Ostrom, Quinn T.

Abstract INTRODUCTION The NIH Revitalization Act, implemented 29 years ago, set to improve the representation of women and minorities in clinical trials. In this study, we investigate the progress made in neuro-oncology in all phase therapeutic clinical trials for neuro-epithelial central nervous system tumors in comparison to their demographic-specific age-adjusted disease incidence and mortality. METHODS Registry study of all published clinical trials for World Health Organization (WHO) defined neuro-epithelial CNS tumors between January 2000 and December 2019. Study participants for trials were obtained from PubMed and ClinicalTrials.gov. Population-based data from the CBTRUS for incidence analyses. SEER-18 Incidence-Based Mortality data was used for mortality analysis. Descriptive statistics, Fisher exact, and c2 tests were used to analyze the data. RESULTS Among 662 published clinical trial articles representing 49, 907 accrued participants, 62.5% of study participants were men and 37.5% were women (P< 0.0001) representing a mortality specific over-accrual for men (P= 0.001) and under-accrual for women (P= 0.001). Whites, Asians, Blacks, and Hispanics represented 91.7%, 1.5%, 2.6%, and 1.7% of trial participants. Compared with their US cancer mortality, Blacks (47% of expected mortality, P=.008), Hispanics (17% of expected mortality, P< .001) and Asians (33% of expected mortality, P< .001) were underrepresented compared with Whites (114% of expected mortality, P< .001). CONCLUSIONS Nearly 30 years since the Revitalization Act, minorities and women are consistently underrepresented when compared with their demographic-specific incidence and mortality in therapeutic clinical trials for neuroepithelial tumors. This study provides a framework for investigating cancer clinical trial accrual and offers guidance regarding workforce factors associated with enrollment of vulnerable patients.

Abstract Background Advanced age is a major risk factor for the development of many diseases including those affecting the central nervous system. Wild-type isocitrate dehydrogenase glioblastoma (IDHwt GBM) is the most common primary malignant brain cancer and accounts for ≥90% of all adult GBM diagnoses. Patients with IDHwt GBM have a median age of diagnosis at 68–70 years of age, and increasing age is associated with an increasingly worse prognosis for patients with this type of GBM. Methods The Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results, The Cancer Genome Atlas, and the Chinese Glioma Genome Atlas databases were analyzed for mortality indices. Meta-analysis of 80 clinical trials was evaluated for log hazard ratio for aging to tumor survivorship. Results Despite significant advances in the understanding of intratumoral genetic alterations, molecular characteristics of tumor microenvironments, and relationships between tumor molecular characteristics and the use of targeted therapeutics, life expectancy for older adults with GBM has yet to improve. Conclusions Based upon the results of our analysis, we propose that age-dependent factors that are yet to be fully elucidated, contribute to IDHwt GBM patient outcomes.

AbstractBackgroundIt remains unknown how the COVID-19 pandemic has changed neuro-oncology clinical practice, training, and research efforts.MethodsWe performed an international survey of practitioners, scientists, and trainees from 21 neuro-oncology organizations across 6 continents, April 24–May 17, 2020. We assessed clinical practice and research environments, institutional preparedness and support, and perceived impact on patients.ResultsOf 582 respondents, 258 (45%) were US-based and 314 (55%) international. Ninety-four percent of participants reported changes in their clinical practice. Ninety-five percent of respondents converted at least some practice to telemedicine. Ten percent of practitioners felt the need to see patients in person, specifically because of billing concerns and pressure from their institutions. Sixty-seven percent of practitioners suspended enrollment for at least one clinical trial, including 62% suspending phase III trial enrollments. More than 50% believed neuro-oncology patients were at increased risk for COVID-19. Seventy-one percent of clinicians feared for their own personal safety or that of their families, specifically because of their clinical duties; 20% had inadequate personal protective equipment. While 69% reported increased stress, 44% received no psychosocial support from their institutions. Thirty-seven percent had salary reductions and 63% of researchers temporarily closed their laboratories. However, the pandemic created positive changes in perceived patient satisfaction, communication quality, and technology use to deliver care and mediate interactions with other practitioners.ConclusionsThe pandemic has changed treatment schedules and limited investigational treatment options. Institutional lack of support created clinician and researcher anxiety. Communication with patients was satisfactory. We make recommendations to guide clinical and scientific infrastructure moving forward and address the personal challenges of providers and researchers.

