Increased compliance with tumor treating fields therapy is prognostic for improved survival in the treatment of glioblastoma: a subgroup analysis of the EF-14 phase III trial

BAG3 regulates cilia homeostasis of glioblastoma via its WW domain

The multidomain protein BAG3 exerts pleiotropic oncogenic functions in many tumor entities including glioblastoma (GBM). Here, we compared BAG3 protein-protein interactions in either adherently cultured or stem-like cultured U251 GBM cells. In line with BAG3's putative role in regulating stem-like properties, identified interactors in sphere-cultured cells included different stem cell markers (SOX2, OLIG2, and NES), while interactomes of adherent BAG3-proficient cells indicated a shift toward involvement of BAG3 in regulation of cilium assembly (ACTR3 and ARL3). Applying a set of BAG3 deletion constructs we could demonstrate that none of the domains except the WW domain are required for suppression of cilia formation by full-length BAG3 in U251 and U343 cells. In line with the established regulation of the Hippo pathway by this domain, we could show that the WW mutant fails to rescue YAP1 nuclear translocation. BAG3 depletion reduced activation of a YAP1/AURKA signaling pathway and induction of PLK1. Collectively, our findings point to a complex interaction network of BAG3 with several pathways regulating cilia homeostasis, involving processes related to ciliogenesis and cilium degradation.

Tumor treating fields in glioblastoma: long-term treatment and high compliance as favorable prognostic factors

Introduction

Tumor treating fields (TTFields) have earned substantial attention in recent years as a novel therapeutic approach with the potential to improve the prognosis of glioblastoma (GBM) patients. However, the impact of TTFields remains a subject of ongoing debate. This study aimed to offer real-world evidence on TTFields therapy for GBM, and to investigate the clinical determinants affecting its efficacy.

Methods

We have reported a retrospective analysis of 81 newly diagnosed Chinese GBM patients who received TTFields/Stupp treatment in the Second Affiliated Hospital of Zhejiang University. Overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) were analyzed using Kaplan-Meier method. Cox regression models with time-dependent covariates were utilized to address non-proportional hazards and to assess the influence of clinical variables on PFS and OS.

Results

The median PFS and OS following TTFields/STUPP treatment was 12.6 months (95% CI 11.0-14.1) and 21.3 months (95% CI 10.0-32.6) respectively. Long-term TTFields treatment (>2 months) exhibits significant improvements in PFS and OS compared to the short-term treatment group (≤2 months). Time-dependent covariate COX analysis revealed that longer TTFields treatment was correlated with enhanced PFS and OS for up to 12 and 13 months, respectively. Higher compliance to TTFields (≥ 0.8) significantly reduced the death risk (HR=0.297, 95%CI 0.108-0.819). Complete surgical resection and MGMT promoter methylation were associated with significantly lower risk of progression (HR=0.337, 95% CI 0.176-0.643; HR=0.156, 95% CI 0.065-0.378) and death (HR=0.276, 95% CI 0.105-0.727; HR=0.249, 95% CI 0.087-0.710).

Conclusion

The TTFields/Stupp treatment may prolong median OS and PFS in GBM patients, with long-term TTFields treatment, higher TTFields compliance, complete surgical resection, and MGMT promoter methylation significantly improving prognosis.

Theory and application of TTFields in newly diagnosed glioblastoma

BACKGROUND

Glioblastoma is the most common primary malignant brain tumor in adults. TTFields is a therapy that use intermediate-frequency and low-intensity alternating electric fields to treat tumors. For patients with ndGBM, the addition of TTFields after the concurrent chemoradiotherapy phase of the Stupp regimen can improve prognosis. However, TTFields still has the potential to further prolong the survival of ndGBM patients.

AIM

By summarizing the mechanism and application status of TTFields in the treatment of ndGBM, the application prospect of TTFields in ndbm treatment is prospected.

METHODS

We review the recent literature and included 76 articles to summarize the mechanism of TTfields in the treatment of ndGBM. The current clinical application status and potential health benefits of TTFields in the treatment of ndGBM are also discussed.

RESULTS

TTFields can interfere with tumor cell mitosis, lead to tumor cell apoptosis and increased autophagy, hinder DNA damage repair, induce ICD, activate tumor immune microenvironment, reduce cancer cell metastasis and invasion, and increase BBB permeability. TTFields combines with chemoradiotherapy has made progress, its optimal application time is being explored and the problems that need to be considered when retaining the electrode patches for radiotherapy are further discussed. TTFields shows potential in combination with immunotherapy, antimitotic agents, and PARP inhibitors, as well as in patients with subtentorial gliomas.

CONCLUSION

This review summarizes mechanisms of TTFields in the treatment of ndGBM, and describes the current clinical application of TTFields in ndGBM. Through the understanding of its principle and application status, we believe that TTFields still has the potential to further prolong the survival of ndGBM patients. Thus,research is still needed to explore new ways to combine TTFields with other therapies and optimize the use of TTFields to realize its full potential in ndGBM patients.

Glioblastoma Therapy: Past, Present and Future

Glioblastoma (GB) stands out as the most prevalent and lethal form of brain cancer. Although great efforts have been made by clinicians and researchers, no significant improvement in survival has been achieved since the Stupp protocol became the standard of care (SOC) in 2005. Despite multimodality treatments, recurrence is almost universal with survival rates under 2 years after diagnosis. Here, we discuss the recent progress in our understanding of GB pathophysiology, in particular, the importance of glioma stem cells (GSCs), the tumor microenvironment conditions, and epigenetic mechanisms involved in GB growth, aggressiveness and recurrence. The discussion on therapeutic strategies first covers the SOC treatment and targeted therapies that have been shown to interfere with different signaling pathways (pRB/CDK4/RB1/P16ink4, TP53/MDM2/P14arf, PI3k/Akt-PTEN, RAS/RAF/MEK, PARP) involved in GB tumorigenesis, pathophysiology, and treatment resistance acquisition. Below, we analyze several immunotherapeutic approaches (i.e., checkpoint inhibitors, vaccines, CAR-modified NK or T cells, oncolytic virotherapy) that have been used in an attempt to enhance the immune response against GB, and thereby avoid recidivism or increase survival of GB patients. Finally, we present treatment attempts made using nanotherapies (nanometric structures having active anti-GB agents such as antibodies, chemotherapeutic/anti-angiogenic drugs or sensitizers, radionuclides, and molecules that target GB cellular receptors or open the blood-brain barrier) and non-ionizing energies (laser interstitial thermal therapy, high/low intensity focused ultrasounds, photodynamic/sonodynamic therapies and electroporation). The aim of this review is to discuss the advances and limitations of the current therapies and to present novel approaches that are under development or following clinical trials.

Tumor treating fields increases blood-brain barrier permeability and relative cerebral blood volume in patients with glioblastoma

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

200 kHz tumor treating fields (TTFields) is clinically approved for newly-diagnosed glioblastoma (nGBM). Because its effects on conventional surveillance MRI brain scans are equivocal, we investigated its effects on perfusion MRI (pMRI) brain scans.

METHODS

Each patient underwent institutional standard pMRI: dynamic contrast-enhanced (DCE) and dynamic susceptibility contrast (DSC) pMRI at three time points: baseline, 2-, and 6-months on-adjuvant therapy. At each timepoint, the difference between T1 pre- versus post-contrast tumor volume (ΔT1) and these pMRI metrics were evaluated: normalized and standardized relative cerebral blood volume (nRCBV, sRCBV); fractional plasma volume (Vp), volume of extravascular extracellular space (EES) per volume of tissue (Ve), blood-brain barrier (BBB) permeability (Ktrans), and time constant for gadolinium reflux from EES back into the vascular system (Kep). Between-group comparisons were performed using rank-sum analysis, and bootstrapping evaluated likely reproducibility of the results.

RESULTS

Among 13 pMRI datasets (11 nGBM, 2 recurrent GBM), therapies included temozolomide-only (n = 9) and temozolomide + TTFields (n = 4). No significant differences were found in patient or tumor characteristics. Compared to temozolomide-only, temozolomide + TTFields did not significantly affect the percent-change in pMRI metrics from baseline to 2 months. But during the 2- to 6-month period, temozolomide + TTFields significantly increased the percent-change in nRCBV (+26.9% [interquartile range 55.1%] vs -39.1% [37.0%], p = 0.049), sRCBV (+9.5% [39.7%] vs -30.5% [39.4%], p = 0.049), Ktrans (+54.6% [1768.4%] vs -26.9% [61.2%], p = 0.024), Ve (+111.0% [518.1%] vs -13.0% [22.5%], p = 0.048), and Vp (+98.8% [2172.4%] vs -24.6% [53.3%], p = 0.024) compared to temozolomide-only.

CONCLUSION

Using pMRI, we provide initial in-human validation of pre-clinical studies regarding the effects of TTFields on tumor blood volume and BBB permeability in GBM.

