Citations 45

Individualized screening trial of innovative glioblastoma therapy (INSIGhT).

Journal of Clinical Oncology | September 6, 2018 | Volume: 35 | Issue: 15_suppl | Pages: TPS2079-TPS2079

10.1200/jco.2017.35.15_suppl.tps2079

TPS2079 Background: Patient with glioblastoma (GBM) with unmethylated MGMT promoters derive limited benefit from temozolomide (TMZ) and have dismal outcome. Prioritizing the numerous available therapies and biomarkers for late stage testing requires an efficient clinical testing platform. INSIGhT (NCT02977780) is a biomarker-based, Bayesian adaptively randomized, multi-arm phase II platform screening trial for patients with newly diagnosed GBM and unmethylated MGMT promoters. Methods: INSIGhT compares experimental arms to a common control of standard concurrent TMZ and radiation therapy (RT) followed by adjuvant TMZ. The primary endpoint is overall survival (OS). Patients with newly diagnosed, unmethylated GBM that are IDH R132H mutation negative, and with genomic data available or who consent to whole exome sequencing through the ALLELE companion study for biomarker grouping are eligible. Two experimental arms consist of concurrent RT/TMZ followed by adjuvant neratinib (EGFR, HER2, and HER4 inhibitor) or abemaciclib CDK 4/6 inhibitor), respectively, in place of TMZ. The other experimental arm is CC-115 (TORC1/2 and DNA PK inhibitor), which replaces TMZ in both the concurrent and adjuvant phases. Biomarker groups include: EGFR + patients with EGFR amplification/mutation; PI3K + patients with PIK3CA mutation/amplification, PIK3R1 mutation, AKT3amplification, PIK3C2B > 1 copy gain, or PTEN dual loss; CDK: + patients with wild-type RB1 and CDK4 amplification, CDK6 amplification, or CDKN2A > 1 copy loss. Given the lack of pretrial biomarker data and the anticipated overlap of the groups, randomization will initially be equal. As the trial progresses, randomization probabilities will be adapted based on the Bayesian estimation of the probability of treatment impact on progression-free survival (PFS). These randomization probabilities can vary among the biomarker groups so predictive biomarkers will be identified and utilized if present. Treatment arms may drop due to low probability of treatment impact on OS, and new arms may be added. Experimental arms are compared only with control and should be thought of as discrete experimental questions, with INSIGhT being open to new investigators with proposed therapeutic hypotheses. Clinical trial information: NCT02977780.
Proposed response assessment and endpoints for meningioma clinical trials: report from the Response Assessment in Neuro-Oncology Working Group

Neuro-Oncology | August 17, 2018 | Volume: 21 | Issue: 1 | Pages: 26-36

10.1093/neuonc/noy137 | PMID 30137421

Validation of postoperative residual contrast-enhancing tumor volume as an independent prognostic factor for overall survival in newly diagnosed glioblastoma

Neuro-Oncology | April 4, 2018 | Volume: 20 | Issue: 9 | Pages: 1240-1250

10.1093/neuonc/noy053 | PMID 29660006

The Impact of T2/FLAIR Evaluation per RANO Criteria on Response Assessment of Recurrent Glioblastoma Patients Treated with Bevacizumab

Clinical Cancer Research | October 22, 2015 | Volume: 22 | Issue: 3 | Pages: 575-581

10.1158/1078-0432.ccr-14-3040 | PMID 26490307

Abstract Purpose: The RANO criteria have not been assessed using outcome data from prospective trials. We examined the radiologic data of patients with recurrent glioblastoma from the randomized phase II trial (AVF3708g) to determine the effect of including T2/FLAIR evaluation as per RANO criteria on measurements of objective response rates (ORRs) and progression-free survival (PFS) compared with assessment based on contrast enhancement (Macdonald criteria). Experimental Design: The ORRs and median PFS were determined using the RANO criteria and compared with those obtained using the Macdonald criteria. Landmark analyses were performed at 2, 4, and 6 months, and Cox proportional hazard models were used to determine the associations between OR and progression with subsequent survival. Results: The ORRs were 0.331 [95% confidence interval (CI), 0.260–0.409] and 0.393 (95% CI, 0.317–0.472) by RANO and Macdonald criteria, respectively (P < 0.0001). The median PFS was 4.6 months (95% CI, 4.1–5.5) using RANO criteria, compared with 6.4 months (95% CI, 5.5–7.1) as determined by Macdonald criteria (P = 0.01). At 2-, 4-, and 6-month landmarks, both OR status and PFS determined by either RANO or Macdonald criteria were predictive of overall survival [OS; hazard ratios for 4-month landmark (OR HR = 1.93, P = 0.0012; PFS HR, 4.23, P < 0.0001)]. Conclusions: The inclusion of T2/FLAIR assessment resulted in statistically significant differences in median PFS and ORRs compared with assessment of solely enhancing tumor (Macdonald criteria), although OR and PFS determined by both RANO and Macdonald criteria correlated with OS. Clin Cancer Res; 22(3); 575–81. ©2015 AACR.
It Is Time to Include Patients With Brain Tumors in Phase I Trials in Oncology

Journal of Clinical Oncology | July 18, 2011 | Volume: 29 | Issue: 24 | Pages: 3211-3213

10.1200/jco.2011.36.6328 | PMID 21768451