User login
New drug approved for relapsed/refractory neuroblastoma
The Food and Drug Administration has granted accelerated approval for naxitamab (Danyelza) to treat certain patients with neuroblastoma, based on response rates in two small trials.
Naxitamab is a humanized monoclonal antibody that targets GD2, a disialoganglioside highly expressed on neuroblastomas.
The FDA approved naxitamab for use in combination with granulocyte-macrophage colony-stimulating factor (GM-CSF) in adults and children aged 1 year and older who have relapsed or refractory, high-risk neuroblastoma in the bone or bone marrow that demonstrated a partial response, minor response, or stable disease to prior therapy.
Naxitamab was originally developed at Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center in New York, and licensed exclusively to Y-mAbs Therapeutics. As a result of the licensing arrangement, MSKCC has institutional financial interests in the product, the company noted.
Study results
The accelerated approval of naxitamab was based on the overall response rate (ORR) and duration of response in two single-arm, open-label trials: Study 201 (NCT03363373) in 22 patients and Study 12-230 (NCT01757626) in 38 patients.
In both studies, patients received naxitamab at 3 mg/kg administered as an intravenous infusion on days 1, 3, and 5 of each 4-week cycle in combination with GM-CSF subcutaneously at 250 mcg/m2/day on days -4 to 0 and at 500 mcg/m2/day on days 1-5.
Some patients also received radiotherapy. At the investigator’s discretion, patients were permitted to receive preplanned radiation to the primary disease site in Study 201 and radiation to nontarget bony lesions or soft tissue disease in Study 12-230.
The ORR was 45% in Study 201 and 34% in Study 12-230. Responses were observed in the bone and/or bone marrow, the FDA noted.
Less than a third of patients had a duration of response that lasted 6 months or more – 30% of responders in Study 201 and 23% of responders in Study 12-230.
The FDA noted that continued approval of naxitamab may be contingent upon verification and description of clinical benefit in confirmatory trials.
The agency also noted that naxitamab was granted priority review, breakthrough therapy, and orphan drug designation. In addition, a priority review voucher was issued for the rare pediatric disease product application.
Boxed warning and adverse events
Naxitamab has a boxed warning about serious infusion-related reactions and neurotoxicity.
The product information notes that, in clinical studies, naxitamab has been shown to cause serious infusion reactions, including anaphylaxis, cardiac arrest, bronchospasm, stridor, and hypotension. Infusion reactions generally occurred within 24 hours of completing an infusion, most often within 30 minutes of initiation. Infusion reactions were most frequent during the first infusion in each cycle.
To mitigate these risks, Y-mAbs Therapeutics recommends premedication with an antihistamine, acetaminophen, an H2 antagonist, and corticosteroid, as well as close monitoring of patients during and for at least 2 hours after each infusion in a setting where cardiopulmonary resuscitation medication and equipment are available.
Based on its mechanism of action, naxitamab can cause severe pain, according to Y-mAbs Therapeutics. The company recommends premedication with gabapentin and, for example, oral oxycodone, and recommends treating break-through pain with intravenous hydromorphone or an equivalent intervention.
In addition, naxitamab may cause severe hypertension. The onset of hypertension may be delayed, so blood pressure should be monitored both during and after infusion.
The product insert also notes that one case of transverse myelitis (grade 3) and two cases of posterior reversible encephalopathy syndrome have been reported.
The most common adverse reactions (incidence ≥ 25% in either trial) were infusion-related reactions, pain, tachycardia, vomiting, cough, nausea, diarrhea, decreased appetite, hypertension, fatigue, erythema multiforme, peripheral neuropathy, urticaria, pyrexia, headache, injection site reaction, edema, anxiety, localized edema, and irritability.
The most common grade 3 or 4 laboratory abnormalities (≥ 5% in either trial) were decreased lymphocytes, decreased neutrophils, decreased hemoglobin, decreased platelet count, decreased potassium, increased alanine aminotransferase, decreased glucose, decreased calcium, decreased albumin, decreased sodium, and decreased phosphate.
A version of this article appeared on Medscape.com.
The Food and Drug Administration has granted accelerated approval for naxitamab (Danyelza) to treat certain patients with neuroblastoma, based on response rates in two small trials.
Naxitamab is a humanized monoclonal antibody that targets GD2, a disialoganglioside highly expressed on neuroblastomas.
The FDA approved naxitamab for use in combination with granulocyte-macrophage colony-stimulating factor (GM-CSF) in adults and children aged 1 year and older who have relapsed or refractory, high-risk neuroblastoma in the bone or bone marrow that demonstrated a partial response, minor response, or stable disease to prior therapy.
Naxitamab was originally developed at Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center in New York, and licensed exclusively to Y-mAbs Therapeutics. As a result of the licensing arrangement, MSKCC has institutional financial interests in the product, the company noted.