Tumor-treating fields dosimetry in glioblastoma: Insights into treatment planning, optimization, and dose-response relationships

Tumor-treating fields (TTFields) are currently a Category 1A treatment recommendation by the US National Comprehensive Cancer Center for patients with newly diagnosed glioblastoma. Although the mechanism of action of TTFields has been partly elucidated, tangible and standardized metrics are lacking to assess antitumor dose and effects of the treatment. This paper outlines and evaluates the current standards and methodologies in the estimation of the TTFields distribution and dose measurement in the brain and highlights the most important principles governing TTFields dosimetry. The focus is on clinical utility to facilitate a practical understanding of these principles and how they can be used to guide treatment. The current evidence for a correlation between TTFields dose, tumor growth, and clinical outcome will be presented and discussed. Furthermore, we will provide perspectives and updated insights into the planning and optimization of TTFields therapy for glioblastoma by reviewing how the dose and thermal effects of TTFields are affected by factors such as tumor location and morphology, peritumoral edema, electrode array position, treatment duration (compliance), array "edge effect," electrical duty cycle, and skull-remodeling surgery. Finally, perspectives are provided on how to optimize the efficacy of future TTFields therapy.

Combining organotypic tissue culture with light-sheet microscopy (OTCxLSFM) to study glioma invasion

Glioblastoma is a very aggressive tumor and represents the most common primary brain malignancy. Key characteristics include its high resistance against conventional treatments, such as radio- and chemotherapy and its diffuse tissue infiltration, preventing complete surgical resection. The analysis of migration and invasion processes in a physiological microenvironment allows for enhanced understanding of these phenomena and can lead to improved therapeutic approaches. Here, we combine two state-of-the-art techniques, adult organotypic brain tissue slice culture (OTC) and light-sheet fluorescence microscopy (LSFM) of cleared tissues in a combined method termed OTCxLSFM. Using this methodology, we can show that glioblastoma tissue infiltration can be effectively blocked through treatment with arsenic trioxide or WP1066, as well as genetic depletion of the tetraspanin, transmembrane receptor CD9, or signal transducer and activator of transcription 3 (STAT3). With our analysis pipeline, we gain single-cell level, three-dimensional information, as well as insights into the morphological appearance of the tumor cells.

Tumor treating fields for the treatment of glioblastoma: Current understanding and future perspectives

Background

This review focuses on the recently published evidence on tumor treating fields (TTFields) administered alone or in combination with locoregional and systemic options for treating glioblastoma (GBM) in the past ten years. The aim is to critically summarize the novelty and results obtained with this innovative tool, which is becoming part of the armamentarium of neurosurgeons and neuro-oncologists.

Methods

A comprehensive search and analysis were conducted on pivotal studies published in the past ten years. Furthermore, all completed clinical trials, whose results were published on clinicaltrials.gov, were examined and included in the present review, encompassing both recurrent (r) and newly diagnosed (n) GBM. Finally, an additional examination of the ongoing clinical trials was also conducted.

Results

Recent trials have shown promising results both in patients with nGBM and rGBM/progressive (rGBM), leading to Food and Drug Administration approval in selected patients and the Congress of Neurological Surgeons to include TTFields into current guidelines on the management of GBM (P100034/S001-029). Recently, different randomized trials have demonstrated promising results of TTFields in combination with standard treatment of n- and rGBM, especially when considering progression-free and overall survival, maintaining a low rate of mild to moderate adverse events.

Conclusion

Optimal outcomes were obtained in nGBM and progressive disease. A possible future refinement of TTFields could significantly impact the treatment of rGBM and the actual standard of care for GBM, given the better safety profile and survival effects.

Enhancing glioblastoma treatment through the integration of tumor-treating fields

Glioblastoma (GBM) represents a significant therapeutic challenge due to its aggressive nature. Tumor Treating Fields (TTFields) present a promising approach to GBM therapy. The primary mechanism of TTFields, an antimitotic effect, alongside numerous indirect effects including increased cell membrane permeability, signifies their potential in combination with other treatment modalities. Current combinations often include chemotherapy, particularly with temozolomide (TMZ), however, emerging data suggests potential synergy with targeted therapies, radiotherapy, and immunotherapy as well. TTFields display minimal side effects, predominantly skin-related, posing no significant barrier to combined therapies. The effectiveness of TTFields in GBM treatment has been demonstrated through several post-registration studies, advocating for continued research to optimize overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) in patients, as opposed to focusing solely on quality of life.

A review of traditional Chinese medicine Curcumae Rhizoma for treatment of glioma

Glioma is the most common primary central nervous tumor and its malignant and high recurrence rate are seriously threatening patient's life. The prognosis of glioma patients is still poor with a variety of modern treatments. Traditional Chinese medicine (TCM) is widely used in the adjuvant treatment or alternative medicine of glioma. Curcumae Rhizoma is one of the most commonly used in traditional Chinese medicine prescriptions for its anti-tumor characteristics. There are also many studies that reveals the anti-tumor effect of its active ingredients and some of which have been made into drugs and have been used in clinical practice. This review summarizes the new research progress on Curcumae Rhizoma for the treatment of glioma in recent years.

Tumor Treating Fields therapy with standard systemic therapy versus standard systemic therapy alone in metastatic non-small-cell lung cancer following progression on or after platinum-based therapy (LUNAR): a randomised, open-label, pivotal phase 3 study

BACKGROUND

Tumor Treating Fields (TTFields) are electric fields that disrupt processes critical for cancer cell survival, leading to immunogenic cell death and enhanced antitumour immune response. In preclinical models of non-small-cell lung cancer, TTFields amplified the effects of chemotherapy and immune checkpoint inhibitors. We report primary results from a pivotal study of TTFields therapy in metastatic non-small-cell lung cancer.

METHODS

This randomised, open-label, pivotal phase 3 study recruited patients at 130 sites in 19 countries. Participants were aged 22 years or older with metastatic non-small-cell lung cancer progressing on or after platinum-based therapy, with squamous or non-squamous histology and ECOG performance status of 2 or less. Previous platinum-based therapy was required, but no restriction was placed on the number or type of previous lines of systemic therapy. Participants were randomly assigned (1:1) to TTFields therapy and standard systemic therapy (investigator's choice of immune checkpoint inhibitor [nivolumab, pembrolizumab, or atezolizumab] or docetaxel) or standard therapy alone. Randomisation was performed centrally using variable blocked randomisation and an interactive voice-web response system, and was stratified by tumour histology, treatment, and region. Systemic therapies were dosed according to local practice guidelines. TTFields therapy (150 kHz) was delivered continuously to the thoracic region with the recommendation to achieve an average of at least 18 h/day device usage. The primary endpoint was overall survival in the intention-to-treat population. The safety population included all patients who received any study therapy and were analysed according to the actual treatment received. The study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02973789.

FINDINGS

Between Feb 13, 2017, and Nov 19, 2021, 276 patients were enrolled and randomly assigned to receive TTFields therapy with standard therapy (n=137) or standard therapy alone (n=139). The median age was 64 years (IQR 59-70), 178 (64%) were male and 98 (36%) were female, 156 (57%) had non-squamous non-small-cell lung cancer, and 87 (32%) had received a previous immune checkpoint inhibitor. Median follow-up was 10·6 months (IQR 6·1-33·7) for patients receiving TTFields therapy with standard therapy, and 9·5 months (0·1-32·1) for patients receiving standard therapy. Overall survival was significantly longer with TTFields therapy and standard therapy than with standard therapy alone (median 13·2 months [95% CI 10·3-15·5] vs 9·9 months [8·1-11·5]; hazard ratio [HR] 0·74 [95% CI 0·56-0·98]; p=0·035). In the safety population (n=267), serious adverse events of any cause were reported in 70 (53%) of 133 patients receiving TTFields therapy plus standard therapy and 51 (38%) of 134 patients receiving standard therapy alone. The most frequent grade 3-4 adverse events were leukopenia (37 [14%] of 267), pneumonia (28 [10%]), and anaemia (21 [8%]). TTFields therapy-related adverse events were reported in 95 (71%) of 133 patients; these were mostly (81 [85%]) grade 1-2 skin and subcutaneous tissue disorders. There were three deaths related to standard therapy (two due to infections and one due to pulmonary haemorrhage) and no deaths related to TTFields therapy.

INTERPRETATION

TTFields therapy added to standard therapy significantly improved overall survival compared with standard therapy alone in metastatic non-small-cell lung cancer after progression on platinum-based therapy without exacerbating systemic toxicities. These data suggest that TTFields therapy is efficacious in metastatic non-small-cell lung cancer and should be considered as a treatment option to manage the disease in this setting.

FUNDING

Novocure.

