A combined analysis of two prospective randomised studies exploring the impact of extended post-radiation temozolomide on survival outcomes in newly diagnosed glioblastoma

PURPOSE

The optimal duration of post-radiation temozolomide in newly diagnosed glioblastoma remains unclear, with no published phase III randomised trials. Standard-of-care stipulates 6 months. However, in routine care, it is often extended to 12 months, despite lacking robust supporting data.

METHODS

GEINO14-01 (Spain) and EX-TEM (Australia) studies enrolled glioblastoma patients without progression at the end of 6 months post-radiation temozolomide. Participants were randomised 1:1 to six additional months of temozolomide or observation. Primary endpoint was 6-month progression free survival from date of randomisation (6mPFS). Secondary endpoints included overall survival (OS) and toxicity. 204 patients were required to detect an improvement in 6mPFS from 50 to 60% (80% power). Neither study recruited sufficient patients. We performed a combined analysis of individual patient data.

RESULTS

205 patients were recruited: 159 in GEINO14-01 (2014-2018) and 46 in EX-TEM (2019-2022). Median follow-up was 20.0 and 14.5 months. Baseline characteristics were balanced. There was no significant improvement in 6mPFS (57.2% vs 64.0%, OR0.75, p = 0.4), nor across any subgroups, including MGMT methylated; PFS (HR0.92, p = 0.59, median 7.8 vs 9.7 months); or OS (HR1.03, p = 0.87, median 20.1 vs 19.4 months). During treatment extension, 64% experienced any grade adverse event, mainly fatigue and gastrointestinal (both 54%). Only a minority required treatment changes: 4.5% dose delay, 7.5% dose reduction, 1.5% temozolomide discontinuation.

CONCLUSION

For glioblastoma patients, extending post-radiation temozolomide from 6 to 12 months is well tolerated but does not improve 6mPFS. We could not identify any subset that benefitted from extended treatment. Six months should remain standard-of-care.

Single nucleotide polymorphisms in MDR1 gen correlates with outcome in advanced non-small-cell lung cancer patients treated with cisplatin plus vinorelbine

New therapeutic approaches are being developed based on the findings that several genetic abnormalities underlying NSCLC could influence chemosensitivity. In this study, we assessed whether the presence of polymorphisms in ERCC1, XPD, RRM1 and MDR1 genes can affect the efficacy and the tolerability of cisplatin and vinorelbine in NSCLC patients.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Eligible patients had histological confirmed stage IV or IIIB (with malignant pleural effusion) non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) previously untreated with chemotherapy; World Health Organization performance status (PS) 0-1. Patients received intravenous doses of vinorelbine 25 mg/m² on day 1 and 8 and cisplatin 75 mg/m² on day 1, every 21 days, for a maximum of eight cycles.

RESULTS

94 patients were included. Median age was 61 years; 84% were male; WHO performance status (PS) was 0 in 24%; and 88% of patients had stage IV disease. The median number of cycles was 6. Overall median survival was 10.92 months (95% CI 9.0-12.9). Overall median time to progression was 5.89 months (95% CI 5.2-6.6). Results of the multivariate analysis for time to progression showed that ECOG 0 (hazard ratio [HR] ECOG 1 vs. ECOG 0, 1.74; p=0.036), MDR13435CC (HR CT vs. CC, 2.01; p=0.017; HR TT vs. CC, 1.54; p=0.22), and decreasing age (HR of age, 0.97; p=0.016) were the most powerful prognostic factors significantly related to lower risk of progression. Whereas ECOG 0 was the only prognostic factor for survival (HR ECOG 1 vs. ECOG 0, 3.02; p=0.001). There was no significant association between any of the SNPs analysed and the occurrence of vinorelbine and cisplatin-related toxicity.

CONCLUSION

In our results, the most important prognostic factors associated with lower risk of progression were MDR1 3435 CC genotype, PS 0 and younger age.

Improvement in symptoms and quality of life (QoL) for patients (p) with non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) treated with erloninib: TargeT study

18140

Background: Erlotinib is an EGFR TKI that is effective in the treatment of advanced NSCLC, in terms of longer survival, better quality of life and delayed symptom progression.We present here the outcome of a group of p from the TargeT study, whose QoL was assessed by the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Lung (FACT-L) questionnaire and the Lung Cancer Subscale (LCS). Methods: TargeT study was a multicenter, single-arm phase II study evaluating efficacy, safety, and tolerability of erlotinib (150 m/day) in p with stage IIIB or IV NSCLC, in 1st, 2nd and 3rd line treatment. Primary end-point was time to progression. QoL was a secondary end point as assessed monthly by the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Lung questionnaire (FACT- L) and its Lung Cancer Subscale. Physical and functional aspects of the QoL were measured by the Trial Outcome Index (TOI), which is the sum of the physical well being, functional well-being and LCS scores from the FACT-L questionnaire. Results: Data from 91 pts were available. QoL analysis showed that 53% of the p (95% IC 37–58%) had improvement in FACT-L or TOI. Similarly, 45% (95% IC35–56%) of improved their symptoms from baseline. Improvement was observed for each individual LCS item and specifically in the pulmonary items. In symptomatic p, shortened of breath was 17,6% at baseline vs 2.2% after treatment (p<0.001) and cough was 24.7% vs 8.8 % (p<0.001) after treatment. Those improvements in symptoms were rapid and, 73% of the patients who improved showed that recovery in the first cycle of treatment. In terms of association between efficacy of erlotinib and QoL, there is a statistically significative relationship between objective response and improvement in TOI or FACT-L (p<0.02). Conclusions: This QoL analysis confirms that erlotinib improves both symptoms and functional aspect of patients with NSCLC. The improvement in QoL is related with objective response.

No significant financial relationships to disclose.