Citations

Abstract Background Glioblastoma (GBM) has a median survival of <2 years. Pexidartinib (PLX3397) is a small-molecule inhibitor of CSF1R, KIT, and oncogenic FTL3, which are implicated in GBM treatment resistance. Results from glioma models indicate that combining radiation therapy (RT) and pexidartinib reduces radiation resistance. We added pexidartinib to standard-of-care RT/temozolomide (TMZ) in patients with newly diagnosed GBM to assess the therapeutic benefit of altering the tumor microenvironment with pexidartinib. Methods In this open-label, dose-escalation, multicenter, Phase 1b/2 trial, pexidartinib was administered in combination with RT/TMZ followed by adjuvant pexidartinib + TMZ. During Phase 1b, pexidartinib was given 5 or 7 days/week at multiple dosing levels. The primary Phase 1b endpoint was the recommended Phase 2 dose (RP2D). Phase 2 patients received the RP2D with the primary endpoint of median progression-free survival (mPFS). Secondary objectives were median overall survival (mOS), pharmacokinetics, and safety. Results The RP2D of pexidartinib was 800 mg/day for 5 days/week during RT/TMZ, followed by 800 mg/day for 7 days/week with adjuvant TMZ. mPFS was 6.7 months (90% CI: 4.5, 11.5) for the modified intention-to-treat population. The actual mOS was 13.1 months (90% CI: 11.5, 24.5), and the mOS corrected for comparison with matched historical controls was 18.8 months (95% CI: 12.6, 28.0). Conclusions This trial established the RP2D of pexidartinib in combination with RT/TMZ and adjuvant TMZ. Pexidartinib was generally safe and well tolerated. Although the study regimen with pexidartinib was not efficacious, pharmacodynamic studies showed modulation of systemic markers that could lead to alteration of the tumor microenvironment.

Mutations in isocitrate dehydrogenase (IDH) genes, an early step in the ontogeny of lower-grade gliomas, induce global epigenetic changes characterized by a hypermethylation phenotype and are critical to tumor classification, treatment decision making, and estimation of patient prognosis. The introduction of IDH inhibitors to block the oncogenic neomorphic function of the mutated protein has resulted in new therapeutic options for these patients. To appreciate the implications of these recent IDH inhibitor results, it is important to juxtapose historical outcomes with chemoradiotherapy. Herein, we rationally evaluate recent IDH inhibitor data within historical precedents to guide contemporary decisions regarding the role of observation, maximal safe resection, adjuvant therapies, and the import of patient and tumor variables. The biological underpinnings of the IDH pathway and the mechanisms, impact, and limitations of IDH inhibitors, the actual magnitude of tumor regression and patient benefit, and emergence of resistance pathways are presented to guide future trial development. Management in the current, molecularly defined era will require careful patient selection and risk factor assessment, followed by an open dialog about the results of studies such as INDIGO, as well as mature data from legacy trials, and a discussion about risk-versus-benefit for the choice of treatment, with multidisciplinary decision making as an absolute prerequisite.

Abstract Background Patients with relapsed intracranial germinoma can achieve durable remission with standard chemotherapy regimens and/or reirradiation; however, innovative therapies are required for patients with relapsed and/or refractory intracranial nongerminomatous germ cell tumors (NGGCTs) due to their poor prognosis. Improved outcomes have been reported using reinduction chemotherapy to achieve minimal residual disease, followed by marrow-ablative chemotherapy (HDCx) with autologous hematopoietic progenitor cell rescue (AuHPCR). We conducted a phase II trial evaluating the response and toxicity of a 3-drug combination developed for recurrent intracranial germ cell tumors consisting of gemcitabine, paclitaxel, and oxaliplatin (GemPOx). Methods A total of 9 patients with confirmed relapsed or refractory intracranial GCT were enrolled after signing informed consent, and received at least 2 cycles of GemPOx, of which all but 1 had relapsed or refractory NGGCTs. One patient with progressive disease was found to have pathologically confirmed malignant transformation to pure embryonal rhabdomyosarcoma (without GCT elements), hence was ineligible and not included in the analysis. Patients who experienced sufficient responses proceeded to receive HDCx with AuHPCR. Treatment response was determined based on radiographic tumor assessments and tumor markers. Results A total of 7 patients achieved sufficient response and proceeded with HDCx and AuHPCR, and 5 subsequently received additional radiotherapy. A total of 2 patients developed progressive disease while receiving GemPOx. Myelosuppression and transaminitis were the most common treatment-related adverse events. With a mean follow-up of 44 months, 4 patients (3 NGGCTs, 1 germinoma) are alive without evidence of disease. Conclusions GemPOx demonstrates efficacy in facilitating stem cell mobilization, thus facilitating the feasibility of both HDCx and radiotherapy.

