Galanis, Evanthia

Abstract Background Glioblastoma IDH-wildtype (GBM) may be diagnosed histologically (hGBM) or based on molecular features when microvascular proliferation and histologic necrosis are absent (mGBM). Clinical and radiographic distinction between hGBM and mGBM remains unclear. Methods 101 hGBM cases were matched to 109 mGBM cases by age, sex, year of diagnosis, and TERT promoter mutation (TERTp) status. Clinical outcome, radiographic, and molecular features were compared across mGBM and hGBM. Results Median time from first MRI to diagnosis was longer for mGBM versus hGBM (34 vs 7 days, p < .001). mGBM more often presented with seizures (51% vs 26%, p < .001), gliomatosis pattern (12% vs 2%, p = .005), basal ganglia involvement (17% vs 0%, p < .001). Contrast enhancement appeared on MRI for 98% (96/98) of hGBM and 50% (54/107) of mGBM (p < .001). mGBM with non-enhancing MRI were rarely multifocal (2% vs 30%, p < .001). mGBM harbored fewer total copy number alterations (median 20 vs 16.5, p = .029), less often had EGFRamp (34% vs 48%, p = .051), isolated chromosome 10 loss (84% vs 96%, p = .013), and CDKN2A/B homozygous deletion (56% vs 77%, p = .005). Median overall survival was longer for mGBM (2.16 vs 1.44 years, p < .001), and for mGBM without MRI contrast enhancement versus hGBM with enhancement (3.11 vs 1.62 years, adjusted p = .003). mGBM without +7/−10 or without CDKN2A/B homozygous deletion had longer survival and time-to-progression versus hGBM with these alterations. Conclusion mGBM with MRI enhancement may represent undersampled or early/evolving hGBM. mGBM that are non-enhancing, present with seizures, prolonged time to diagnosis, absent CDKN2A/B alteration or +7/−10 may represent other IDH-wildtype entities.

Abstract Background Disruption of the blood–brain barrier (BBB) in high-grade brain tumors is characterized by contrast accumulation on diagnostic imaging. This window of opportunity study correlates contrast imaging features with the tumor distribution of BBB-permeable (levetiracetam) and -impermeable (cefazolin) drugs. Methods Patients with a clinical diagnosis of a high-grade brain tumor underwent MRI for surgical planning. Cefazolin and levetiracetam were administered prior to skin incision, and serial plasma and image-registered tumor samples were collected during the operation. Drug levels were measured by LC-MS/MS, tissue drug levels were corrected for residual blood, and tumor-to-plasma concentration ratios were calculated. Intraoperative microdialysis was performed in a subset of patients to measure the same two drugs. Results Tumor (n = 125) and plasma (n = 261) samples were available for analysis from 42 operative cases. Across all samples, the tumor-to-plasma ratio was significantly lower for cefazolin (marginal mean [MM]: 0.15, 95% CI: 0.11–0.19) as compared to levetiracetam (MM: 0.70, 95% CI: 0.64–0.75; P < .001). When compared between contrast-enhancing and non-enhancing regions, tumor-to-plasma ratios for cefazolin varied by 4.4-fold (0.27, 95% CI: 0.20–0.35 vs. 0.06, 95% CI: 0.04–0.08, respectively; P < .001), and varied for levetiracetam by 1.4-fold (0.88, 95% CI: 0.78–0.97 vs. 0.61, 95% CI: 0.55–0.66, respectively; P < .001). These results were confirmed with the intra-operative microdialysis and a population pharmacokinetic analysis. Conclusions This study demonstrates significant inter- and intra-tumoral heterogeneity in drug delivery for both levetiracetam and cefazolin within high-grade brain tumors that is not necessarily predicted by clinical MR imaging and may reflect tumor-induced changes in both perfusion and BBB integrity.

Abstract Glioblastoma is the most common type of malignant primary brain tumor and a major cause of morbidity and mortality. In 2021, the World Health Organization updated the classification of Central Nervous System (CNS) tumors to restrict glioblastomas to isocitrate dehydrogenase-wildtype (IDHwt) tumors, improving understanding of the prognosis and optimal therapy for these tumors. This revision also enables more homogeneous populations of patients to be enrolled in clinical trials, facilitating the evaluation of novel therapies. In this updated consensus review from the Society for Neuro-Oncology (SNO) and the European Association of Neuro-Oncology (EANO), the current management of patients with glioblastoma is discussed. In addition, novel therapies such as immunotherapies, viral therapies, targeted molecular therapies, theranostics, and antibody–drug conjugates will be reviewed, as well as the current challenges and future directions for research.