Study results
The accelerated approval of naxitamab was based on the overall response rate (ORR) and duration of response in two single-arm, open-label trials: Study 201 (NCT03363373) in 22 patients and Study 12-230 (NCT01757626) in 38 patients.
In both studies, patients received naxitamab at 3 mg/kg administered as an intravenous infusion on days 1, 3, and 5 of each 4-week cycle in combination with GM-CSF subcutaneously at 250 mcg/m2/day on days -4 to 0 and at 500 mcg/m2/day on days 1-5.
Some patients also received radiotherapy. At the investigator’s discretion, patients were permitted to receive preplanned radiation to the primary disease site in Study 201 and radiation to nontarget bony lesions or soft tissue disease in Study 12-230.
The ORR was 45% in Study 201 and 34% in Study 12-230. Responses were observed in the bone and/or bone marrow, the FDA noted.
Less than a third of patients had a duration of response that lasted 6 months or more – 30% of responders in Study 201 and 23% of responders in Study 12-230.
The FDA noted that continued approval of naxitamab may be contingent upon verification and description of clinical benefit in confirmatory trials.
The agency also noted that naxitamab was granted priority review, breakthrough therapy, and orphan drug designation. In addition, a priority review voucher was issued for the rare pediatric disease product application.
Boxed warning and adverse events
Naxitamab has a boxed warning about serious infusion-related reactions and neurotoxicity.
The product information notes that, in clinical studies, naxitamab has been shown to cause serious infusion reactions, including anaphylaxis, cardiac arrest, bronchospasm, stridor, and hypotension. Infusion reactions generally occurred within 24 hours of completing an infusion, most often within 30 minutes of initiation. Infusion reactions were most frequent during the first infusion in each cycle.
To mitigate these risks, Y-mAbs Therapeutics recommends premedication with an antihistamine, acetaminophen, an H2 antagonist, and corticosteroid, as well as close monitoring of patients during and for at least 2 hours after each infusion in a setting where cardiopulmonary resuscitation medication and equipment are available.
Based on its mechanism of action, naxitamab can cause severe pain, according to Y-mAbs Therapeutics. The company recommends premedication with gabapentin and, for example, oral oxycodone, and recommends treating break-through pain with intravenous hydromorphone or an equivalent intervention.
In addition, naxitamab may cause severe hypertension. The onset of hypertension may be delayed, so blood pressure should be monitored both during and after infusion.
The product insert also notes that one case of transverse myelitis (grade 3) and two cases of posterior reversible encephalopathy syndrome have been reported.
The most common adverse reactions (incidence ≥ 25% in either trial) were infusion-related reactions, pain, tachycardia, vomiting, cough, nausea, diarrhea, decreased appetite, hypertension, fatigue, erythema multiforme, peripheral neuropathy, urticaria, pyrexia, headache, injection site reaction, edema, anxiety, localized edema, and irritability.
The most common grade 3 or 4 laboratory abnormalities (≥ 5% in either trial) were decreased lymphocytes, decreased neutrophils, decreased hemoglobin, decreased platelet count, decreased potassium, increased alanine aminotransferase, decreased glucose, decreased calcium, decreased albumin, decreased sodium, and decreased phosphate.
A version of this article appeared on Medscape.com.
The Food and Drug Administration has granted accelerated approval for naxitamab (Danyelza) to treat certain patients with neuroblastoma, based on response rates in two small trials.
Naxitamab is a humanized monoclonal antibody that targets GD2, a disialoganglioside highly expressed on neuroblastomas.
The FDA approved naxitamab for use in combination with granulocyte-macrophage colony-stimulating factor (GM-CSF) in adults and children aged 1 year and older who have relapsed or refractory, high-risk neuroblastoma in the bone or bone marrow that demonstrated a partial response, minor response, or stable disease to prior therapy.
Naxitamab was originally developed at Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center in New York, and licensed exclusively to Y-mAbs Therapeutics. As a result of the licensing arrangement, MSKCC has institutional financial interests in the product, the company noted.
Study results
The accelerated approval of naxitamab was based on the overall response rate (ORR) and duration of response in two single-arm, open-label trials: Study 201 (NCT03363373) in 22 patients and Study 12-230 (NCT01757626) in 38 patients.
In both studies, patients received naxitamab at 3 mg/kg administered as an intravenous infusion on days 1, 3, and 5 of each 4-week cycle in combination with GM-CSF subcutaneously at 250 mcg/m2/day on days -4 to 0 and at 500 mcg/m2/day on days 1-5.
Some patients also received radiotherapy. At the investigator’s discretion, patients were permitted to receive preplanned radiation to the primary disease site in Study 201 and radiation to nontarget bony lesions or soft tissue disease in Study 12-230.