μMESH-Enabled Sustained Delivery of Molecular and Nanoformulated Drugs for Glioblastoma Treatment

Modest tissue penetrance, nonuniform distribution, and suboptimal release of drugs limit the potential of intracranial therapies against glioblastoma. Here, a conformable polymeric implant, μMESH, is realized by intercalating a micronetwork of 3 × 5 μm poly(lactic-co-glycolic acid) (PLGA) edges over arrays of 20 × 20 μm polyvinyl alcohol (PVA) pillars for the sustained delivery of potent chemotherapeutic molecules, docetaxel (DTXL) and paclitaxel (PTXL). Four different μMESH configurations were engineered by encapsulating DTXL or PTXL within the PLGA micronetwork and nanoformulated DTXL (nanoDTXL) or PTXL (nanoPTXL) within the PVA microlayer. All four μMESH configurations provided sustained drug release for at least 150 days. However, while a burst release of up to 80% of nanoPTXL/nanoDTXL was documented within the first 4 days, molecular DTXL and PTXL were released more slowly from μMESH. Upon incubation with U87-MG cell spheroids, DTXL-μMESH was associated with the lowest lethal drug dose, followed by nanoDTXL-μMESH, PTXL-μMESH, and nanoPTXL-μMESH. In orthotopic models of glioblastoma, μMESH was peritumorally deposited at 15 days post-cell inoculation and tumor proliferation was monitored via bioluminescence imaging. The overall animal survival increased from ∼30 days of the untreated controls to 75 days for nanoPTXL-μMESH and 90 days for PTXL-μMESH. For the DTXL groups, the overall survival could not be defined as 80% and 60% of the animals treated with DTXL-μMESH and nanoDTXL-μMESH were still alive at 90 days, respectively. These results suggest that the sustained delivery of potent drugs properly encapsulated in conformable polymeric implants could halt the proliferation of aggressive brain tumors.

Association of Tumor Treating Fields (TTFields) therapy with survival in newly diagnosed glioblastoma: a systematic review and meta-analysis

PURPOSE

Tumor Treating Fields (TTFields) therapy, an electric field-based cancer treatment, became FDA-approved for patients with newly diagnosed glioblastoma (GBM) in 2015 based on the randomized controlled EF-14 study. Subsequent approvals worldwide and increased adoption over time have raised the question of whether a consistent survival benefit has been observed in the real-world setting, and whether device usage has played a role.

METHODS

We conducted a literature search to identify clinical studies evaluating overall survival (OS) in TTFields-treated patients. Comparative and single-cohort studies were analyzed. Survival curves were pooled using a distribution-free random-effects method.

RESULTS

Among nine studies, seven (N = 1430 patients) compared the addition of TTFields therapy to standard of care (SOC) chemoradiotherapy versus SOC alone and were included in a pooled analysis for OS. Meta-analysis of comparative studies indicated a significant improvement in OS for patients receiving TTFields and SOC versus SOC alone (HR: 0.63; 95% CI 0.53-0.75; p < 0.001). Among real-world post-approval studies, the pooled median OS was 22.6 months (95% CI 17.6-41.2) for TTFields-treated patients, and 17.4 months (95% CI 14.4-21.6) for those not receiving TTFields. Rates of gross total resection were generally higher in the real-world setting, irrespective of TTFields use. Furthermore, for patients included in studies reporting data on device usage (N = 1015), an average usage rate of ≥ 75% was consistently associated with prolonged survival (p < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Meta-analysis of comparative TTFields studies suggests survival may be improved with the addition of TTFields to SOC for patients with newly diagnosed GBM.

Multi-Institutional Patterns of Use of Tumor-Treating Fields for Patients with Malignant Pleural Mesothelioma

(1) Background: The objective of this analysis was to evaluate the device usage rates and patterns of use regarding Tumor-Treating Fields (TTFields) for patients with malignant pleural mesothelioma (MPM) throughout the US. (2) Methods: We evaluated de-identified data from 33 patients with MPM enrolled in FDA-required HDE protocols at 14 institutions across the US from September 2019 to March 2022. (3) Results: The median number of total TTFields usage days was 72 (range: 6-649 days), and the total treatment duration was 160 months for all patients. A low usage rate (defined as less than 6 h per day, 25%) was observed in 34 (21.2%) months. The median TTFields usage in the first 3 months was 12 h per day (range: 1.9-21.6 h), representing 50% (range: 8-90%) of the potential daily duration. The median TTFields usage after 3 months decreased to 9.1 h per day (range: 3.1-17 h), representing 38% (range: 13-71%) of the daily duration, and was lower than usage in the first 3 months (p = 0.01). (4) Conclusions: This study represents the first multicenter analysis of real-world TTFields usage based on usage patterns for MPM patients in clinical practice. The real-world usage level was lower than the suggested daily usage. Further initiatives and guidelines should be developed to evaluate the impact of this finding on tumor control.

Characteristics and management of tumor treating fields-related dermatological complications in patients with glioblastoma

Tumor treating fields (TTFields) is a novel approved modality for the treatment of glioblastoma (GBM) exhibiting a satisfactory effect. Although TTFields has shown considerable safety for the normal brain, dermatological adverse events (DAEs) often occur during therapy. However, studies focused on the identification and management of DAEs are rare. The clinical data and photos of skin lesions from 9 patients with GBM were retrospectively analyzed, and the types and grades of individual scalp dermatitis were evaluated based on the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events version 5.0 (CTCAE v 5.0). Adherence and safety were also evaluated on the basis of the device monitoring data. Eight patients (88.9%) exhibited grade 1 or grade 2 CTCAE DAEs, all of whom were cured after interventions. The adherence was >90%, with no relevant safety events reported. Finally, a guideline for preventing DAEs in patients with GBM was proposed. The identification and management of TTFields-related DAEs is necessary and urgent in patients with GBM. Timely interventions of DAEs will help to improve the adherence and quality of life of patients, which ultimately improves prognosis. The proposed guideline for preventing DAEs in patients with GBM assists in the management of healthcare providers and may avoid dermatologic complications.

Therapeutic potential of tumor treating fields for malignant brain tumors

BACKGROUND

Malignant brain tumors are among the most threatening diseases of the central nervous system, and despite increasingly updated treatments, the prognosis has not been improved. Tumor treating fields (TTFields) are an emerging approach in cancer treatment using intermediate-frequency and low-intensity electric field and can lead to the development of novel therapeutic options.

RECENT FINDINGS

A series of biological processes induced by TTFields to exert anti-cancer effects have been identified. Recent studies have shown that TTFields can alter the bioelectrical state of macromolecules and organelles involved in cancer biology. Massive alterations in cancer cell proteomics and transcriptomics caused by TTFields were related to cell biological processes as well as multiple organelle structures and activities. This review addresses the mechanisms of TTFields and recent advances in the application of TTFields therapy in malignant brain tumors, especially in glioblastoma (GBM).

CONCLUSIONS

As a novel therapeutic strategy, TTFields have shown promising results in many clinical trials, especially in GBM, and continue to evolve. A growing number of patients with malignant brain tumors are being enrolled in ongoing clinical studies demonstrating that TTFields-based combination therapies can improve treatment outcomes.

Meta-Analysis of Modulated Electro-Hyperthermia and Tumor Treating Fields in the Treatment of Glioblastomas

BACKGROUND

Glioblastoma is one of the most difficult to treat and most aggressive brain tumors, having a poor survival rate. The use of non-invasive modulated electro-hyperthermia (mEHT) and Tumor Treating Fields (TTF) devices has been introduced in the last few decades, both of which having proven anti-tumor effects.

METHODS

A meta-analysis of randomized and observational studies about mEHT and TTF was conducted.

RESULTS

A total of seven and fourteen studies about mEHT and TTF were included, with a total number of 450 and 1309 cases, respectively. A 42% [95% confidence interval (95% CI): 25-59%] 1-year survival rate was found for mEHT, which was raised to 61% (95% CI: 32-89%) if only the studies conducted after 2008 were investigated. In the case of TTF, 1-year survival was 67% (95% CI: 53-81%). Subgroup analyses revealed that newly diagnosed patients might get extra benefits from the early introduction of the devices (mEHT all studies: 73% vs. 37%, p = 0.0021; mEHT studies after 2008: 73% vs. 54%, p = 0.4214; TTF studies: 83% vs. 52%, p = 0.0083), compared with recurrent glioblastoma.

CONCLUSIONS

Our meta-analysis showed that both mEHT and TTF can improve glioblastoma survival, and the most benefit may be achieved in newly diagnosed cases.

Eighteen years' experience with tumor treating fields in the treatment of newly diagnosed glioblastoma

Introduction

The prognosis of glioblastoma remains unfavorable. TTFields utilize low intensity electric fields (frequency 150-300 kHz) that disrupt cellular processes critical for cancer cell viability and tumor progression. TTFields are delivered via transducer arrays placed on the patients' scalp. Methods: Between the years 2004 and 2022, 55 patients (20 female), aged 21.9-77.8 years (mean age 47.3±11.8 years; median 47.6 years) were treated with TTFields for newly-diagnosed GBM, and compared to 54 control patients (20 females), aged 27.0-76.7 years (mean age 51.4±12.2 years; median 51.7 years) (p=0.08). All patients underwent gross total or partial resection of GBM. One patient had biopsy only. When available, MGMT promoter methylation status and IDH mutation was detected.

Results

Patients on TTFields therapy demonstrated improvements in PFS and OS relative to controls (hazard ratio: 0.64, p=0.031; and 0.61, p=0.028 respectively). TTFields average time on therapy was 74.8% (median 82%): median PFS of these patients was 19.75 months. Seven patients with TTFields usage ≤60% (23-60%, mean 46.3%, median 53%) had a median PFS of 7.95 months (p=0.0356). Control patients with no TTFields exposure had a median PFS of 12.45 months. Median OS of TTF patients was 31.67 months compared to 24.80 months for controls.

Discussion

This is the most extensive study on newly-diagnosed GBM patients treated with TTFields, covering a period of 18 years at a single center and presenting not only data from clinical trials but also a group of 36 patients treated with TTFields as a part of routine clinical practice.