Abstract To assess the impact of the pandemic on the field, we performed an international web-based survey of practitioners, scientists, and trainees from 21 neuro-oncology organizations across 6 continents from April 24 through May 17. Of 582 respondents, 258 (45%) were in the US, and 314 (55%) were international. 80.4% were affiliated with academic institutions. 94% respondents reported changes in clinical practice; 95% reported conversion to telemedicine for at least some appointments. However, almost 10% practitioners felt the need to see patients in person specifically because of billing concerns and perceived institutional pressure. Over 50% believed neuro-oncology patients were at increased risk of contracting COVID-19. 67% practitioners suspended enrollment for at least one clinical trial: 53% suspended phase II and 62% suspended phase III trial enrollment. 71% clinicians feared for their or their families’ safety, specifically because of their clinical duties. 20% percent said they did not have enough PPE to work safely; about the same percentage were unhappy with their institutions’ response to the pandemic. 43% believed the pandemic would negatively affect their academic career, and 52% fellowship program directors were worried about losing funding for their training programs. While 69% respondents reported increased stress, 44% were offered no psychosocial support. 37% had their salary reduced. 36% researchers had to temporarily close their laboratories. In contrast, the pandemic created positive changes in perceived patient and family satisfaction, quality of communication, and use of technology to deliver care and interactions with other practitioners. CONCLUSIONS: The pandemic has altered standard treatment schedules and limited investigational treatment options for patients. In some cases, clinicians felt institutional pressure to continue conducting billable in-person visits when telemedicine visits would have sufficed. A lack of institutional support created anxiety among clinicians and researchers. We make specific recommendations to guide clinical and scientific infrastructure moving forward.

Abstract BACKGROUND: Approximately 5% of gliomas occur in individuals with a family history of glioma, and first-degree relatives of brain tumor cases have a two-fold increase in risk of brain tumor. Recent somatic characterization has shown that tumors from familial cases are indistinguishable from sporadic cases, suggesting that familial cases may arise through similar mechanisms of gliomagenesis, and therefore may be associated with common variants as well as rare mutations. In this analysis, we assessed whether previously identified common risk variants are associated with familial glioma. METHODS: Data were obtained from the Glioma International Case Control (GICC) and Gliogene studies for 448 cases with reported family history, 4,405 cases without reported family history, and 3,288 controls. We assessed 25 risk loci previously identified by glioma GWAS, and odds ratios (OR) and 95% confidence intervals (95%CI) were calculated using an additive genetic logistic regression model adjusted for age, sex, and the first two principal components for familial cases versus unaffected controls, and non-familial cases versus controls. Results were considered significant at p<0.002 (Bonferroni correction for 25 tests). RESULTS: Significant associations were detected at 5/25 loci, including TERT, EGFR, CCDC26, CDKN2B, and RTEL1. The strongest association was at rs55705857 (CCDC26, OR=2.7, p=7.49x10-17). For GBM (222 familial cases), significant associations were detected at 6/26 loci (TERT, EGFR, CDKN2B, TP53 and RTEL1), while in non-GBM (205 familial cases) significant associations were detected at 3/25 loci (LRIG1, CCDC26, PHLDB1). These SNPs were further examined using a case-only approach comparing familial to non-familial cases, and there was no significant difference in allele frequencies by family history status. There was a strong correlation between log(OR) for familial cases only versus non-familial cases (adjusted R2=0.88). CONCLUSIONS: In this analysis we identified a significant association between familial glioma and five common risk loci previously identified by glioma GWAS. This provides further evidence of shared pathways of genetic risk and gliomagenesis between familial and non-familial glioma. Further exploration is necessary to determine the overall contribution of common genetic variation to risk of familial glioma. Citation Format: Quinn T. Ostrom, Georgina Armstrong, Christopher I. Amos, Jonine L. Bernstein, Elizabeth B. Claus, Jeanette E. Eckel-Passow, Dora Il'yasova, Christoffer Johansen, Daniel H. Lachance, Rose K. Lai, Ryan T. Merrell, Sara H. Olson, Joellen H. Schildkraut, Sanjay S. Shete, Richard S. Houlston, Robert B. Jenkins, Margaret R. Wrensch, Beatrice Melin, Jill S. Barnholtz-Sloan, Melissa L. Bondy. Previously identified common glioma risk SNPs are associated with familial glioma [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the American Association for Cancer Research Annual Meeting 2019; 2019 Mar 29-Apr 3; Atlanta, GA. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2019;79(13 Suppl):Abstract nr 4173.

