser, Matthias , Wen, Patrick Yung , Bendszus, Martin , Weller, Michael , colleagues, EORTC RANO LM scorecard task force, including 38

Journal of Clinical Oncology | June 6, 2022 | Volume: 40 | Issue: 16_suppl | Pages: 2026-2026

10.1200/jco.2022.40.16_suppl.2026 Get It

2026 Background: Validation of the 2016 RANO MRI scorecard for leptomeningeal metastasis failed for multiple reasons. Accordingly, this joint EORTC Brain Tumor Group and RANO effort sought to prospectively validate a revised MRI scorecard for response assessment in leptomeningeal metastasis. Methods: Coded paired cerebrospinal MRI of 20 patients with leptomeningeal metastases from solid cancers at baseline and follow-up after treatment and instructions for assessment were provided via the EORTC imaging platform. The Kappa coefficient was used to evaluate the inter-observer pairwise agreement. Results: Thirty-five raters participated, including 9 neuroradiologists, 17 neurologists, 4 radiation oncologists, 3 neurosurgeons and 2 medical oncologists. Among single leptomeningeal metastases-related imaging findings at baseline, the best median concordance was noted for hydrocephalus (Kappa = 0.63), and the worst median concordance for spinal linear enhancing disease (Kappa = 0.46). The median concordance of raters for the overall response assessment was moderate (Kappa = 0.44). Notably, the interobserver agreement for the presence of parenchymal brain metastases at baseline was fair (Kappa = 0.29) and virtually absent for their response to treatment. 394 of 700 ratings (20 patients x 35 raters, 56%) were fully completed. In 308 of 394 fully completed ratings (78%), the overall response assessment perfectly matched the summary interpretation of the single ratings as proposed in the scorecard instructions. Conclusions: This study confirms the principle utility of the new scorecard, but also indicates the need for training of MRI assessment with a dedicated reviewer panel in clinical trials. Electronic case report forms with “blocking options” may be required to enforce completeness and quality of scoring.