Abstract Background Medulloblastoma in adults is rare and treatment decisions are largely driven from pediatric literature. We sought to characterize recurrent medulloblastoma in adults. Methods From a single-institution dataset of 200 adult patients diagnosed with medulloblastoma during 1978–2017, those with recurrence were analyzed for clinical features, treatment, and outcome. Results Of the 200 patients, 82 (41%) with median age of 29 years (18–59) had recurrence after a median follow-up time of 8.4 years (95% CI = 7.1, 10.3). Of these, 30 (37%) were standard-risk, 31 (38%) were high-risk, and 21 (26%) had unknown-risk diseases at the time of initial diagnosis. Forty-eight (58%) presented with recurrence outside the posterior fossa, of whom 35 (43%) had distant recurrence only. Median Progression-free survival (PFS) and OS from initial surgery were 33.5 and 62.4 months, respectively. Neither PFS nor OS from initial diagnosis differed between the standard-risk and high-risk groups in those who experience recurrence (P = .505 and .463, respectively). Median OS from first recurrence was 20.3 months, also with no difference between the standard-risk and high-risk groups (P = .518). Recurrences were treated with combinations of re-resection (20 patients; 25%), systemic chemotherapy (61 patients; 76%), radiation (29 patients; 36%), stem cell transplant (6 patients; 8%), and intrathecal chemotherapy (4 patients; 5%). Patients who received radiation at recurrence had better OS (32.9 months) than those who did not (19.2 months) (P = .034). Conclusions Recurrent medulloblastoma in adults has a poor prognosis irrespective of initial risk stratification. Recurrence commonly arises outside the posterior fossa years after initial diagnosis.

The NCCN Guidelines for Central Nervous System (CNS) Cancers focus on management of the following adult CNS cancers: glioma (WHO grade 1, WHO grade 2–3 oligodendroglioma [1p19q codeleted, IDH- mutant], WHO grade 2–4 IDH- mutant astrocytoma, WHO grade 4 glioblastoma), intracranial and spinal ependymomas, medulloblastoma, limited and extensive brain metastases, leptomeningeal metastases, non–AIDS-related primary CNS lymphomas, metastatic spine tumors, meningiomas, and primary spinal cord tumors. The information contained in the algorithms and principles of management sections in the NCCN Guidelines for CNS Cancers are designed to help clinicians navigate through the complex management of patients with CNS tumors. Several important principles guide surgical management and treatment with radiotherapy and systemic therapy for adults with brain tumors. The NCCN CNS Cancers Panel meets at least annually to review comments from reviewers within their institutions, examine relevant new data from publications and abstracts, and reevaluate and update their recommendations. These NCCN Guidelines Insights summarize the panel’s most recent recommendations regarding molecular profiling of gliomas.

Abstract Immunotherapy has revolutionized treatment for many hard-to-treat cancers but has yet to produce significant improvement in outcomes for patients with glioblastoma. This reflects the multiple and unique mechanisms of immune evasion and escape in this highly heterogeneous tumor. Glioblastoma engenders profound local and systemic immunosuppression and is remarkably effective at inducing T-cell dysfunction, posing a challenge to any immunotherapy-based approach. To overcome these mechanisms, multiple disparate modes of immune-oriented therapy will be required. However, designing trials that can evaluate these combinatorial approaches requires careful consideration. In this review, we explore the immunotherapy resistance mechanisms that have been encountered to date and how combinatorial approaches may address these. We also describe the unique aspects of trial design in both preclinical and clinical settings and consider endpoints and markers of response best suited for an intervention involving multiple agents.