Abstract This review explores the pivotal role of preanalytical variables in bringing liquid biopsy approaches into the clinic for brain tumors. Preanalytical variables encompass a range of critical issues, from blood sample collection and handling to the impact of tumor heterogeneity and patient-specific factors. These variables introduce challenges such as false positives, false negatives, and variability in the analysis of tumor signals, which can hinder the diagnostic and prognostic utility of liquid biopsies. Understanding the nuances of preanalytical variables is essential for the successful implementation of liquid biopsy in clinical settings. This paper delves into strategies aimed at mitigating the influence of preanalytical variables by emphasizing the importance of standardized sample collection protocols, optimized sample processing and storage, quality control measures, and the integration of multiple liquid biopsy modalities.

Abstract Background Despite advances in our understanding of the molecular underpinnings of meningioma progression and innovations in systemic and local treatments, recurrent meningiomas remain a substantial therapeutic challenge. The objective of this systematic review and meta-analysis is to provide a historical baseline, contemporary analysis, and propose a “rate of probable interest” to inform future clinical trial design and development on behalf of the Response Assessment in Neuro-Oncology meningioma group. Methods PubMed, ClinicalTrials.gov, and ASCOpubs databases were screened for clinical trials evaluating the activity of systemic therapies for adults with recurrent meningiomas. The pooled progression-free survival at 6-months and 1-year (PFS-6 and PFS-1 year) values were calculated using the random effects technique with I2 indices. Results The pooled PFS-6 and PFS-1 year rates for recurrent WHO grade 1 meningiomas were 43.6% (95% CI: 22.7-67.0%, I2 = 80%) and 21.7% (95% CI: 6.2-53.9%, I2 = 76%), and for grades 2-3 meningiomas, the PFS-6 was 38.0% (95% CI: 28.3-48.8%, I2 = 68%). In the targeted therapy group, PFS-6 and PFS-1 year rates stood at 62.0% (I2 = 58%) and 49.0% (I2 = 63%) for grade 1, while for grades 2-3 tumors, the PFS-6 rates with targeted therapy and immunotherapy were 42.1% (I² = 60%) and 46.0% (I² = 0%), respectively. The benchmarks were set at 67% and 54% for PFS-6 and PFS-1 year for grade 1 tumors, and PFS-6 of 49% for grades 2-3 tumors. Conclusions Several studies have reported outcomes in patients with recurrent meningiomas testing a variety of agents with modest, but variable and progressively increasing activity. In this context, we recommend new benchmarks for future trials to define efficacy of future investigational therapies.

AbstractIntroductionStructured data capture requires defined languages such as minimal Common Oncology Data Elements (mCODE). This pilot assessed the feasibility of capturing 5 mCODE categories (stage, disease status, performance status (PS), intent of therapy and intent to change therapy).MethodsA tool (SmartPhrase) using existing and custom structured data elements was Built to capture 4 data categories (disease status, PS, intent of therapy and intent to change therapy) typically documented as free‐text within notes. Existing functionality for stage was supported by the Build. Participant survey data, presence of data (per encounter), and time in chart were collected prior to go‐live and repeat timepoints. The anticipated outcome was capture of >50% sustained over time without undue burden.ResultsPre‐intervention (5‐weeks before go‐live), participants had 1390 encounters (1207 patients). The median percent capture across all participants was 32% for stage; no structured data was available for other categories pre‐intervention. During a 6‐month pilot with 14 participants across three sites, 4995 encounters (3071 patients) occurred. The median percent capture across all participants and all post‐intervention months increased to 64% for stage and 81%–82% for the other data categories post‐intervention. No increase in participant time in chart was noted. Participants reported that data were meaningful to capture.ConclusionsStructured data can be captured (1) in real‐time, (2) sustained over time without (3) undue provider burden using note‐based tools. Our system is expanding the pilot, with integration of these data into clinical decision support, practice dashboards and potential for clinical trial matching.

Abstract Despite major strides in cancer research and therapy, these advances have not been equitable across race and ethnicity. Historically marginalized groups (HMG) are more likely to have inadequate preventive screening, increased delays in diagnosis, and poor representation in clinical trials. Notably, Black, Hispanic, and Indigenous people represent 30% of the population but only 9% of oncology clinical trial participants. As a result, HMGs lack equitable access to novel therapies, contradicting the principle of distributive justice, as enshrined in the Belmont report, which demands the equitable selection of subjects in research involving human subjects. The lack of clinical trial diversity also leads to low generalizability and potentially harmful medical practices. Specifically, patients with brain cancer face unique barriers to clinical trial enrollment and completion due to disease-specific neurologic and treatment-induced conditions. Collectively, the intersection of these disease-specific conditions with social determinants of health fosters a lack of diversity in clinical trials. To ameliorate this disparity in neuro-oncology clinical trial participation, we present interventions focused on improving engagement of HMGs. Proposals range from inclusive trial design, decreasing barriers to care, expanding trial eligibility, access to tumor profiling for personalized medical trials, setting reasonable metrics and goals for accrual, working with patient community stakeholders, diversifying the neuro-oncology workforce, and development of tools to overcome biases with options to incentivize equity. The diversification of participation amongst neuro-oncology clinical trials is imperative. Equitable access and inclusion of HMG patients with brain tumors will not only enhance research discoveries but will also improve patient care.

