Citations

Abstract To assess the impact of the pandemic on the field, we performed an international web-based survey of practitioners, scientists, and trainees from 21 neuro-oncology organizations across 6 continents from April 24 through May 17. Of 582 respondents, 258 (45%) were in the US, and 314 (55%) were international. 80.4% were affiliated with academic institutions. 94% respondents reported changes in clinical practice; 95% reported conversion to telemedicine for at least some appointments. However, almost 10% practitioners felt the need to see patients in person specifically because of billing concerns and perceived institutional pressure. Over 50% believed neuro-oncology patients were at increased risk of contracting COVID-19. 67% practitioners suspended enrollment for at least one clinical trial: 53% suspended phase II and 62% suspended phase III trial enrollment. 71% clinicians feared for their or their families’ safety, specifically because of their clinical duties. 20% percent said they did not have enough PPE to work safely; about the same percentage were unhappy with their institutions’ response to the pandemic. 43% believed the pandemic would negatively affect their academic career, and 52% fellowship program directors were worried about losing funding for their training programs. While 69% respondents reported increased stress, 44% were offered no psychosocial support. 37% had their salary reduced. 36% researchers had to temporarily close their laboratories. In contrast, the pandemic created positive changes in perceived patient and family satisfaction, quality of communication, and use of technology to deliver care and interactions with other practitioners. CONCLUSIONS: The pandemic has altered standard treatment schedules and limited investigational treatment options for patients. In some cases, clinicians felt institutional pressure to continue conducting billable in-person visits when telemedicine visits would have sufficed. A lack of institutional support created anxiety among clinicians and researchers. We make specific recommendations to guide clinical and scientific infrastructure moving forward.

The NCCN Guidelines for Central Nervous System (CNS) Cancers focus on management of adult CNS cancers ranging from noninvasive and surgically curable pilocytic astrocytomas to metastatic brain disease. The involvement of an interdisciplinary team, including neurosurgeons, radiation therapists, oncologists, neurologists, and neuroradiologists, is a key factor in the appropriate management of CNS cancers. Integrated histopathologic and molecular characterization of brain tumors such as gliomas should be standard practice. This article describes NCCN Guidelines recommendations for WHO grade I, II, III, and IV gliomas. Treatment of brain metastases, the most common intracranial tumors in adults, is also described.

Abstract Dysregulation of ErbB-mediated signaling is observed in up to 90% of solid tumors. ErbB family cross-talk is implicated in the development of resistance and metastasis, including CNS metastases. Inhibition of multiple ErbB receptors may result in improved patient outcomes. EO1001 is a novel, patented, oral, brain-penetrating, irreversible pan-ErbB inhibitor targeting EGFR (ErbB1), HER2 (ErbB2) and HER4 (ErbB4). METHODS: (1) In vitro testing. EO1001 demonstrates high specificity for the ErbB family of receptors with excellent, balanced equipotent activity against EGFR, HER2 and HER4 (0.4 to 7.4 nM). EO1001 inhibits signaling downstream of wild type EGFR, mutant EGFR (T790M, L858R and d746-750) and HER2. (2) PK and toxicity. In rodent studies in vivo, EO1001 exhibited a half-life of 16–20 hours. EO1001 rapidly enters the CNS and penetrates tumor tissue at higher concentrations relative to plasma. Safety of EO1001 was evaluated by repeat-dosing studies in SD rats and beagle dogs. Toxicities typical of the ErbB inhibitor class, including gastro-intestinal effects, weight loss and decreased activity were observed at higher dose groups in both species. Mortality was observed in SD rats at higher dose groups. (3) In vivo efficacy studies. EO1001 was studied following oral administration in several erbB-positive mouse xenograft models including N87 (Her2+), H1975 (EGFR/T790M), GBM12 (EGFR+), GBM39 (EGVRvIII+). Following oral administration, treatment with EO1001 resulted in a statistically significant improvement in outcomes compared to positive and negative controls in both CNS and systemic tumor models. EO1001 was well-tolerated with no gastrointestinal side effects observed at efficacious doses in these models. CONCLUSION: Based on research to date, EO1001 has the potential to be a best-in-class CNS-penetrating pan-ErbB inhibitor with a safety and pharmacokinetic profile amenable for use as a single agent and in combination with other agents. EO1001 is poised to enter phase 1-2a clinical testing in the second-half of 2019.

2023 Background: TRC105 is a humanized antibody targeting CD105 (endoglin), a member of the TGFβ receptor superfamily. CD105 is expressed in glioma stem cells and circulating endothelial cells (CECs) in GBM patients (pts), increasing following VEGF inhibition. N1174 was conducted in recurrent bevacizumab (bev) naïve GBM pts to investigate the hypothesis that CD105 blockade+bev can delay development of bev resistance. Methods: After a ph I cohort (15 pts) established the ph II dose of TRC105 as 10 mg/kg IV over 4 hours every 7 days in combination with standard dose bev, the ph II trial used 1:1 randomization with 90% power and 0.10 type I error to detect a 3 month (mo) difference in progression-free survival (PFS) between the two arms. CECs including CD105 positive subsets were measured by flow cytometry at baseline and multiple time points. Results: Based on 101 evaluable ph II pts, there was no significant difference in PFS between TRC105+bev and bev only (2.9 vs 3.2 mo, respectively; HR=1.14, 95% CI 0.73-1.77, p=0.57), or overall survival (10.0 vs 7.4 mo; HR 1.02 95% CI 0.63-1.65, p=0.93). Response rate (complete or partial) was 12.2% (6/49) for TRC105+bev and 11.6% (5/43) for bev only. Overall incidence of grade (gr) 3+ toxicity was higher for TRC105+bev (67.3% vs 32.7%, p<0.001) mainly due to 14 pts with gr 3 anemia in the TRC105+bev arm vs 0 in the bev only pts. Gr 3+ non-heme toxicities were higher in pts receiving TRC105+bev vs bev only (50% vs 30.6%, p=0.07), mainly due to headache (6 vs 1 pts) and hyperglycemia (3 vs 0 pts). CECs remained stable in combination treated pts, suggesting a possible impact of the anti-CD105 blockade, but increased at progression in the bev only arm. There was no association between PFS and initial changes in CEC values, independent of treatment received. Conclusions: TRC105 plus bev did not prolong median PFS vs single agent bev in recurrent GBM pts, although it was associated with a non-significant prolongation of OS. These data and associated correlative analysis of CECs from study pts point against endoglin being a clinically significant factor for the development of bev resistance. Support: U10CA180821, U10CA180882. Clinical trial information: NCT01648348.