Glioma incidence is highest in non‐Hispanic Whites, and to date, glioma genome‐wide association studies (GWAS) to date have only included European ancestry (EA) populations. African Americans and Hispanics in the US have varying proportions of EA, African (AA) and Native American ancestries (NAA). It is unknown if identified GWAS loci or increased EA is associated with increased glioma risk. We assessed whether EA was associated with glioma in African Americans and Hispanics. Data were obtained for 832 cases and 675 controls from the Glioma International Case–Control Study and GliomaSE Case–Control Study previously estimated to have <80% EA, or self‐identify as non‐White. We estimated global and local ancestry using fastStructure and RFMix, respectively, using 1,000 genomes project reference populations. Within groups with ≥40% AA (AFR ≥0.4 ), and ≥15% NAA (AMR ≥0.15 ), genome‐wide association between local EA and glioma was evaluated using logistic regression conditioned on global EA for all gliomas. We identified two regions (7q21.11, p = 6.36 × 10 −4 ; 11p11.12, p = 7.0 × 10 −4 ) associated with increased EA, and one associated with decreased EA (20p12.13, p = 0.0026) in AFR ≥0.4 . In addition, we identified a peak at rs1620291 ( p = 4.36 × 10 −6 ) in 7q21.3. Among AMR ≥0.15 , we found an association between increased EA in one region (12q24.21, p = 8.38 × 10 −4 ), and decreased EA in two regions (8q24.21, p = 0. 0010; 20q13.33, p = 6.36 × 10 −4 ). No other significant associations were identified. This analysis identified an association between glioma and two regions previously identified in EA populations (8q24.21, 20q13.33) and four novel regions (7q21.11, 11p11.12, 12q24.21 and 20p12.13). The identifications of novel association with EA suggest regions to target for future genetic association studies.

Abstract Genome-wide association studies (GWAS) have so far identified 25 loci associated with glioma risk, with most showing specificity for either glioblastoma (GBM) or non-GBM tumors. The majority of these GWAS susceptibility variants reside in noncoding regions and the causal genes underlying the associations are largely unknown. Here we performed a transcriptome-wide association study to search for novel risk loci and candidate causal genes at known GWAS loci using Genotype-Tissue Expression Project (GTEx) data to predict cis-predicted gene expression in relation to GBM and non-GBM risk in conjunction with GWAS summary statistics on 12,488 glioma cases (6,183 GBM and 5,820 non-GBM) and 18,169 controls. Imposing a Bonferroni-corrected significance level of P &lt; 5.69 × 10−6, we identified 31 genes, including GALNT6 at 12q13.33, as a candidate novel risk locus for GBM (mean Z = 4.43; P = 5.68 × 10−6). GALNT6 resides at least 55 Mb away from any previously identified glioma risk variant, while all other 30 significantly associated genes were located within 1 Mb of known GWAS-identified loci and were not significant after conditioning on the known GWAS-identified variants. These data identify a novel locus (GALNT6 at 12q13.33) and 30 genes at 12 known glioma risk loci associated with glioma risk, providing further insights into glioma tumorigenesis. Significance: This study identifies new genes associated with glioma risk, increasing understanding of how these tumors develop.

Abstract Background: There have been few studies of sufficient size to address the relationship between glioma risk and the use of aspirin or NSAIDs, and results have been conflicting. The purpose of this study was to examine the associations between glioma and aspirin/NSAID use, and to aggregate these findings with prior published studies using meta-analysis. Methods: The Glioma International Case-Control Study (GICC) consists of 4,533 glioma cases and 4,171 controls recruited from 2010 to 2013. Interviews were conducted using a standardized questionnaire to obtain information on aspirin/NSAID use. We examined history of regular use for ≥6 months and duration-response. Restricted maximum likelihood meta-regression models were used to aggregate site-specific estimates, and to combine GICC estimates with previously published studies. Results: A history of daily aspirin use for ≥6 months was associated with a 38% lower glioma risk, compared with not having a history of daily use [adjusted meta-OR = 0.62; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.54–0.70]. There was a significant duration-response trend (P = 1.67 × 10−17), with lower ORs for increasing duration of aspirin use. Duration-response trends were not observed for NSAID use. In the meta-analysis aggregating GICC data with five previous studies, there was a marginally significant association between use of aspirin and glioma (mOR = 0.84; 95% CI, 0.70–1.02), but no association for NSAID use. Conclusions: Our study suggests that aspirin may be associated with a reduced risk of glioma. Impact: These results imply that aspirin use may be associated with decreased glioma risk. Further research examining the association between aspirin use and glioma risk is warranted.