Safety and efficacy of tumour-treating fields (TTFields) therapy for newly diagnosed glioblastoma in Japanese patients using the Novo-TTF System: a prospective post-approval study

BACKGROUND

Tumour-treating fields therapy is a locoregional, anti-cancer treatment. Efficacy and safety of tumour-treating fields therapy in adults with newly diagnosed glioblastoma were demonstrated in the pivotal phase 3 EF-14 study (NCT00916409). Here, we report post-approval data of tumour-treating fields therapy in Japanese patients with newly diagnosed glioblastoma.

METHODS

Unsolicited post-marketing surveillance data from Japanese patients with newly diagnosed glioblastoma treated with tumour-treating fields therapy (December 2016-June 2020) were retrospectively analysed. The primary endpoints were skin, neurological and psychiatric adverse events. The secondary endpoints were 1- and 2-year overall survival rates, and the 6-month progression-free survival. adverse events were analysed using MedDRA v24.0. The overall survival and progression-free survival were assessed using the Kaplan-Meier survival analysis (log-rank testing). The Cox proportional hazard regression analyses were also performed.

RESULTS

Forty patients with newly diagnosed glioblastoma were enrolled (62.5% male; median age 59 years; median baseline Karnofsky Performance Scale score 90). The most common tumour-treating-fields-therapy-related adverse event was beneath-array local skin reaction (60% of patients). The adverse events were mostly mild to moderate in severity. Neurological disorders were observed in 2.5% patients (one patient reported dysesthesia). No psychiatric disorders were reported. The 1- and 2-year overall survival rates were 77.9% (95% CI 60.6-88.3) and 53.6% (35.5-68.7%), respectively. The 6-month progression-free survival was 77.5% (61.2-87.6%). These survival rates compare favourably with those in the EF-14 trial (1- and 2-year overall survival rates: 73% [69-77%] and 43% [39-48%], respectively; 6-month progression-free survival rate: 56% (51-61%).

CONCLUSION

This post-approval, real-world evidence study revealed no new safety signals and suggests the safety and efficacy of tumour-treating fields therapy in Japanese patients with newly diagnosed glioblastoma.

Effectiveness and safety of tumor-treating fields therapy for glioblastoma: A single-center study in a Chinese cohort

Objective

Tumor-treating fields (TTFields) are a new therapeutic modality for patients with glioblastoma (GBM). However, studies on survival outcomes of TTFields are rarely reported in China. This study aimed to examine the clinical efficacy and safety of TTFields therapy for GBM in China.

Methods

A total of 93 patients with newly diagnosed GBM (ndGBM) and recurrent GBM (rGBM) were included in our study retrospectively. They were divided into two groups based on whether they used TTFields. Progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), and toxicities were assessed.

Results

Among the patients with ndGBM, there were 13 cases with TTFields and 39 cases with no TTFields. The median PFS was 15.3 [95% confidence interval (CI): 6.5-24.1] months and 10.6 (95% CI: 5.4-15.8) months in the two groups, respectively, with P = 0.041. The median OS was 24.8 (95% CI: 6.8-42.8) months and 18.6 (95% CI: 11.4-25.8) months, respectively, with P = 0.368. Patients with subtotal resection (STR) who used TTFields had a better PFS than those who did not (P = 0.003). Among the patients with rGBM, there were 13 cases with TTFields and 28 cases with no TTFields. The median PFS in the two groups was 8.4 (95% CI: 1.7-15.2) months and 8.0 (95% CI: 5.8-10.2) months in the two groups, respectively, with P = 0.265. The median OS was 10.6 (95% CI: 4.8-16.4) months and 13.3 (95% CI: 11.0-15.6) months, respectively, with P = 0.655. A total of 21 patients (21/26, 80.8%) with TTFields developed dermatological adverse events (dAEs). All the dAEs could be resolved or controlled.

Conclusion

TTFields therapy is a safe and effective treatment for ndGBM, especially in patients with STR. However, it may not improve survival in patients with rGBM.

Tumour treating fields in glioblastoma: is the treatment tolerable, effective, and practical in UK patients?

BACKGROUND

Tumour Treating Fields (TTF) in combination with standard therapy, prolongs survival in patients with glioblastoma (GBM). The aim of the current study was to assess the feasibility of integrating TTF into a standard UK neuro-oncology service with a focus on patient tolerability, compliance, and treatment delivery.

METHODS

A prospective study was performed of UK patients with IDH 1 Wild Type, MGMT Unmethylated GBM treated with TTF, in conjunction with conventional therapy. Patient compliance data, device-specific tolerability questions, and an evaluation of disease progression and survival were collected. Monthly quality of life (QoL) questionnaires (EORTC QLQ-C30 with BN-20) examined the trend of global health, psychosocial function, and symptom progression.

RESULTS

Nine patients were enrolled with a median age of 47 (seven males; two females). Overall, compliance with TTF was 89% (range 16-97%). Only one patient failed to comply with treatment. Patients tolerated the device with minimal side effects. Eight patients described mild to moderate skin irritation, whilst all patients were keen to recommend the device to other patients (100%). Most patients found the weight and size of the device to be its biggest drawback (72%). Progression-free survival was 5.5 months and median overall survival was 14.9 months.

CONCLUSIONS

TTF was well-tolerated amongst a small cohort of UK patients, who were able to comply with treatment without any significant complication. QoL questionnaires showed no sustained deterioration in global health, physical and emotional function until the final months of life when the disease burden was greatest.

Prodigiosin inhibits the proliferation of glioblastoma by regulating the KIAA1524/PP2A signaling pathway

Prodigiosin (PG), a member of a family of natural red pigments produced by a variety of bacteria, was first discovered in Serratia marcescens. PG has been reported to have an apoptosis-inducing effect in many cancers, such as lymphoma, colon cancer and nasopharyngeal carcinoma. For this study, we used three glioblastoma (GBM) cell lines (LN229, U251 and A172) to explore the effect of prodigiosin on GBM cells. A CCK8 assay was used to evaluate cell viability. We determinedthe cell cycle distribution by flow cytometry and measured proliferation by an EdU incorporation assay. The expression of different molecules was investigated by western blotting and RT-PCR. We further confirmed our results by plasmid transfection and lentiviral transduction. The LN229 xenograft model was used to study the effect of prodigiosin in vivo. We confirmed that prodigiosin played an anticancer role in several GBM cell lines through the KIAA1524/PP2A/Akt signalling pathway. Prodigiosin inhibited the protein expression of KIAA1524 by suppressing its transcription, which led to activation of PP2A. Afterward, PP2A inhibited the phosphorylation of Akt, thereby inducing increased expression of p53/p21. Furthermore, it was verified that prodigiosin inhibited the KIAA1524/PP2A/Akt axis in vivo in the LN229 xenograft model. These data improve the understanding of the anticancer effects of prodigiosin and further highlight the potential of prodigiosin for the development of anti-glioma drugs.

Concurrent chemoradiation and Tumor Treating Fields (TTFields, 200 kHz) for patients with newly diagnosed glioblastoma: patterns of progression in a single institution pilot study

Current standard of care for glioblastoma (GBM) includes concurrent chemoradiation and maintenance temozolomide (TMZ) with Tumor Treating Fields (TTFields). Preclinical studies suggest TTFields and radiation treatment have synergistic effects. We conducted a pilot clinical trial of concurrent chemoradiation with TTFields and report pattern of progression.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This is a single arm pilot study (clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT03477110). Adult patients (age ≥ 18 years) with KPS ≥ 60 with newly diagnosed GBM were eligible. All patients received concurrent scalp-sparing radiation (60 Gy in 30 fractions), standard concurrent TMZ and TTFields. Maintenance therapy included standard TMZ and continuation of TTFields. Radiation treatment was delivered through TTFields arrays. Incidence and location of progression was documented. Distant recurrence was defined as recurrence more than 2 cm from the primary enhancing lesion.

RESULTS

Thirty patients were enrolled on the trial. Twenty were male with median age 58 years (19-77 years). Median KPS was 90 (70-100). Median follow-up was 15.2 months (1.7-23.6 months). Ten (33.3%) patients had a methylated promoter status. Twenty-seven patients (90%) had progression, with median PFS of 9.3 months (range 8.5 to 11.6 months). Six patients presented with distant recurrence, with median distance from primary lesion of 5.05 cm (2.26-6.95 cm). One infratentorial progression was noted.

CONCLUSIONS

We observed improved local control using concurrent chemoradiation with TTFields for patients with newly diagnosed when compared to historical controls. Further data are needed to validate this finding.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Clinicaltrials.gov Identifier NCT03477110.

