Citations

The authors present the case of a man with a papillary craniopharyngioma, first diagnosed at 47 years of age, who experienced multiple recurrences. Review of the pathologic specimen from his first resection demonstrated the BRAF V600E mutation. With his most recent recurrence following previous surgery and radiotherapy, at 52 years of age, the decision was made to initiate treatment with the BRAF V600E inhibitor dabrafenib. Imaging following initiation of dabrafenib demonstrated reduction in tumor size. He remained on dabrafenib therapy for approximately 1 year and continued to demonstrate a good clinical result. At that time the decision was made to discontinue dabrafenib therapy and follow up with serial imaging. After more than 1 year of follow-up since stopping dabrafenib, the patient has continued to do well with no radiographic evidence of tumor progression and continues to be monitored with frequent interval imaging.

Abstract MEDICAL THERAPY Target Population Adults with histologically proven or suspected vestibular schwannomas with neurofibromatosis type 2 (NF2). Question What is the role of bevacizumab in the treatment of patients with vestibular schwannomas? Recommendations Level 3: It is recommended that bevacizumab be administered in order to radiographically reduce the size or prolong tumor stability in patients with NF2 without surgical options. Level 3: It is recommended that bevacizumab be administered to improve hearing or prolong time to hearing loss in patients with NF2 without surgical options. Question Is there a role for lapatinib, erlotinib, or everolimus in the treatment of patients with vestibular schwannomas? Recommendations Level 3: Lapatinib may be considered for use in reducing vestibular schwannoma size and improvement in hearing in NF2. Level 3: Erlotinib is not recommended for use in reducing vestibular schwannoma size or improvement in hearing in patients with NF2. Level 3: Everolimus is not recommended for use in reducing vestibular schwannoma size or improvement in hearing in NF2. Question What is the role of aspirin, to augment inflammatory response, in the treatment of patients with vestibular schwannomas? Target Population Any patient with a vestibular schwannoma undergoing observation. Recommendation Level 3: It is recommended that aspirin administration may be considered for use in patients undergoing observation of their vestibular schwannomas. Question Is there a role for treatment of vasospasm, ie, nimodipine or hydroxyethyl starch, perioperatively to improve facial nerve outcomes in patients with vestibular schwannomas? Target Population Adults with histologically proven or suspected vestibular schwannomas. Recommendation Level 3: Perioperative treatment with nimodipine (or with the addition of hydroxyethyl starch) should be considered to improve postoperative facial nerve outcomes and may improve hearing outcomes. PREHABILITATION Question Is there a role for preoperative vestibular rehab or vestibular ablation with gentamicin for patients surgically treated for vestibular schwannomas? Target Population Adults with histologically proven or suspected vestibular schwannomas. Recommendations Level 3: Preoperative vestibular rehabilitation is recommended to aid in postoperative mobility after vestibular schwannoma surgery. Level 3: Preoperative gentamicin ablation of the vestibular apparatus should be considered to improve postoperative mobility after vestibular schwannoma surgery. SURGICAL THERAPY Question Does endoscopic assistance make a difference in resection or outcomes in patients with vestibular schwannomas? Target Population Vestibular schwannoma patients, who are surgical candidates. Inclusion in this analysis required resection utilizing the endoscope, either as the primary operative visualization or microscopic assistance with more than 20 patients treated. Recommendation Level 3: Endoscopic assistance is a surgical technique that the surgeon may choose to use in order to aid in visualization. The full guideline can be found at: https://www.cns.org/guidelines/guidelines-management-patients-vestibular-schwannoma/chapter_9.

Abstract Background Despite advances in modern therapy, high-grade gliomas continue to portend a dismal prognosis and nearly all patients will experience relapse. Unfortunately, salvage options remain limited. In this study, we assessed outcomes for patients with recurrent gliomas treated with reirradiation. Methods We retrospectively identified 48 glioma patients treated with reirradiation between 2013 and 2016. All had radiographic or pathologic evidence of recurrence. Prognostic factors were abstracted from the electronic medical record. Results Initial surgery included biopsy in 15, subtotal resection in 21, and gross total resection in 12. Initial chemotherapy included temozolomide (TMZ) in 31, TMZ+dasatinib in 7, TMZ+vorinostat in 3, and procarbazine, lomustine, and vincristine in 2. The median dose of primary radiotherapy was 60 Gy delivered in 30 fractions. Median overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) from initial diagnosis were 3.2 and 1.7 years, respectively. A total of 36 patients failed salvage bevacizumab before reirradiation. Salvage surgery was performed before reirradiation in 21 patients. Median time to reirradiation was 1.7 years. Median follow-up was 13.7 months from reirradiation. Concurrent systemic therapy was given in 33 patients (bevacizumab in 27, TMZ in 8, and lomustine in 2). Median PFS and OS after reirradiation were 3.2 and 6.3 months, respectively. Radionecrosis occurred in 4 patients and no radionecrosis was seen in patients receiving concurrent bevacizumab with reirradiation (0% vs 19%, P = .03). Conclusions Reirradiation may result in delayed tumor progression with acceptable toxicity. Prospective trials are needed to determine the impact of reirradiation on tumor progression and quality of life.