The ORR was 45% in Study 201 and 34% in Study 12-230. Responses were observed in the bone and/or bone marrow, the FDA noted.
Less than a third of patients had a duration of response that lasted 6 months or more – 30% of responders in Study 201 and 23% of responders in Study 12-230.
The FDA noted that continued approval of naxitamab may be contingent upon verification and description of clinical benefit in confirmatory trials.
The agency also noted that naxitamab was granted priority review, breakthrough therapy, and orphan drug designation. In addition, a priority review voucher was issued for the rare pediatric disease product application.
Boxed warning and adverse events
Naxitamab has a boxed warning about serious infusion-related reactions and neurotoxicity.
The product information notes that, in clinical studies, naxitamab has been shown to cause serious infusion reactions, including anaphylaxis, cardiac arrest, bronchospasm, stridor, and hypotension. Infusion reactions generally occurred within 24 hours of completing an infusion, most often within 30 minutes of initiation. Infusion reactions were most frequent during the first infusion in each cycle.
To mitigate these risks, Y-mAbs Therapeutics recommends premedication with an antihistamine, acetaminophen, an H2 antagonist, and corticosteroid, as well as close monitoring of patients during and for at least 2 hours after each infusion in a setting where cardiopulmonary resuscitation medication and equipment are available.
Based on its mechanism of action, naxitamab can cause severe pain, according to Y-mAbs Therapeutics. The company recommends premedication with gabapentin and, for example, oral oxycodone, and recommends treating break-through pain with intravenous hydromorphone or an equivalent intervention.
In addition, naxitamab may cause severe hypertension. The onset of hypertension may be delayed, so blood pressure should be monitored both during and after infusion.
The product insert also notes that one case of transverse myelitis (grade 3) and two cases of posterior reversible encephalopathy syndrome have been reported.
The most common adverse reactions (incidence ≥ 25% in either trial) were infusion-related reactions, pain, tachycardia, vomiting, cough, nausea, diarrhea, decreased appetite, hypertension, fatigue, erythema multiforme, peripheral neuropathy, urticaria, pyrexia, headache, injection site reaction, edema, anxiety, localized edema, and irritability.
The most common grade 3 or 4 laboratory abnormalities (≥ 5% in either trial) were decreased lymphocytes, decreased neutrophils, decreased hemoglobin, decreased platelet count, decreased potassium, increased alanine aminotransferase, decreased glucose, decreased calcium, decreased albumin, decreased sodium, and decreased phosphate.
A version of this article appeared on Medscape.com.
Genomic analysis reveals insights into pathogenesis of neuroblastoma
Insights into the genetic drivers of the disease were identified based on data from whole-genome, whole-exome, and/or transcriptome sequencing of tumor samples.
“The comprehensive genome-wide analysis performed here allowed us to discover age-associated alterations in MYCN, TERT, PTPRD, and Ras pathway alterations, which, together with ATRX, represent the majority of common driver gene alterations in neuroblastoma,” wrote study author Samuel W. Brady, PhD, of St. Jude Children’s Research Hospital in Memphis, Tenn., and colleagues.
The group’s findings were published in Nature Communications.
The researchers integrated and analyzed data from 702 neuroblastomas encompassing all age and risk categories, with the goal of identifying rare driver events and age-related molecular aberrations. Among the samples, 23 were from patients who had relapsed.
The researchers found that 40% of samples had somatic alterations in known driver genes, with the most common alterations being MYCN (19%; primarily amplification), TERT (17%; structural variations [SVs]), SHANK2 (13%; SVs), PTPRD (11%; SVs and focal deletions), ALK (10%; single nucleotide variants [SNVs] and SVs), and ATRX (8%; multiple mutation types).
MYCN and TERT alterations were more common in younger children (median age of 2.3 years and 3.8 years, respectively), while ATRX alterations were more frequently seen in older patients (median age of 5.6 years).
“These findings suggest that the sympathetic nervous system, the tissue from which neuroblastoma arises, is susceptible to different oncogenic insults at different times during development, which could be explored in future investigations using animal models,” the researchers wrote.
Furthermore, they found evidence to suggest the COSMIC mutational signature 18 is the most common cause of driver SNVs in neuroblastoma, including most Ras-activating and ALK variants.
Signature 18 was enriched in neuroblastomas with increased expression of mitochondrial ribosome and electron transport–associated genes, 17q gain, and MYCN amplification.
“[T]his mutagenic process, which is caused by ROS [reactive oxygen species] in other settings (though not proven in neuroblastoma), may promote evolution and heterogeneity, as many driver SNVs, such as ALK mutations, are later events in neuroblastoma,” the researchers explained.
