Sener, Ugur

Abstract Background Despite the lack of proven therapies for recurrent high-grade glioma (HGG), only 8%–11% of patients with glioblastoma participate in clinical trials, partly due to stringent eligibility criteria. Prior bevacizumab treatment is a frequent exclusion criterion, due to difficulty with response assessment and concerns for rebound edema following antiangiogenic discontinuation. There are no standardized trial eligibility rules related to prior antiangiogenic use. Methods We reviewed ClinicalTrials.gov listings for glioma studies starting between May 2009 and July 2022 for eligibility rules related to antiangiogenics. We also reviewed the literature pertaining to bevacizumab withdrawal. Results Two hundred and ninety-seven studies for patients with recurrent glioma were reviewed. Most were phase 1 (n = 145, 49%), non-randomized (n = 257, 87%), evaluated a drug-only intervention (n = 223, 75%), and had a safety and tolerability primary objective (n = 181, 61%). Fifty-one (17%) excluded participants who received any antiangiogenic, one (0.3%) excluded participants who received any non-temozolomide systemic therapy. Fifty-nine (20%) outlined washout rules for bevacizumab (range 2–24 weeks, 4-week washout n = 35, 12% most common). Seventy-eight required a systemic therapy washout (range 1–6 weeks, 4-week washout n = 34, 11% most common). Nine permitted prior bevacizumab use with limitations, 18 (6%) permitted any prior bevacizumab, 5 (2%) were for bevacizumab-refractory disease, and 76 (26%) had no rules regarding antiangiogenic use. A literature review is then presented to define standardized eligibility criteria with a 6-week washout period proposed for future trial design. Conclusions Interventional clinical trials for patients with HGG have substantial heterogeneity regarding eligibility criteria pertaining to bevacizumab use, demonstrating a need for standardizing clinical trial design.

Abstract Background This study aimed to determine whether proton craniospinal irradiation (CSI) decreased the dose to normal tissue and resulted in less toxicity than photon CSI for adult patients. Methods This single-institution retrospective analyzed differences in radiation doses, acute toxicity, and cost between proton and CSI for adult medulloblastoma patients. Results Of 39 total patients, 20 were treated with photon CSI prior to 2015, and 19 were treated with proton CSI thereafter. Median age was 28 years (range 18–66). The molecular subtype was most commonly sonic hedgehog (68%). Patients most commonly received 36 Gy CSI in 20 fractions with a boost to 54–55.8 Gy (92%). Proton CSI delivered significantly lower mean doses to cochleae, lacrimal glands, lens, parotid glands, pharyngeal constrictors, esophagus, lungs, liver, and skin (all P < .001). Patients receiving proton CSI had significantly lower rates of acute dysphagia of any grade (5% versus 35%, P = .044) and decreased median weight loss during radiation (+1.0 versus –2.8 kg, P = .011). Weight loss was associated with acute hospitalization (P = .009). Median follow-up was 2.9 and 12.9 years for proton and photon patients, respectively, limiting late toxicity and outcome comparisons. At the last follow-up, 5 photon patients had died (2 of progressive disease, 3 without recurrence ages 41–63) and 21% had experienced major cardiovascular events. At 10 years, 89% were alive and 82% were recurrence free. Conclusions This study demonstrates dosimetric improvements with proton CSI, potentially leading to decreased acute toxicity including dysphagia and weight loss during treatment.

ABSTRACT Introduction Proton craniospinal irradiation (pCSI) is a treatment option for leptomeningeal disease (LMD), which permits whole neuroaxis treatment while minimizing toxicity. Despite this, patients inevitably experience progression. Adding systemic therapy to pCSI may improve outcomes. Methods In this single-institution retrospective case series, we present the feasibility of treatment with pCSI (30Gy, 10 fractions) and an immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI) in two sequential patients with LMD from melanoma. Results The first patient developed LMD related to BRAF V600E-mutant melanoma after prior ICI and BRAF-targeted therapy. After pCSI with concurrent nivolumab, the addition of relatlimab, and BRAF-targeted therapy, he remained alive 7 months after LMD diagnosis despite central nervous system progression. The second patient developed LMD related to BRAF-wildtype melanoma after up-front ICI. He received pCSI with concurrent ipilimumab and nivolumab, then nivolumab maintenance. Though therapy was held for ICI hepatitis, the patient remained progression-free 5 months after LMD diagnosis. Conclusion Adding an ICI to pCSI is feasible for patients with LMD and demonstrates a tolerable toxicity profile. While prospective evaluation is ultimately warranted, pCSI with ICI may confer survival benefits, even after prior ICI.