Glioblastoma-Derived Three-Dimensional Ex Vivo Models to Evaluate Effects and Efficacy of Tumor Treating Fields (TTFields)

Glioblastoma (GBM) displays a wide range of inter- and intra-tumoral heterogeneity contributing to therapeutic resistance and relapse. Although Tumor Treating Fields (TTFields) are effective for the treatment of GBM, there is a lack of ex vivo models to evaluate effects on patients' tumor biology or to screen patients for treatment efficacy. Thus, we adapted patient-derived three-dimensional tissue culture models to be compatible with TTFields application to tissue culture. Patient-derived primary cells (PDPC) were seeded onto murine organotypic hippocampal slice cultures (OHSC), and microtumor development with and without TTFields at 200 kHz was observed. In addition, organoids were generated from acute material cultured on OHSC and treated with TTFields. Lastly, the effect of TTFields on expression of the Ki67 proliferation marker was evaluated on cultured GBM slices. Microtumors exhibited increased sensitivity towards TTFields compared to monolayer cell cultures. TTFields affected tumor growth and viability, as the size of microtumors and the percentage of Ki67-positive cells decreased after treatment. Nevertheless, variability in the extent of the response was preserved between different patient samples. Therefore, these pre-clinical GBM models could provide snapshots of the tumor to simulate patient treatment response and to investigate molecular mechanisms of response and resistance.

The Mechanisms of Action of Tumor Treating Fields

Tumor treating fields (TTFields), a new modality of cancer treatment, are electric fields transmitted transdermally to tumors. The FDA has approved TTFields for the treatment of glioblastoma multiforme and mesothelioma, and they are currently under study in many other cancer types. While antimitotic effects were the first recognized biological anticancer activity of TTFields, data have shown that tumor treating fields achieve their anticancer effects through multiple mechanisms of action. TTFields therefore have the ability to be useful for many cancer types in combination with many different treatment modalities. Here, we review the current understanding of TTFields and their mechanisms of action.

Tumor Treating Fields (TTFields) therapy vs physicians' choice standard-of-care treatment in patients with recurrent glioblastoma: a post-approval registry study (EF-19)

PURPOSE

Tumor Treating Fields (TTFields) therapy, a noninvasive, anti-mitotic treatment modality, is approved for recurrent glioblastoma (rGBM) and newly diagnosed GBM based on phase III, EF-11 (NCT00379470) and EF-14 (NCT00916409) studies, respectively. The EF-19 study aimed to evaluate efficacy and safety of TTFields monotherapy (200 kHz) vs physicians' choice standard of care (PC-SOC; EF-11 historical control group) in rGBM.

METHODS

A prospective, post-marketing registry study of adults with supratentorial rGBM treated with TTFields therapy was conducted. Primary endpoint was overall survival (OS; intent-to-treat [ITT] population) and secondary endpoint was OS per-protocol (PP). Subgroup and toxicity analyses were conducted.

RESULTS

Median OS (ITT population) was comparable with TTFields monotherapy vs PC-SOC (7.4 vs 6.4 months, log-rank test P = 0.053; Cox test hazard ratio [HR] [95% CI], 0.66 [0.47-0.92], P = 0.016). The upper-bound HR (95% CI) was lower than pre-defined noninferiority (1.375 threshold). In the PP population, median OS was significantly longer for TTFields monotherapy vs PC-SOC (8.1 vs 6.4 months; log-rank test P = 0.017; Cox test HR [95% CI], 0.60 [0.42-0.85], P = 0.004). TTFields therapy showed increased benefit with extended use (≥ 18 h/day [averaged over 28 days]). TTFields therapy-related adverse events (AEs) by body system were lower vs PC-SOC: mainly mild-to-moderate skin AEs.

CONCLUSION

In the real-world setting, TTFields monotherapy showed comparable (ITT population) and superior (PP population) OS vs PC-SOC in rGBM. In line with previous results, TTFields therapy showed a favorable safety profile vs chemotherapy, without new safety signals/systemic effects.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

NCT01756729, registered December 20, 2012.

Updates in IDH-Wildtype Glioblastoma

Glioblastoma is the most aggressive primary brain tumor with a poor prognosis. The 2021 WHO CNS5 classification has further stressed the importance of molecular signatures in diagnosis although therapeutic breakthroughs are still lacking. In this review article, updates on the current and novel therapies in IDH-wildtype GBM will be discussed.

Collagen Matrices Mediate Glioma Cell Migration Induced by an Electrical Signal

Glioma cells produce an increased amount of collagen compared with normal astrocytes. The increasing amount of collagen in the extracellular matrix (ECM) modulates the matrix structure and the mechanical properties of the microenvironment, thereby regulating tumor cell invasion. Although the regulation of tumor cell invasion mainly relies on cell–ECM interaction, the electrotaxis of tumor cells has attracted great research interest. The growth of glioma cells in a three-dimensional (3D) collagen hydrogel creates a relevant tumor physiological condition for the study of tumor cell invasion. In this study, we tested the migration of human glioma cells, fetal astrocytes, and adult astrocytes in a 3D collagen matrix with different collagen concentrations. We report that all three types of cells demonstrated higher motility in a low concentration of collagen hydrogel (3 mg/mL and 5 mg/mL) than in a high concentration of collagen hydrogel (10 mg/mL). We further show that human glioma cells grown in collagen hydrogels responded to direct current electric field (dcEF) stimulation and migrated to the anodal pole. The tumor cells altered their morphology in the gels to adapt to the anodal migration. The directedness of anodal migration shows a field strength-dependent response. EF stimulation increased the migration speed of tumor cells. This study implicates the potential role of an dcEF in glioma invasion and as a target of treatment.

Anti-cancer mechanisms of action of therapeutic alternating electric fields (tumor treating fields [TTFields])

Despite improved survival outcomes across many cancer types, the prognosis remains grim for certain solid organ cancers including glioblastoma and pancreatic cancer. Invariably in these cancers, the control achieved by time-limited interventions such as traditional surgical resection, radiation therapy, and chemotherapy is short-lived. A new form of anti-cancer therapy called therapeutic alternating electric fields (AEFs) or tumor treating fields (TTFields) has been shown, either by itself or in combination with chemotherapy, to have anti-cancer effects that translate to improved survival outcomes in patients. Although the pre-clinical and clinical data are promising, the mechanisms of TTFields are not fully elucidated. Many investigations are underway to better understand how and why TTFields is able to selectively kill cancer cells and impede their proliferation. The purpose of this review is to summarize and discuss the reported mechanisms of action of TTFields from pre-clinical studies (both in vitro and in vivo). An improved understanding of how TTFields works will guide strategies focused on the timing and combination of TTFields with other therapies, to further improve survival outcomes in patients with solid organ cancers.

Safety tumor treating fields (TTFields) therapy in pediatric patients with malignant brain tumors: Post-marketing surveillance data

There is an unmet need to develop effective and tolerable treatments for pediatric patients with malignant central nervous system tumors. This is especially essential for pediatric patients with aggressive brain tumors such as high-grade gliomas, which have a typical survival rate of under 2 years. Tumor Treating Fields (TTFields) are locoregional, noninvasive electric fields that produce an antimitotic effect on cancerous cells when applied to the skin via arrays. TTFields therapy (200 kHz) is currently approved in adult patients with newly diagnosed glioblastoma (GBM), with temozolomide, and recurrent GBM as monotherapy. Positive preclinical and clinical data have encouraged off-label use of TTFields therapy in pediatric patients with brain tumors, and this study aims to explore the safety of TTFields therapy in pediatric patients (0–18 years of age) based on data from an unsolicited post-marketing surveillance safety database. The real-world data reported here demonstrate that TTFields therapy has a favorable safety profile for pediatric patients with brain tumors, with no new safety signals observed. Findings from this study warrant further research into the efficacy of TTFields therapy, as well as its potential impact on the quality of life in pediatric patients.

Tumor-Treating Fields in Glioblastomas: Past, Present, and Future

Simple Summary

Glioblastoma (GBM) is the most common malignant primary brain tumor. Although the standard of care, including maximal resection, concurrent radiotherapy with temozolomide (TMZ), and adjuvant TMZ, has largely improved the prognosis of these patients, the 5-year survival rate is still < 10%. Tumor-treating fields (TTFields), a noninvasive anticancer therapeutic modality, has been rising as a fourth treatment option for GBMs, as confirmed by recent milestone large-scale phase 3 randomized trials and subsequent real-world data, elongating patient overall survival from 16 months to 21 months. However, the mechanisms of antitumor efficacy, its clinical safety, and potential benefits when combined with other treatment modalities are far from completely elucidated. As an increasing number of studies have recently been published on this topic, we conducted this updated, comprehensive review to establish an objective understanding of the mechanism of action, efficacy, safety, clinical concerns, and future perspectives of TTFields.

Abstract

Tumor-treating fields (TTFields), a noninvasive and innovative therapeutic approach, has emerged as the fourth most effective treatment option for the management of glioblastomas (GBMs), the most deadly primary brain cancer. According to on recent milestone randomized trials and subsequent observational data, TTFields therapy leads to substantially prolonged patient survival and acceptable adverse events. Clinical trials are ongoing to further evaluate the safety and efficacy of TTFields in treating GBMs and its biological and radiological correlations. TTFields is administered by delivering low-intensity, intermediate-frequency, alternating electric fields to human GBM function through different mechanisms of action, including by disturbing cell mitosis, delaying DNA repair, enhancing autophagy, inhibiting cell metabolism and angiogenesis, and limiting cancer cell migration. The abilities of TTFields to strengthen intratumoral antitumor immunity, increase the permeability of the cell membrane and the blood–brain barrier, and disrupt DNA-damage-repair processes make it a promising therapy when combined with conventional treatment modalities. However, the overall acceptance of TTFields in real-world clinical practice is still low. Given that increasing studies on this promising topic have been published recently, we conducted this updated review on the past, present, and future of TTFields in GBMs.