AbstractBackgroundIdentifying patient‐ and disease‐specific characteristics associated with clinical trial enrollment of adolescents and young adults (AYAs) with cancer may target efforts to improve accrual.MethodsAlliance for Clinical Trials in Oncology (Alliance) trials opened from January 1, 2000, and closed before January 1, 2018, for common AYA cancers were identified. Proportions of AYAs (aged 18–39 years old) versus non‐AYAs (aged ≥40 years old) enrolled by cancer type were summarized by descriptive statistics. Among studies with ≥20 AYAs enrolled, demographic and disease characteristics of AYAs versus non‐AYAs were compared with χ2 and Kruskal–Wallis tests. A qualitative review was also conducted of therapeutic trials included in analysis in PubMed through December 31, 2021, that reported AYA‐specific survival.ResultsAmong 188 trials enrolling 40,396 patients, AYAs represented 11% (4468 of 40,396) of accrual. AYA accrual varied by cancer type (leukemia, 23.6%; breast, 9.9%; lymphoma, 14.8%; colorectal, 6.2%; central nervous system, 8.1%; melanoma, 11.8%; sarcoma, 12%). Across ages, the proportion of Black and Hispanic patients enrolled was 1%–10%. Compared to non‐AYAs, AYAs in breast and colorectal cancer trials were less likely to be White and more likely to be Hispanic. Disease characteristics differed by age for selected trials. Two trials reported AYA‐specific survival, with no significant differences observed by age.ConclusionsAYA accrual to Alliance trials was comparable to or exceeded population‐based, age‐specific prevalence estimates for most cancer types. Greater proportional representation of Hispanic and non‐White patients among AYAs reflects US demographic trends. The small number of minority patients enrolled across ages underscores the persistent challenge of ensuring equitable access to trials, including for AYAs.

Abstract Durable objective response rate (ORR) remains a meaningful endpoint in recurrent cancer; however, the target ORR for single-arm recurrent glioblastoma trials has not been based on historic information or tied to patient outcomes. The current study reviewed 68 treatment arms comprising 4793 patients in past trials in recurrent glioblastoma in order to judiciously define target ORRs for use in recurrent glioblastoma trials. ORR was estimated at 6.1% [95% CI 4.23; 8.76%] for cytotoxic chemothera + pies (ORR = 7.59% for lomustine, 7.57% for temozolomide, 0.64% for irinotecan, and 5.32% for other agents), 3.37% for biologic agents, 7.97% for (select) immunotherapies, and 26.8% for anti-angiogenic agents. ORRs were significantly correlated with median overall survival (mOS) across chemotherapy (R2= 0.4078, P < .0001), biologics (R2= 0.4003, P = .0003), and immunotherapy trials (R2= 0.8994, P < .0001), but not anti-angiogenic agents (R2= 0, P = .8937). Pooling data from chemotherapy, biologics, and immunotherapy trials, a meta-analysis indicated a strong correlation between ORR and mOS (R2= 0.3900, P < .0001; mOS [weeks] = 1.4xORR + 24.8). Assuming an ineffective cytotoxic (control) therapy has ORR = 7.6%, the average ORR for lomustine and temozolomide trials, a sample size of ≥40 patients with target ORR>25% is needed to demonstrate statistical significance compared to control with a high level of confidence (P < .01) and adequate power (>80%). Given this historic data and potential biases in patient selection, we recommend that well-controlled, single-arm phase II studies in recurrent glioblastoma should have a target ORR >25% (which translates to a median OS of approximately 15 months) and a sample size of ≥40 patients, in order to convincingly demonstrate antitumor activity. Crucially, this response needs to have sufficient durability, which was not addressed in the current study.

Abstract Isocitrate dehydrogenase (IDH) 1 or 2 mutations confer a favorable prognosis compared to IDH-wildtype in astrocytoma, frequently denoting a lower grade malignancy. However, recent molecular profiling has identified specific aggressive tumor subgroups with clear clinical prognostic implications that are independent of histologic grading. The homozygous deletion of CDKN2A/B is the strongest implicated independent indicator of the poor prognosis within IDH-mutant astrocytoma, and the identification of this alteration in these lower histologic grade tumors transforms their biology toward an aggressive grade 4 phenotype clinically. CDKN2A/B homozygous deletion is now sufficient to define a grade 4 tumor in IDH-mutant astrocytomas regardless of histologic appearance, yet there are currently no effective molecularly informed targeted therapies for these tumors. The biological impact of CDKN2A/B homozygous deletion in IDH-mutant tumors and the optimal treatment strategy for this molecular subgroup remains insufficiently explored. Here we review the current understanding of the translational significance of homozygous deletion of CDKN2A/B gene expression in IDH-mutant astrocytoma and associated diagnostic and therapeutic implications.