Net Clinical Benefit Analysis of Radiation Therapy Oncology Group 0525: A Phase III Trial Comparing Conventional Adjuvant Temozolomide With Dose-Intensive Temozolomide in Patients With Newly Diagnosed Glioblastoma

Minesh Mehta, University of Maryland, Baltimore, MD.
Journal of Clinical Oncology (Impact Factor: 17.88). 10/2013; DOI: 10.1200/JCO.2013.49.6067
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT Radiation Therapy Oncology Group trial 0525 tested whether dose-intensifying temozolomide versus standard chemoradiotherapy improves overall survival (OS) or progression-free survival (PFS) in newly diagnosed glioblastoma. Tests of neurocognitive function (NCF) and symptoms (using the MD Anderson Symptom Inventory-Brain Tumor module; MDASI-BT) and of quality of life (European Organisation for the Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire [EORTC QLQ] -C30/BN20) examined the net clinical benefit (NCB) of therapy.
NCF tests (Hopkins Verbal Learning Test-Revised, Trail Making Test, and Controlled Oral Word Association), MDASI-BT, and EORTC QLQ-C30/BN20 were completed in a subset of patients. Multivariate Cox proportional hazard regression modeling determined the prognostic value of baseline and early change from baseline to cycle 1 for OS and PFS. Two-sample proportional test statistic was used to evaluate differences between treatments (dose-dense v standard-dose) on NCB measures from baseline to cycle 4 in stable patients.
Overall, 182 patients participated in the study. Baseline NCF tests and the physical functioning quality of life scale were associated with OS and PFS. Baseline to cycle 1 in all NCB components were associated with OS and PFS. There was greater deterioration in the dose-dense arm from baseline to cycle 4 in the Global Health and Motor Function subscales (EORTC QLQ-C30/BN20) as well as in overall symptom burden, overall symptom interference, and activity-related symptom interference subscales (MDASI-BT). There were no between-arm differences in NCF.
Longitudinal collection of NCB measures is feasible in cooperative group studies and provides an added dimension to standard outcome measures. Greater adverse symptom burden and functional interference, as well as decreased global health and motor function were observed in patients randomly assigned to the dose-dense arm. Baseline and early change in NCB measures were associated with decreased rates of survival.

1 Follower
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: High-grade glioma (HGG) are optimally treated with maximum safe surgery, followed by radiotherapy (RT) and/or systemic chemotherapy (CT). Recently, the treatment of newly diagnosed anaplastic glioma (AG) has changed, particularly in patients with 1p19q codeleted tumors. Results of trials currenlty ongoing are likely to determine the best standard of care for patients with noncodeleted AG tumors. Trials in AG illustrate the importance of molecular characterization, which are germane to both prognosis and treatment. In contrast, efforts to improve the current standard of care of newly diagnosed glioblastoma (GB) with, for example, the addition of bevacizumab (BEV), have been largely disappointing and furthermore molecular characterization has not changed therapy except in elderly patients. Novel approaches, such as vaccine-based immunotherapy, for newly diagnosed GB are currently being pursued in multiple clinical trials. Recurrent disease, an event inevitable in nearly all patients with HGG, continues to be a challenge. Both recurrent GB and AG are managed in similar manner and when feasible re-resection is often suggested notwithstanding limited data to suggest benefit from repeat surgery. Occassional patients may be candidates for re-irradiation but again there is a paucity of data to commend this therapy and only a minority of selected patients are eligible for this approach. Consequently systemic therapy continues to be the most often utilized treatment in recurrent HGG. Choice of therapy, however, varies and revolves around re-challenge with temozolomide (TMZ), use of a nitrosourea (most often lomustine; CCNU) or BEV, the most frequently used angiogenic inhibitor. Nevertheless, no clear standard recommendation regarding the prefered agent or combination of agents is avaliable. Prognosis after progression of a HGG remains poor, with an unmet need to improve therapy.
    Surgical Neurology International 02/2015; 6(Suppl 1):S9-S44. DOI:10.4103/2152-7806.151331 · 1.18 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Objective To explore and facilitate the multifaceted process of drug development and regulatory approval in ovarian cancer. Methods The Society of Gynecologic Oncology (SGO) recently sought and received input from multiple stakeholders including the National Cancer Institute’s (NCI) Clinical Therapy Evaluation Program (CTEP), the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), pharmaceutical industry, and patient advocates. This whitepaper is the work product and opinion solely of the SGO. Results This document summarizes the SGO’s interpretation of these meetings and the current regulatory environment where there has been a paucity of recent approvals in the United States. It provides guidance in clinical trial design with the express purpose of encouraging novel drug development in ovarian cancer. Points of emphasis include: ovarian cancer heterogeneity (histologic subtypes and molecular genetic alterations), clinical trial design elements, surrogate as well as composite endpoints, and the four principles of clinical drug development (unmet medical need, discovery, safety, and efficacy). Conclusions There has been an evolution in the acceptance of surrogate endpoints depending upon the clinical setting in ovarian cancer. While overall survival (OS) remains the most objective clinical trial endpoint, there is now realization that demanding OS as the primary endpoint has many obstacles. Ovarian cancer is a heterogeneous disease that is now divided by histologic subtypes. Future registration strategies will need to address disease heterogeneity. Exploration of currently acceptable clinical trial endpoints and alternative regulatory strategies will hopefully stimulate interest in novel drug development for patients with ovarian cancer.
    Gynecologic Oncology 10/2014; 135(1). DOI:10.1016/j.ygyno.2014.08.004 · 3.69 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Symptom occurrence impacts primary brain tumor patients from the time of diagnosis and often heralds recurrence. In addition, the therapy can also result in symptoms that may compound tumor-associated symptoms, further impacting the patient's function and overall quality of life. There is increasing recognition that clinical studies evaluating tumor response using only measures of tumor size on imaging or survival are inadequate in brain tumor patients. Many symptoms can only be assessed from the patient, and patient reported outcome measures have been developed and have adequate reliability and validity. These measures are beginning to be incorporated into clinical trials. Guidelines on their use and meaning are needed to standardize assessment across trials and facilitate measurement of clinical benefit.
    Current Treatment Options in Oncology 08/2014; 15(4). DOI:10.1007/s11864-014-0302-8 · 3.24 Impact Factor


Available from
Feb 18, 2015