Temperature and Impedance Variations During Tumor Treating Fields (TTFields) Treatment

Tumor Treating Fields (TTFields) is an FDA-approved cancer treatment technique used for glioblastoma multiforme (GBM). It consists in the application of alternating (100–500 kHz) and low-intensity (1–3 V/cm) electric fields (EFs) to interfere with the mitotic process of tumoral cells. In patients, these fields are applied via transducer arrays strategically positioned on the scalp using the NovoTAL™ system. It is recommended that the patient stays under the application of these fields for as long as possible. Inevitably, the temperature of the scalp increases because of the Joule effect, and it will remain above basal values for most part of the day. Furthermore, it is also known that the impedance of the head changes throughout treatment and that it might also play a role in the temperature variations. The goals of this work were to investigate how to realistically account for these increases and to quantify their impact in the choice of optimal arrays positions using a realistic head model with arrays positions obtained through NovoTAL™. We also studied the impedance variations based on the log files of patients who participated in the EF-14 clinical trial. Our computational results indicated that the layouts in which the arrays were very close to each other led to the appearance of a temperature hotspot that limited how much current could be injected which could consequently reduce treatment efficacy. Based on these data, we suggest that the arrays should be placed at least 1 cm apart from each other. The analysis of the impedance showed that the variations seen during treatment could be explained by three main factors: slow and long-term variations, array placement, and circadian rhythm. Our work indicates that both the temperature and impedance variations should be accounted for to improve the accuracy of computational results when investigating TTFields.

Synergetic Effect of Tumor Treating Fields and Zinc Oxide Nanoparticles on Cell Apoptosis and Genotoxicity of Three Different Human Cancer Cell Lines

Cancer remains a leading cause of death worldwide, despite extraordinary progress. So, new cancer treatment modalities are needed. Tumor-treating fields (TTFs) use low-intensity, intermediate-frequency alternating electric fields with reported cancer anti-mitotic properties. Moreover, nanomedicine is a promising therapy option for cancer. Numerous cancer types have been treated with nanoparticles, but zinc oxide nanoparticles (ZnO NPs) exhibit biocompatibility. Here, we investigate the activity of TTFs, a sub-lethal dose of ZnO NPs, and their combination on hepatocellular carcinoma (HepG2), the colorectal cancer cell line (HT-29), and breast cancer cell lines (MCF-7). The lethal effect of different ZnO NPs concentrations was assessed by sulforhodamine B sodium salt assay (SRB). The cell death percent was determined by flow cytometer, the genotoxicity was evaluated by comet assay, and the total antioxidant capacity was chemically measured. Our results show that TTFs alone cause cell death of 14, 8, and 17% of HepG2, HT-29, and MCF-7, respectively; 10 µg/mL ZnO NPs was the sub-lethal dose according to SRB results. The combination between TTFs and sub-lethal ZnO NPs increased the cell death to 29, 20, and 33% for HepG2, HT-29, and MCF-7, respectively, without reactive oxygen species increase. Increasing NPs potency using TTFs can be a novel technique in many biomedical applications.

The Routine Application of Tumor-Treating Fields in the Treatment of Glioblastoma WHO° IV

Introduction:

Tumor-treating fields (TTFs) are a specific local oncological treatment modality in glioblastoma multiforme WHO° IV (GBM). Their mechanism of action is based on the effect of electrical fields interfering with the mitotic activity of malignant cells. Prospective studies have demonstrated efficacy, but TTF benefits are still controversially discussed. This treatment was implemented in our center as the standard of care in January 2016. We thus discuss the current state of the art and our long-term experience in the routine application of TTF.

Methods

The data of 48 patients suffering from GBM and treated with TTF were assessed and compared with previously published studies. Up-to-date information from open sources was evaluated.

Results

A total of 31 males and 17 females harboring a GBM were treated with TTF, between January 2016 and August 2021, in our center. In 98% of cases, TTFs were started within 6 weeks after concomitant radiochemotherapy (Stupp protocol). Mean overall survival was 22.6 months (95% CI: 17.3–27.9). Current indications, benefits, and restrictions were evaluated. Future TTF opportunities and ongoing studies were reviewed.

Conclusion

TTFs are a feasible and routinely applicable specific oncological treatment option for glioblastoma multiforme WHO° IV. Further research is ongoing to extend the indications and the efficacy of TTF.

Guidelines for Burr Hole Surgery in Combination With Tumor Treating Fields for Glioblastoma: A Computational Study on Dose Optimization and Array Layout Planning

Tumor treating fields (TTFields) is an anti-cancer technology increasingly used for the treatment of glioblastoma. Recently, cranial burr holes have been used experimentally to enhance the intensity (dose) of TTFields in the underlying tumor region. In the present study, we used computational finite element methods to systematically characterize the impact of the burr hole position and the TTFields transducer array layout on the TTFields distribution calculated in a realistic human head model. We investigated a multitude of burr hole positions and layouts to illustrate the basic principles of optimal treatment planning. The goal of the paper was to provide simple rules of thumb for physicians to use when planning the TTFields in combination with skull remodeling surgery. Our study suggests a number of key findings, namely that (1) burr holes should be placed directly above the region of interest, (2) field enhancement occurs mainly underneath the holes, (3) the ipsilateral array should directly overlap the holes and the contralateral array should be placed directly opposite, (4) arrays in a pair should be placed at far distance and not close to each other to avoid current shunting, and finally (5) rotation arrays around their central normal axis can be done without diminishing the enhancing effect of the burr holes. Minor deviations and adjustments (<3 cm) of arrays reduces the enhancement to some extent although the procedure is still effective in these settings. In conclusion, our study provides simple guiding principles for implementation of dose-enhanced TTFields in combination with burr-holes. Future studies are required to validate our findings in additional models at the patient specific level.

Tumor Treating Fields (TTFields) Concomitant with Sorafenib Inhibit Hepatocellular Carcinoma In Vitro and In Vivo

Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), a highly aggressive liver cancer, is a leading cause of cancer-related death. Tumor Treating Fields (TTFields) are electric fields that exert antimitotic effects on cancerous cells. The aims of the current research were to test the efficacy of TTFields in HCC, explore the underlying mechanisms, and investigate the possible combination of TTFields with sorafenib, one of the few front-line treatments for patients with advanced HCC. HepG2 and Huh-7D12 human HCC cell lines were treated with TTFields at various frequencies to determine the optimal frequency eliciting maximal cell count reduction. Clonogenic, apoptotic effects, and autophagy induction were measured. The efficacy of TTFields alone and with concomitant sorafenib was tested in cell cultures and in an orthotopic N1S1 rat model. Tumor volume was examined at the beginning and following 5 days of treatment. At study cessation, tumors were weighed and examined by immunohistochemistry to assess autophagy and apoptosis. TTFields were found in vitro to exert maximal effect at 150 kHz, reducing cell count and colony formation, increasing apoptosis and autophagy, and augmenting the effects of sorafenib. In animals, TTFields concomitant with sorafenib reduced tumor weight and volume fold change, and increased cases of stable disease following treatment versus TTFields or sorafenib alone. While each treatment alone elevated levels of autophagy relative to control, TTFields concomitant with sorafenib induced a significant increase versus control in tumor ER stress and apoptosis levels, demonstrating increased stress under the multimodal treatment. Overall, TTFields treatment demonstrated efficacy and enhanced the effects of sorafenib for the treatment of HCC in vitro and in vivo, via a mechanism involving induction of autophagy.

Predicting access to postoperative treatment after glioblastoma resection: an analysis of neighborhood-level disadvantage using the Area Deprivation Index (ADI)

PURPOSE

Social determinants of health (SDoH)-socioeconomic and environmental factors-impact outcomes. The Area Deprivation Index (ADI), a composite of seventeen SDoH factors, has been correlated with poorer outcomes. We aimed to compare outcomes and treatment access for glioblastoma, a universally fatal malignant brain tumor, in patients more (ADI 34-100%) versus less disadvantaged (ADI 0-33%).

METHODS

A 5-year retrospective study of Rhode Island Hospital and Mayo Clinic databases was conducted from 2012 to 2017 for patients ≥ 18 years with glioblastoma. Patient addresses were matched to ADI percentiles and grouped into more (top 66% ADI) and less disadvantaged. Adjusted multivariable regressions were used to compare outcomes between groups.

RESULTS

A total of 434 patients met inclusion; 92.9% were insured, 56.2% were more disadvantaged (n = 244), and the more disadvantaged cohort was younger on average (62 years). After adjustment, the more disadvantaged group had decreased odds of receiving gross total resection (adjusted odds ratio (aOR) 0.43, 95% CI [0.27-0.68]; p < 0.001). This cohort also had decreased odds of undergoing chemotherapy (aOR 0.51[0.26-0.98]), radiation (aOR 0.39[0.20-0.77]), chemoradiation (aOR 0.42[0.23-0.77]), tumor-treating fields (aOR 0.39[0.16-0.93]), and clinical trial participation (aOR 0.47[0.25-0.91]). No differences in length of survival or postoperative Karnofsky Performance Status Scale were observed.