Introduction: The differential diagnosis of a spinal intradural extramedullary mass lesion is broad and includes meningioma, schwannoma, neurofibroma, leptomeningeal metastasis, and myxopapillary ependymoma. Though rare, lymphoma should be included in the differential diagnosis of a dural mass lesion. Case Report: A 38-year-old man presented with back pain that progressed over 1 month with associated focal tenderness over his mid to lower thoracic spine. He developed intermittent numbness of the bilateral lower extremities, nuchal rigidity, difficulty sleeping, and night sweats. A magnetic resonance imaging of the thoracic spine demonstrated a dorsal intradural extramedullary enhancing lesion from T7 to T10 extending outside the spinal canal. Dural thickening across the entire circumference of the spinal cord was noted. Computed tomography (CT)-guided biopsy of the thoracic lesion was performed, and pathology was consistent with follicular lymphoma. Fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography:CT demonstrated no systemic disease. Bone marrow biopsy was negative for malignancy. Symptoms resolved with dexamethasone therapy. He was treated with bendamustine and rituximab with follow-up positron emission tomography:CT 2 months later demonstrating a complete response. Conclusions: Lymphoma can rarely present as an isolated dural lesion and should be considered in the differential diagnosis of intradural extramedullary spinal mass lesions. Prompt diagnosis and initiation of treatment can lead to complete response and resolution of symptoms.

Abstract Background Neurofibromatosis type 2 (NF2)-related schwannomatosis is an autosomal dominant tumor-predisposition syndrome characterized by bilateral vestibular schwannomas (VS). In patients with VS associated with NF2, vascular endothelial growth factor A inhibitor, bevacizumab, is a systemic treatment option. The aim of this study is to retrospectively evaluate NF2 patient responses to bevacizumab on VS growth and symptom progression. Methods This is a retrospective analysis of patients seen at the Mayo Clinic Rochester Multidisciplinary NF2 Clinic. Results Out of 76 patients with NF2 evaluated between 2020 and 2022, we identified 19 that received treatment with bevacizumab. Thirteen of these patients discontinued bevacizumab after median treatment duration of 12.2 months. The remaining 6 patients are currently receiving bevacizumab treatment for a median duration of 9.4 months as of March, 2023. Fifteen patients had evaluable brain MRI data, which demonstrated partial responses in 5 patients, stable disease in 8, and progression in 2. Within 6 months of bevacizumab discontinuation, 5 patients had rebound growth of their VS greater than 20% from their previous tumor volume, while 3 did not. Three patients with rebound growth went on to have surgery or irradiation for VS management. Conclusions Our single-institution experience confirms prior studies that bevacizumab can control progression of VS and symptoms associated with VS growth. However, we note that there is the potential for rapid VS growth following bevacizumab discontinuation, for which we propose heightened surveillance imaging and symptom monitoring for at least 6 months upon stopping anti-VEGF therapy.

Despite decades of research and numerous clinical trials, the prognosis of patients diagnosed with glioblastoma (GBM) remains dire with median observed survival at 8 months. There is a critical need for novel treatments for GBM, which is the most common malignant primary brain tumor. Major advances in cancer therapeutics such as immune checkpoint inhibitors and chimeric antigen receptor (CAR) T-cell therapy have not yet led to improved outcomes for GBM. Conventional therapy of surgery followed by chemoradiation with or without tumor treating fields remains the standard of care. One of the many approaches to GBM therapy currently being explored is viral therapies. These typically work by selectively lysing target neoplastic cells, called oncolysis, or by the targeted delivery of a therapeutic transgene via a viral vector. In this review, we discuss the underlying mechanisms of action and describe both recent and current human clinical trials using these viruses with an emphasis on promising viral therapeutics that may ultimately break the field’s current stagnant paradigm.

Glioblastoma (GBM) is the most common malignant primary brain tumor and confers a dismal prognosis. With only two FDA-approved therapeutics showing modest survival gains since 2005, there is a great need for the development of other disease-targeted therapies. Due, in part, to the profound immunosuppressive microenvironment seen in GBMs, there has been a broad interest in immunotherapy. In both GBMs and other cancers, therapeutic vaccines have generally yielded limited efficacy, despite their theoretical basis. However, recent results from the DCVax-L trial provide some promise for vaccine therapy in GBMs. There is also the potential that future combination therapies with vaccines and adjuvant immunomodulating agents may greatly enhance antitumor immune responses. Clinicians must remain open to novel therapeutic strategies, such as vaccinations, and carefully await the results of ongoing and future trials. In this review of GBM management, the promise and challenges of immunotherapy with a focus on therapeutic vaccinations are discussed. Additionally, adjuvant therapies, logistical considerations, and future directions are discussed.