Lesser, Glenn J.

2518 Background: This study sought to evaluate the prognostic significance of the three WHO-defined molecular glioma subgroups ( IDHwt, IDHmt/non-codel, and IDHmt/codel) in NRG Oncology/RTOG 0424, a phase II trial of high-risk low-grade gliomas treated with radiation (RT) and concurrent and adjuvant temozolomide (TMZ) after biopsy/surgical resection. Notably, this is the first clinical study to evaluate the prognostic value of the WHO subgroups in RT + TMZ-treated high-risk grade II (G2) gliomas using prospectively-collected long-term survival data. Methods: IDH1/2 mutation status was determined by next-generation sequencing. 1p/19q co-deletion status was determined by Oncoscan and/or 450K methylation data. Overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) by marker status were determined by the Cox proportional hazard model and tested using the log-rank test in a post-hoc analysis. Patient pre-treatment characteristics were included as covariates in multivariate analyses. Results: Of all the eligible patients (N=129), 80 (62%) had sufficient quality DNA for both IDH and 1p/19q analyses. Of these 80, 54 (67.5%) were IDHmt, and 26 (32.5%) were IDHwt. Of the 54 IDHmt patients, 26 (32.5% of total, 48% of IDHmt) were IDHmt/codel, and 28 (35% of total, 52% of IDHmt) were IDHmt/non-codel. Both IDHmt subgroups were significantly correlated with longer PFS ( IDHmt/co-del = 8.1yrs (5.2-not reached (NR)); IDHmt/non-codel = 7.5yrs (3.9-11.8); IDHwt = 1.0yr (0.6-1.7), p<0.001) and OS ( IDHmt/co-del = 9.4yrs (8.2-NR); IDHmt/non-codel = 8.8yrs (5.9-NR); IDHwt = 2.3yrs (1.4-3.4), p<0.001) relative to the IDHwt subgroup. Upon univariate and multivariate analyses, both molecular IDHmt subgroup comparisons relative to IDHwt remained significant (p<0.001) even after incorporation of known clinical variables. Conclusions: These analyses suggest that G2 glioma patients harboring IDH1/2 mutations, regardless of co-deletion status, demonstrated longer survival with RT + TMZ relative to IDHwt tumors, although sample size is limited and analyses were post-hoc. These results also support the notion that outcomes for IDHwt high-risk G2 gliomas remain dismal (median = 2.3yrs, similar to G3 anaplastic astrocytoma); these patients should be separated from IDHmt patients in future G2 glioma trials, and warrant novel treatment strategies. Funding: U10CA180868, U10CA180822, U24CA196067, CURE, PA Dept. of Health, and Merck. Also, R01CA108633, R01CA169368, RC2CA148190, U10CA180850, BTFC, OSUCCC (all to AC). Clinical trial information: NCT00114140 .

Over the past decade, a variety of new and innovative technologies has led to important advances in the diagnosis and management of patients with primary malignant brain tumors. New approaches to surgical navigation and tumor localization, advanced imaging to define tumor biology and treatment response, and the widespread adoption of a molecularly defined integrated diagnostic paradigm that complements traditional histopathologic diagnosis continue to impact the day-to-day care of these patients. In the neuro-oncology clinic, discussions with patients about the role of tumor treating fields (TTFields) and the incorporation of next-generation sequencing (NGS) data into therapeutic decision-making are now a standard practice. This article summarizes newer applications of technology influencing the pathologic, neuroimaging, neurosurgical, and medical management of patients with malignant primary brain tumors.

AbstractBuilding on an initiative to enhance clinical trial participation involving the Society for Neuro-Oncology, the Response Assessment in Neuro-Oncology Working Group, patient advocacy groups, clinical trial cooperative groups, and other partners, we evaluate the impact of eligibility criteria and trial conduct on neuro-oncology clinical trial participation. Clinical trials often carry forward eligibility criteria from prior studies that may be overly restrictive and unnecessary and needlessly limit patient accrual. Inclusion and exclusion criteria should be evaluated based on the goals and design of the study and whether they impact patient safety and/or treatment efficacy. In addition, we evaluate clinical trial conduct as a barrier to accrual and discuss strategies to minimize such barriers for neuro-oncology trials.