CONCLUSION

More disadvantaged glioblastoma patients had decreased odds of receiving gross total resection. They also exhibited decreased odds of receiving standard of care like chemoradiation as well as participating in a clinical trial, compared to the less disadvantaged group. More research is needed to identify modifiable SDoH barriers to post-operative treatment in disadvantaged patients with glioblastoma.

A randomized feasibility study evaluating temozolomide circadian medicine in patients with glioma

Background

Gliomas are the most common primary brain tumor in adults. Current treatments involve surgery, radiation, and temozolomide (TMZ) chemotherapy; however, prognosis remains poor and new approaches are required. Circadian medicine aims to maximize treatment efficacy and/or minimize toxicity by timed delivery of medications in accordance with the daily rhythms of the patient. We published a retrospective study showing greater anti-tumor efficacy for the morning, relative to the evening, administration of TMZ in patients with glioblastoma. We conducted this prospective randomized trial to determine the feasibility, and potential clinical impact, of TMZ chronotherapy in patients with gliomas (NCT02781792).

Methods

Adult patients with gliomas (WHO grade II-IV) were enrolled prior to initiation of monthly TMZ therapy and were randomized to receive TMZ either in the morning (AM) before 10 am or in the evening (PM) after 8 pm. Pill diaries were recorded to measure compliance and FACT-Br quality of life (QoL) surveys were completed throughout treatment. Study compliance, adverse events (AE), and overall survival were compared between the two arms.

Results

A total of 35 evaluable patients, including 21 with GBM, were analyzed (18 AM patients and 17 PM patients). Compliance data demonstrated the feasibility of timed TMZ dosing. There were no significant differences in AEs, QoL, or survival between the arms.

Conclusions

Chronotherapy with TMZ is feasible. A larger study is needed to validate the effect of chronotherapy on clinical efficacy.

Scalp-Sparing Radiation With Concurrent Temozolomide and Tumor Treating Fields (SPARE) for Patients With Newly Diagnosed Glioblastoma

Introduction

Standard-of-care treatment for patients with newly diagnosed glioblastoma (GBM) after surgery or biopsy includes concurrent chemoradiation followed by maintenance temozolomide (TMZ) with tumor treating fields (TTFields). Preclinical studies suggest TTFields and radiotherapy work synergistically. We report the results of our trial evaluating the safety of TTFields used concurrently with chemoradiation.

Methods

This is a single-arm pilot study (clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT03477110). Adult patients (age ≥ 18 years) with newly diagnosed glioblastoma and a Karnofsky performance score (KPS) of ≥ 60 were eligible. All patients received concurrent scalp-sparing radiation (60 Gy in 30 fractions) with TMZ (75 mg/m² daily) and TTFields (200 kHz). Maintenance therapy included TMZ and continuation of TTFields. Scalp-sparing radiation treatment was used to reduce radiation dermatitis. Radiation treatment was delivered through the TTFields arrays. The primary endpoint was safety and toxicity of tri-modality treatment within 30 days of completion of chemoradiation treatment.

Results

There were 30 patients enrolled, including 20 (66.7%) men and 10 (33.3%) women, with a median age of 58 years (range 19 to 77 years). Median KPS was 90 (range 70 to 100). A total of 12 (40%) patients received a gross total resection and 18 (60%) patients had a subtotal resection. A total of 12 (40%) patients had multifocal disease at presentation. There were 20 (66.7%) patients who had unmethylated O(6)-methylguanine-DNA-methyltransferase (MGMT) promotor status and 10 (33.3%) patients who had methylated MGMT promoter status. Median follow-up was 15.2 months (range 1.7 to 23.6 months). Skin adverse events were noted in 83.3% of patients, however, these were limited to Grade 1 or 2 events, which resolved spontaneously or with topical medications. The primary end point was met; no TTFields discontinuation occurred during the evaluation period due to high grade scalp toxicity. A total of 27 (90%) patients had progression, with a median progression-free survival (PFS) of 9.3 months (95% confidence interval (CI): 8.5-11.6 months). The 1-year progression-free survival was 23% (95% CI: 12%-45%). The median overall survival (OS) was 15.8 months (95% CI: 12.5 months-infinity). The 1-year overall survival was 66% (95% CI: 51%-86%).

Conclusions

Concurrent TTFields with scalp-sparing chemoradiation is a feasible and well-tolerated treatment option with limited toxicity. A phase 3, randomized clinical trial (EF-32, clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT04471844) investigating the clinical benefit of concurrent TTFields with chemoradiation treatment is currently enrolling.

Clinical Trial Registration

Clinicaltrials.gov, identifier NCT03477110.

Feasibility of Tumor Treating Fields with Pemetrexed and Platinum-Based Chemotherapy for Unresectable Malignant Pleural Mesothelioma: Single-Center, Real-World Data

Simple Summary

Management of malignant pleural mesothelioma (MPM) is challenging as patients frequently present with unresectable disease and the response rates with systemic therapy alone remain low. Given the paucity of effective therapies for MPM, Tumor Treating Fields (TTFields) therapy was made available for use under an FDA-approved Humanitarian Device Exemption (HDE) protocol in 2019, but no real-world data beyond the initial trial have been published to date. We reviewed our retrospective series of five patients diagnosed with MPM and treated with TTFields with pemetrexed and platinum-based chemotherapy. This therapy resulted in a modest disease-stabilization rate with no significant device-related major toxicities. However, we observed universal low-grade skin toxicities related to the device which required medical management and self-discontinuation in 2/5 patients. We also observed lower device usage, compared to the STELLAR trial. Both of these represent opportunities for developing improved management guidelines and efforts to improve patient compliance.

Abstract

Purpose: The objectives of this study were to evaluate the implementation, device usage rates, clinical outcomes, and treatment-related toxicities associated with TTFields and pemetrexed plus platinum-based chemotherapy in patients with unresectable MPM, outside the initial trial results. Methods: Consecutive patients with unresectable MPM were enrolled onto an FDA-required HDE protocol from 2019 to 2021. All patients were treated with a protocol-defined regimen of continuous TTFields (150 kHz) and pemetrexed plus platinum-based chemotherapy. Results: Five patients with unresectable MPM were enrolled. The median number of 4-week TTFields cycles was 5 (range: 2–7 cycles). Median TTFields device usage in the first 3 months was 12.5 h per day (range: 5–16.8 h), representing 52% (21–70%) of the potential daily duration. The median follow-up was 5.4 months (range: 1.1–20.9 months). Treatment-related dermatitis was the only side effect associated with TTFields and was reported as grade 1–2 in all patients; no patient had grade 3+ device-related toxicities. Conclusions: This study represents the first results of real-world implementation of TTFields for MPM. In comparison to the initial clinical trial (STELLAR), compliance rates were lower, although skin-related toxicities appeared similar. Further initiatives and guidelines should be developed to manage treatment-related dermatitis and improve device usage.

First Report of Tumor Treating Fields (TTFields) Therapy for Glioblastoma in Comorbidity with Multiple Sclerosis

Tumor Treating Fields (TTFields) therapy is FDA approved and has the CE mark for treatment of newly diagnosed and recurrent glioblastoma. To our knowledge, to date TTFields therapy remains unstudied in glioblastoma patients with multiple sclerosis (MS) as a comorbidity. Here, we present a patient who was diagnosed with MS at the age of 34. Treatment included several corticoid pulse treatments and therapies with interferon beta-1a and sphingosine-1-phosphate receptor modulator fingolimod. At the age of 52 the patient was diagnosed with glioblastoma, after experiencing worsening headaches which could not be attributed to the MS condition. After subtotal resection and concomitant radiochemotherapy, the patient received temozolomide in combination with TTFields therapy. For two years, the tumor condition remained stable while the patient showed high adherence to TTFields therapy with low-grade skin reactions being the only therapy-related adverse events. After two years, the tumor recurred. The patient underwent re-resection and radiotherapy and restarted TTFields therapy together with chemotherapy and is currently still on this therapy regime. Although having not been studied systematically, the case presented here demonstrates that TTFields therapy may be considered for newly diagnosed and recurrent glioblastoma patients with previously diagnosed multiple sclerosis.

Efficacy and safety of tumor-treating fields in recurrent glioblastoma: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Tumor-treating fields (TTF) is a novel cancer treatment that uses alternating electric fields to interfere with tumor cell mitosis. It has been approved by the U.S. food and drug administration for the treatment of recurrent glioblastoma (rGBM). We designed this meta-analysis to evaluate the efficacy and safety of TTF in the treatment of rGBM.

METHODS

The study was based on the PRISMA guideline. Systematic retrieval was performed in PubMed, Cochrane Library, and Embase databases. The outcomes were overall survival (OS) hazard ratio (HR), 1-year survival rate, and cutaneous toxicity.

RESULTS

These studies included a total of 1048 rGBM patients who received TTF treatment. The overall survival time between the TTF group and the control group was HR 0.75 ([95%CI 0.63 to 0.89]; P = 0.001). Pooled 1-year overall survival rate and incidence of cutaneous toxicity were 0.47 and 0.48, respectively. Data were insufficient to evaluate the effect of MGMT methylation status and tumor recurrence times on heterogeneity.