Background: Seizures in patients with glioblastoma are associated with worse quality of life. However, their incidence, clinical characteristics, and prognostic implications are less well characterized. Objective: This study was undertaken to provide a contemporary experience along with benchmark data relevant to the above in patients with glioblastoma. It also sought to reexplore improved survival with seizures, as observed by others. Methods: In this single-institution study, patients with glioblastoma from 2010 through 2014 had their medical records reviewed in detail. Results: Among 122 patients, 58 (48%) had a seizure history. Of these, 67% had more than 1, 41% had generalized seizures, and most received antiseizure medication (most commonly levetiracetam). The median survival for patients with seizures was 1.66 years and 0.87 years for those without (hazard ratio for risk of death with seizures: 0.72; 95% confidence interval: 0.43, 1.21; P = .22 by the log-rank test). Conclusion: Seizures are common in patients with glioblastoma and, in contrast to earlier reports, are not associated with a statistically significant improvement in survival.

BACKGROUNDBevacizumab received US Food and Drug Administration approval for use in recurrent glioblastoma based on promising radiographic response data, but without clear evidence that it prolongs survival. A population‐based analysis was conducted to determine whether bevacizumab approval was associated with improved glioblastoma survival in the United States.METHODSSurveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) Program data were used to compare survival of glioblastoma patients who died in 2006, 2008 (both prior to approval of bevacizumab), and 2010 (after approval of bevacizumab).RESULTSThe SEER database contained 1715 patients with glioblastoma who died in 2006, 1924 who died in 2008, and 1968 who died in 2010 who met study inclusion criteria. Median survival was 8 months for those who died in 2006, 7 months in 2008, and 9 months in 2010. The difference in survival between 2008 (pre‐bevacizumab) and 2010 (post‐bevacizumab) was highly significant. This difference is unlikely to be due to improvements in supportive care in this short interval, because there was no significant difference (P = .4440) between patients who died in 2006 versus those who died in 2008. Between 2008 and 2010, a statistically significant improvement in survival was seen in all age groups except those patients aged 18 to 39 years.CONCLUSIONSPatients who died of glioblastoma in 2010 had lived with disease significantly longer than patients who died in 2008. The most likely explanation for this change is the approval and use of bevacizumab for progressive glioblastoma, indicating that at a population level, treatment strategies involving bevacizumab prolong survival. Cancer 2013;119:3489–3495.. © 2013 American Cancer Society.

Abstract Purpose: We hypothesized that vertical blockade of VEGF signaling by combining bevacizumab with sorafenib in patients with recurrent glioblastoma would result in a synergistic therapeutic effect. We also investigated whether VEGF, VEGFR2 and hypoxia-inducible factor-1α single-nucleotide polymorphisms (SNP), circulating biomarkers of angiogenesis, and MRI markers such as apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) are correlated with treatment efficacy and/or toxicity. Experimental Design: Patients received bevacizumab (5 mg/kg every 2 weeks) with sorafenib (200 mg twice a day, weekly, days 1–5; group A). Due to toxicity, the starting sorafenib dose was subsequently modified to 200 mg every day (group B). Results: Fifty-four patients were enrolled: 19 patients in group A and 35 in group B. Objective response rate was 18.5% with median duration of 6.7 months (range 0.5–24.1 months). Six-month progression-free survival (PFS6) was 20.4% (11/54), and median overall survival (OS) was 5.6 months [95% confidence interval (CI), 4.7–8.2]; outcome was similar between the two dose groups. We identified SNPs in the VEGF and VEGFR2 promoter regions, which were associated with PFS6 (P < 0.022). Among molecular markers of angiogenesis, a higher log2 baseline level of stromal cell–derived factor-1 was associated with PFS6 success (P = 0.04). Circulating endothelial cells decreased during treatment with subsequent increase at disease progression (P = 0.022). Imaging analysis showed a trend associating ADC-L with poor outcome. Conclusions: The bevacizumab/sorafenib combination did not improve outcome of patients with recurrent glioblastoma versus historic bevacizumab-treated controls. Biologic markers of response and resistance to bevacizumab in gliomas were identified which merit prospective validation. Clin Cancer Res; 19(17); 4816–23. ©2013 AACR.