With rapid advances in our understanding of cancer, there is an expanding number of potential novel combination therapies, including novel–novel combinations. Identifying which combinations are appropriate and in which subpopulations are among the most difficult questions in medical research. We conducted a Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA)-guided systematic review of trials of novel–novel combination therapies involving immunotherapies or molecular targeted therapies in advanced solid tumors. A MEDLINE search was conducted using a modified Cochrane Highly Sensitive Search Strategy for published clinical trials between July 1, 2017, and June 30, 2020, in the top-ranked medical and oncology journals. Trials were evaluated according to a criterion adapted from previously published Food and Drug Administration guidance and other key considerations in designing trials of combinations. This included the presence of a strong biological rationale, the use of a new established or emerging predictive biomarker prospectively incorporated into the clinical trial design, appropriate comparator arms of monotherapy or supportive external data sources and a primary endpoint demonstrating a clinically meaningful benefit. Of 32 identified trials, there were 11 (34%) trials of the novel–novel combination of anti-programmed death 1 (PD-1)/programmed death ligand 1 (PD-L1) and anti-cytotoxic T lymphocyte-associated antigen-4 (CTLA-4) therapy, and 10 (31%) trials of anti-PD-1/PD-L1 and anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) combination therapy. 20 (62.5%) trials were phase II trials, while 12 (37.5%) were phase III trials. Most (72%) trials lacked significant preclinical evidence supporting the development of the combination in the given indication. A majority of trials (69%) were conducted in biomarker unselected populations or used pre-existing biomarkers within the given indication for patient selection. Most studies (66%) were considered to have appropriate comparator arms or had supportive external data sources such as prior studies of monotherapy. All studies were evaluated as selecting a clinically meaningful primary endpoint. In conclusion, designing trials to evaluate novel–novel combination therapies presents numerous challenges to demonstrate efficacy in a comprehensive manner. A greater understanding of biological rationale for combinations and incorporating predictive biomarkers may improve effective evaluation of combination therapies. Innovative statistical methods and increasing use of external data to support combination approaches are potential strategies that may improve the efficiency of trial design. Designing trials to evaluate novel–novel combination therapies presents numerous challenges to demonstrate efficacy in a comprehensive manner. A greater understanding of biological rationale for combinations and incorporating predictive biomarkers may improve effective evaluation of combination therapies. Innovative statistical methods and increasing use of external data to support combination approaches are potential strategies that may improve the efficiency of trial design.

AbstractBackgroundAdult medulloblastoma (MB) is rare, and management guidelines are largely based on pediatric clinical trials and retrospective series. Limited data exist with respect to clinical characteristics, prognostic factors, and outcomes based on first-line treatments.MethodsTwo hundred adults with MB seen at a single institution from January 1978 to April 2017 were identified and followed for a median of 8.4 y (7.1, 10.3).ResultsPatient’s median age at diagnosis was 29 y (18, 63). One hundred eleven (55.5%) were standard-risk, 59 (29.5%) were high-risk, and 30 (15.0%) were indeterminate. Most received post-operative radiation (RT) (184 [92.0%]), and 105 (52.5%) received first-line chemotherapy. Median overall survival (OS) was 8.8 y (7.2, 12.2) and median progression-free survival (PFS) was 6.6 y (4.9, 11.2). High-risk patients had inferior OS (Hazard ratio [HR] = 2.5 [1.5, 4.2], P = .0006) and PFS (HR = 2.3 [1.3, 3.9], P = .002) compared to standard-risk patients. Age, sex, and metastatic disease were not associated with survival. After adjusting for risk status, those who received RT plus adjuvant chemotherapy had superior PFS compared to RT plus neoadjuvant chemotherapy [HR = 0.46 (0.22, 0.95), P = .0357]. Within a subgroup for whom detailed clinical data were available, those who received RT plus adjuvant chemotherapy had improved PFS compared to RT only [HR = 0.24 (0.074–0.76), P = .016]. The substitution of cisplatin for carboplatin and the elimination of vincristine did not negatively affect outcomes.ConclusionThis is the largest single-institution retrospective study of adult MB to our knowledge and identifies standard-risk status, first-line RT and adjuvant chemotherapy as factors associated with improved outcomes.

Abstract On July 24, 2020, a workshop sponsored by the National Brain Tumor Society was held on innovating brain tumor clinical trials based on lessons learned from the COVID-19 experience. Various stakeholders from the brain tumor community participated including the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA), academic and community clinicians, researchers, industry, clinical research organizations, patients and patient advocates, and representatives from the Society for Neuro-Oncology and the National Cancer Institute. This report summarizes the workshop and proposes ways to incorporate lessons learned from COVID-19 to brain tumor clinical trials including the increased use of telemedicine and decentralized trial models as opportunities for practical innovation with potential long-term impact on clinical trial design and implementation.