CONCLUSIONS

TTF therapy is effective for recurrent glioblastoma. However, most relevant trials should assess rGBM patient baseline characteristics such as age, KPS, MGMT methylation status, and number of tumor recurrence,. In addition, the risk of rashes caused by long-term wearing of devices should also be considered.

Tumor Treating Fields Concomitant with Sorafenib in Advanced Hepatocellular Cancer: Results of the HEPANOVA Phase II Study

Advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is an aggressive disease associated with poor prognosis. Tumor Treating Fields (TTFields) therapy is a non-invasive, loco-regional treatment approved for glioblastoma and malignant pleural mesothelioma. HCC preclinical and abdominal simulation data, together with clinical results in other solid tumors, provide a rationale for investigating TTFields with sorafenib in this patient population. HEPANOVA was a phase II, single arm, historical control study in adults with advanced HCC (NCT03606590). Patients received TTFields (150 kHz) for ≥18 h/day concomitant with sorafenib (400 mg BID). Imaging assessments occurred every 12 weeks until disease progression. The primary endpoint was the overall response rate (ORR). Safety was also evaluated. Patients (n = 27 enrolled; n = 21 evaluable) had a poor prognosis; >50% were Child−Turcotte−Pugh class B and >20% had a baseline Eastern Clinical Oncology Group performance status (ECOG PS) of 2. The ORR was higher, but not statistically significant, for TTFields/sorafenib vs. historical controls: 9.5% vs. 4.5% (p = 0.24), respectively; all responses were partial. Among patients (n = 11) with ≥12 weeks of TTFields/sorafenib, ORR was 18%. Common adverse events (AEs) were diarrhea (n = 15/27, 56%) and asthenia (n = 11/27, 40%). Overall, 19/27 (70%) patients had TTFields-related skin AEs; none were serious. TTFields/sorafenib improved response rates vs. historical controls in patients with advanced HCC, with no new safety concerns or related systemic toxicity.

CD44-Mediated Poor Prognosis in Glioma Is Associated With M2-Polarization of Tumor-Associated Macrophages and Immunosuppression

Background

Glioma is the most common primary brain tumor with a poor prognosis. Key genes that are negatively related to prognosis may provide the therapy targets to cure glioma. To clarify the role of CD44 in glioma, we explored its function at bulk-transcriptome, spatial and single-cell transcriptome levels.

Methods

In total, expression profiles with survival data of whole-grade glioma from The Cancer Genome Atlas (TCGA) and the Chinese Glioma Genome Atlas (CGGA), RNA-seq data with anatomic information of glioblastoma (GBM) from the Ivy Glioblastoma Atlas Project, RNA-sequencing (RNA-seq) data from recurrent GBM receiving adjuvant anti-PD-1 immunotherapy accessed through GSE121810, and single-cell RNA-seq data of GBM under accession GSE103224 were enrolled in this study. CD44-specific findings were further analyzed by R language.

Results

CD44 is positively correlated with WHO grade of malignancy and is negatively related to prognosis in glioma. Meanwhile, CD44 predominantly expresses in GBM mesenchymal subtype, and gene ontology (GO) and Kyoto Encyclopedia of Genes and Genomes (KEGG) analyses reveal that CD44 positively coexpressed genes are closely related to glioma immunity. Moreover, CD44+ cells mainly distribute in perinecrotic region with high expression of immune factors. At single-cell resolution, only malignant tumor cells, tumor-associated macrophages (TAMs), and T cells express CD44 in GBM. CD44+ malignant tumor cells are in mesenchymal-1-like (MES1-like) cellular state, and CD44+ TAMs are in M2 phenotype. CD44+ T cells have high expression of both PD-1 and PD-L1. CD44 and its directly interacted inhibitory immunomodulators are upregulated in patients with nonresponder recurrent GBM treated with PD-1 blockade therapy.

Conclusion

Our work demonstrates that CD44, a new M2 TAM biomarker, is involved in immune suppressor and promote glioma progression in glioma microenvironment. These results expand our understanding of CD44-specific clinical and immune features in glioma.

Effect of duty cycles of tumor‑treating fields on glioblastoma cells and normal brain organoids

Tumor‑treating fields (TTFields) are emerging cancer therapies based on alternating low‑intensity electric fields that interfere with dividing cells and induce cancer cell apoptosis. However, to date, there is limited knowledge of their effects on normal cells, as well as the effects of different duty cycles on outcomes. The present study evaluated the effects of TTFields with different duty cycles on glioma spheroid cells and normal brain organoids. A customized TTFields system was developed to perform in vitro experiments with varying duty cycles. Three duty cycles were applied to three types of glioma spheroid cells and brain organoids. The efficacy and safety of the TTFields were evaluated by analyzing the cell cycle of glioma cells, and markers of neural stem cells (NSCs) and astrocytes in brain organoids. The application of the TTFields at the 75 and 100% duty cycle markedly inhibited the proliferation of the U87 and U373 compared with the control. FACS analysis revealed that the higher the duty cycle of the applied fields, the greater the increase in apoptosis detected. Exposure to a higher duty cycle resulted in a greater decrease in NSC markers and a greater increase in glial fibrillary acidic protein expression in normal brain organoids. These results suggest that TTFields at the 75 and 100% duty cycle induced cancer cell death, and that the neurotoxicity of the TTFields at 75% was less prominent than that at 100%. Although clinical studies with endpoints related to safety and efficacy need to be performed before this strategy may be adopted clinically, the findings of the present study provide meaningful evidence for the further advancement of TTFields in the treatment of various types of cancer.

Tumor treating fields therapy is feasible and safe in a 3-year-old patient with diffuse midline glioma H3K27M - a case report

Since high grade gliomas are aggressive brain tumors, intensive search for new treatment options is ongoing. For adult patients with newly diagnosed (ndGBM) and recurrent glioblastoma (rGBM), low intensity intermediate frequency alternating electric fields, known as tumor treating fields (TTFields) have been established as a new treatment modality. Tumor treating fields significantly increase survival rates in combination with adjuvant temozolomide (TMZ) in adult and GBM patients. Here, we report about feasibility and safety of treatment on a pediatric patient with diffuse midline glioma who is receiving TTFields therapy in combination with temozolomide.

The Impact of Tumor Treating Fields on Glioblastoma Progression Patterns

BACKGROUND

Tumor-treating fields (TTFields) is an antimitotic treatment modality that interferes with glioblastoma cell division and organelle assembly by delivering low-intensity alternating electric fields to the tumor. A previous analysis from the pivotal EF-14 trial demonstrated a clear correlation between TTFields dose-density at the tumor bed and survival in patients treated with TTFields. This study tests the hypothesis that the antimitotic effects of TTFields result in measurable changes in the location and patterns of progression of newly diagnosed glioblastoma (nGBM) patients.

METHODS

MRI images of 428 nGBM patients that participated in the pivotal EF-14 trial were reviewed and the rates at which distant progression occurred in the TTFields treatment and control arm were compared. Realistic head models of 252 TTFields treated patients were created and TTFields intensity distributions were calculated using a Finite Elements Method. TTFields dose was calculated within regions of the tumor bed and normal brain and its relationship with progression determined.

RESULTS

Distant progression was frequently observed in the TTFields-treated arm, and distant lesions in the TTFields-treated arm appeared at larger distances from the primary lesion than in the control arm. Distant progression correlated with improved clinical outcome in the TTFields patients, with no such correlation observed in the controls. Areas of normal brain that remained normal were exposed to higher TTFields doses compared to normal brain that subsequently exhibited neoplastic progression. Additionally, the average dose to areas of enhancing tumor that returned to normal was significantly higher than in the areas of normal brain that progressed to enhancing tumor.

CONCLUSIONS

There was a direct correlation between TTFields dose distribution and tumor response, confirming the therapeutic activity of TTFields and the rationale for optimizing array placement to maximize TTFields dose in areas at highest risk of progression, as well as array layout adaptation after progression.

Tumor-Treating Fields: A fourth modality in cancer treatment, new practice updates

Although major innovations in treatment are advancing, cancer persists as one of the leading causes of mortality. With the rising incidence of cancer and as we treat them, patients incur short term and long-term toxicities of current traditional therapies, including chemotherapy. This imposes a significant physical, emotional, and financial burden among patients, which affects their quality of life. Tumor-Treating Fields (TTFields) is a novel innovative new treatment modality that utilizes alternating electric fields at specific intermediate frequencies to diminish tumor growth by inhibiting mitosis and thus proliferation of malignant cells. The distinguishing feature of this new treatment modality is that it is noninvasive and tolerable. In fact, TTFields is currently FDA approved for the treatment of glioblastoma multiforme (GBM) as well as malignant pleural mesothelioma (MPM). Recently, TTFields have also been found to affect immunogenic cell death resulting in stronger anti-neoplastic effects. In this review, we discuss the mechanism of action of TTFields, the plethora of clinical trials being conducted in patients with GBM, pancreatic adenocarcinoma, ovarian cancer, non-small-cell-lung-cancer (NSCLC), brain metastasis from NSCLC, and MPM and toxicity profile.