The optimal combination of bevacizumab with cytotoxic or cytostatic drugs in recurrent glioblastoma is unknown. We performed a phase 2 trial of combined bevacizumab and fotemustine for patients with glioblastoma at first relapse after radiotherapy and temozolomide. The primary endpoint was 6-month progression-free survival (PFS), while secondary endpoints were overall survival (OS), response rate based on RANO criteria and toxicity. Fifty-four patients with recurrent GBM were enrolled. The authors observed a 6-month PFS rate of 42.6 % (95 % CI 29.3–55.2) and a median PFS of 5.2 months (95 % CI 3.8–6.6). The median OS was 9.1 months (95 % CI 7.3–10.3). Twenty-eight patients (52 %) had a radiographic response, and a significant neurological improvement with steroid reduction was observed in 25/42 symptomatic patients (60 %). MGMT promoter methylation was significantly associated with improved PFS in univariate analysis. Most unifocal tumors at baseline had a focal enhancing progression (76 %), while the diffuse non-enhancing progression accounted for 9.5 %. Response or survival were not associated with any pattern of progression. Survival after failure of treatment was short. Twelve out of 54 patients (22 %) discontinued fotemustine for grade 3/4 myelotoxicity, while 4/54 (7.4 %) discontinued bevacizumab. This study failed to demonstrate a superiority of the combination of bevacizumab and fotemustine over either bevacizumab or fotemustine alone as historical controls. Future studies should explore alternative regimens of combination of the two drugs.

Bevacizumab and fotemustine for recurrent glioblastoma: a phase II study of AINO (Italian Association of Neuro-Oncology)

SOFFIETTI, Riccardo;TREVISAN, Elisa;Bertero L;CASSONI, Paola;CASTIGLIONE, Anna;Rudà R.
2014-01-01

Abstract

The optimal combination of bevacizumab with cytotoxic or cytostatic drugs in recurrent glioblastoma is unknown. We performed a phase 2 trial of combined bevacizumab and fotemustine for patients with glioblastoma at first relapse after radiotherapy and temozolomide. The primary endpoint was 6-month progression-free survival (PFS), while secondary endpoints were overall survival (OS), response rate based on RANO criteria and toxicity. Fifty-four patients with recurrent GBM were enrolled. The authors observed a 6-month PFS rate of 42.6 % (95 % CI 29.3–55.2) and a median PFS of 5.2 months (95 % CI 3.8–6.6). The median OS was 9.1 months (95 % CI 7.3–10.3). Twenty-eight patients (52 %) had a radiographic response, and a significant neurological improvement with steroid reduction was observed in 25/42 symptomatic patients (60 %). MGMT promoter methylation was significantly associated with improved PFS in univariate analysis. Most unifocal tumors at baseline had a focal enhancing progression (76 %), while the diffuse non-enhancing progression accounted for 9.5 %. Response or survival were not associated with any pattern of progression. Survival after failure of treatment was short. Twelve out of 54 patients (22 %) discontinued fotemustine for grade 3/4 myelotoxicity, while 4/54 (7.4 %) discontinued bevacizumab. This study failed to demonstrate a superiority of the combination of bevacizumab and fotemustine over either bevacizumab or fotemustine alone as historical controls. Future studies should explore alternative regimens of combination of the two drugs.
2014
116
3
533
541
http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007%2Fs11060-013-1317-x
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3905193/
Bevacizumab; fotemustine; glioblastoma; AINO
Soffietti R; Trevisan E; Bertero L; Cassoni P; Morra I; Fabrini MG; Pasqualetti F; Lolli I; Castiglione A; Ciccone G; Rudà R
File in questo prodotto:
File Dimensione Formato  
1260216_pdf.pdf

Accesso riservato

Tipo di file: PDF EDITORIALE
Dimensione 257.52 kB
Formato Adobe PDF
257.52 kB Adobe PDF   Visualizza/Apri   Richiedi una copia

I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.

Utilizza questo identificativo per citare o creare un link a questo documento: https://hdl.handle.net/2318/140676
Citazioni
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.pmc??? 22
  • Scopus 62
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.isi??? 58
social impact