Citations

Abstract Patients with glioblastoma (GBM) face poor outcomes; the 5-year survival rate is 7% with standard of care treatments, which are frequently associated with systemic toxicity. Tumor Treating Fields (TTFields) are electric fields that disrupt critical cancer cell processes. The TTFields therapy device consists of a portable electric field generator and arrays placed on the patient’s scalp, thus delivery is locoregional and noninvasive. Currently, TTFields therapy is approved for recurrent and newly diagnosed GBM, based on the phase 3 EF-11 (TTFields 200 kHz) and EF-14 studies (TTFields therapy 200 kHz + temozolomide), respectively. These studies confirmed that TTFields therapy had a tolerable safety profile with mild-to-moderate localized skin adverse events (AEs) being the most common related AEs. Here, we present an updated analysis of the largest global real-world evidence dataset of patients with brain tumors receiving TTFields therapy over an 11-year time period. Unsolicited safety data were obtained from routine post-marketing activities, including published literature and interactions with patients, caregivers, and healthcare professionals. Safety data were grouped according to age, diagnosis, and sex. AEs were categorized using MedDRA version 25. Data from 25,898 patients were included in this analysis; median age was 59 years (range: 3-103) for patients with known age. Diagnoses were ndGBM (67.7%), rGBM (26.1%), anaplastic astrocytoma/oligodendroglioma (4.2%) and other (2.1%). Most (n=17,817, 68.8%) patients were 18-65 years of age; n=93 (0.4%) were pediatric/adolescent patients (<18 years), and n=7,808 (30.2%) were elderly patients (>65 years). For 130 patients (0.5%) age was not known. Two-thirds of patients were male, which reflects the preponderance of CNS tumors in males. Most patients were based in North America (72.1%), followed by Europe, the Middle East and Africa (23.3%), and Japan (4.6%). Overall, 72.4% of patients experienced at least one AE, with 55.9% being related to TTFields therapy. The most common AEs (overall and related to TTFields therapy) were skin reactions (42.0%), electric (tingling) sensations (13.5%), and heat (warmth) sensations (11.8%). The percentage of patients experiencing ≥1 AE in the pediatric/adolescent, 18-65, and elderly groups was 63.4%, 74.6%, and 68.4%, respectively. The percentage of females and males experiencing ≥1 AE was 75.2% and 70.9%, respectively. These long-term, real-world data from the largest global dataset of patients with brain tumors using TTFields therapy to date demonstrate a tolerable safety profile consistent with pivotal clinical studies. There were no new safety signals, and most AEs were manageable localized mild-moderate skin events that can be resolved. The distribution of AEs between age and sex was similar, with broad applicability among different patient groups. Citation Format: Maciej M. Mrugala, Wenyin Shi, Fabio Iwamoto, Rimas V. Lukas, Joshua D. Palmer, John H. Suh, Martin Glas. Patients with glioblastoma (GBM) treated with tumor treating fields (TTFields) therapy: post-marketing safety data over the last decade [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the American Association for Cancer Research Annual Meeting 2023; Part 1 (Regular and Invited Abstracts); 2023 Apr 14-19; Orlando, FL. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2023;83(7_Suppl):Abstract nr 3221.

AbstractNeuro-oncology encompasses a broad field focusing on an array of neoplasms, many of which can mimic several diseases. Neurologists will often be involved in the initial diagnostic evaluation and management of these patients. Their insight is central to optimizing the diagnostic yield and providing high-level clinical care. Several neuro-oncologic cases are reviewed with a goal of increasing the understanding of these diseases in a clinically relevant manner and providing updates on the contemporary thinking in the subspecialty.

Abstract Tumor Treating Fields therapy (TTFields; 200 kHz) is a noninvasive, locoregional, antimitotic treatment approved for newly diagnosed glioblastoma (ndGBM), recurrent (r) GBM, malignant pleural mesothelioma, and is being investigated in additional solid tumors. Approval in GBM was based on results of the phase 3 EF-11 (TTFields monotherapy; rGBM) and EF-14 (TTFields therapy/maintenance temozolomide; ndGBM), which showed clinical benefit without an increase in adverse events (AEs). Here we review post-marketing surveillance (PMS) data from patients with brain tumors who received TTFields therapy over an 11-year period. Unsolicited PMS data from patients with brain tumors who received TTFields therapy between October 2011 and March 2022, were included. Overall 23,822 patients were included in this analysis. Most patients (72%) were from North America; 24% from Europe, Middle East and Africa, and 4% from Japan. Birth year was available for 23,784 patients; of these, the average age at treatment start was 57 years (range: 3–103). Diagnoses were ndGBM (67%), rGBM (27%), astrocytoma (WHO grade 3; 4%) and other (2%). Overall, 71% of patients reported ≥ 1 AE, with the most common being skin reaction (42%), electric (tingling) sensation (14%), heat (warmth) sensation (12%), and seizure (11%). Furthermore, 56% of patients reported AEs possibly related to TTFields therapy, with the most frequently reported being skin reaction (42%), electric sensation (14%) and heat sensation (12%), occurring underneath the arrays. Numbers and types of AEs were comparable between age and diagnosis groups. PMS data from > 23,000 patients with brain tumors show that TTFields therapy (200 kHz) is well-tolerated, consistent with the known safety profile; no new safety signals were identified. TTFields therapy is not associated with systemic toxicity; most common possibly-related AEs are localized dermatologic events that can be managed with appropriate prophylaxis and treatment strategies.

Abstract In the following brief report, we highlight the advances in the neuro-oncology space from the ASCO 2022 Annual Meeting. We put into context the phase 2 and 3 trials and how these may alter the standard of care going forward. In addition, we highlight some other earlier work that will lead to future and potentially practice-changing trials.

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.

AbstractAccurate pathologic diagnoses and molecularly informed treatment decisions for a wide variety of cancers depend on robust clinical molecular testing that uses genomic, epigenomic, and transcriptomic-based tools. Nowhere is this more essential than in the workup of brain tumors, as emphasized by the incorporation of molecular criteria into the 2016 World Health Organization classification of central nervous system tumors and the updated official guidelines of the National Comprehensive Cancer Network. Despite the medical necessity of molecular testing in brain tumors, access to and utilization of molecular diagnostics is still highly variable across institutions, and a lack of reimbursement for such testing remains a significant obstacle. The objectives of this review are (i) to identify barriers to adoption of molecular testing in brain tumors, (ii) to describe the current molecular tools recommended for the clinical evaluation of brain tumors, and (iii) to summarize how molecular data are interpreted to guide clinical care, so as to improve understanding and justification for their coverage in the routine workup of adult and pediatric brain tumor cases.