Based on these findings, the authors concluded that neuroblastomas with 17q gain may be amenable to precision medicines, possibly through targeting altered mitochondrial function.
“[Our] findings will identify patients who might be eligible for targeted therapy and those that may be at higher risk based on a combination of genetic alterations detected by these genome-wide sequencing methods,” commented study author Jinghui Zhang, PhD, of St. Jude Children’s Research Hospital.
The study was supported by grants from the National Cancer Institute and by the American Lebanese Syrian Associated Charities of St. Jude Children’s Research Hospital. One author disclosed financial affiliations with Y-mabs Therapeutics, Abpro-Labs, Eureka Therapeutics, and Biotec Pharmacon.
SOURCE: Brady SW et al. Nat Commun. 2020 Oct 14. doi: 10.1038/s41467-020-18987-4.
Insights into the genetic drivers of the disease were identified based on data from whole-genome, whole-exome, and/or transcriptome sequencing of tumor samples.
“The comprehensive genome-wide analysis performed here allowed us to discover age-associated alterations in MYCN, TERT, PTPRD, and Ras pathway alterations, which, together with ATRX, represent the majority of common driver gene alterations in neuroblastoma,” wrote study author Samuel W. Brady, PhD, of St. Jude Children’s Research Hospital in Memphis, Tenn., and colleagues.
The group’s findings were published in Nature Communications.
The researchers integrated and analyzed data from 702 neuroblastomas encompassing all age and risk categories, with the goal of identifying rare driver events and age-related molecular aberrations. Among the samples, 23 were from patients who had relapsed.
The researchers found that 40% of samples had somatic alterations in known driver genes, with the most common alterations being MYCN (19%; primarily amplification), TERT (17%; structural variations [SVs]), SHANK2 (13%; SVs), PTPRD (11%; SVs and focal deletions), ALK (10%; single nucleotide variants [SNVs] and SVs), and ATRX (8%; multiple mutation types).
MYCN and TERT alterations were more common in younger children (median age of 2.3 years and 3.8 years, respectively), while ATRX alterations were more frequently seen in older patients (median age of 5.6 years).
“These findings suggest that the sympathetic nervous system, the tissue from which neuroblastoma arises, is susceptible to different oncogenic insults at different times during development, which could be explored in future investigations using animal models,” the researchers wrote.
Furthermore, they found evidence to suggest the COSMIC mutational signature 18 is the most common cause of driver SNVs in neuroblastoma, including most Ras-activating and ALK variants.
Signature 18 was enriched in neuroblastomas with increased expression of mitochondrial ribosome and electron transport–associated genes, 17q gain, and MYCN amplification.
“[T]his mutagenic process, which is caused by ROS [reactive oxygen species] in other settings (though not proven in neuroblastoma), may promote evolution and heterogeneity, as many driver SNVs, such as ALK mutations, are later events in neuroblastoma,” the researchers explained.
Based on these findings, the authors concluded that neuroblastomas with 17q gain may be amenable to precision medicines, possibly through targeting altered mitochondrial function.
“[Our] findings will identify patients who might be eligible for targeted therapy and those that may be at higher risk based on a combination of genetic alterations detected by these genome-wide sequencing methods,” commented study author Jinghui Zhang, PhD, of St. Jude Children’s Research Hospital.
The study was supported by grants from the National Cancer Institute and by the American Lebanese Syrian Associated Charities of St. Jude Children’s Research Hospital. One author disclosed financial affiliations with Y-mabs Therapeutics, Abpro-Labs, Eureka Therapeutics, and Biotec Pharmacon.
SOURCE: Brady SW et al. Nat Commun. 2020 Oct 14. doi: 10.1038/s41467-020-18987-4.
Insights into the genetic drivers of the disease were identified based on data from whole-genome, whole-exome, and/or transcriptome sequencing of tumor samples.
“The comprehensive genome-wide analysis performed here allowed us to discover age-associated alterations in MYCN, TERT, PTPRD, and Ras pathway alterations, which, together with ATRX, represent the majority of common driver gene alterations in neuroblastoma,” wrote study author Samuel W. Brady, PhD, of St. Jude Children’s Research Hospital in Memphis, Tenn., and colleagues.
The group’s findings were published in Nature Communications.
The researchers integrated and analyzed data from 702 neuroblastomas encompassing all age and risk categories, with the goal of identifying rare driver events and age-related molecular aberrations. Among the samples, 23 were from patients who had relapsed.
The researchers found that 40% of samples had somatic alterations in known driver genes, with the most common alterations being MYCN (19%; primarily amplification), TERT (17%; structural variations [SVs]), SHANK2 (13%; SVs), PTPRD (11%; SVs and focal deletions), ALK (10%; single nucleotide variants [SNVs] and SVs), and ATRX (8%; multiple mutation types).
MYCN and TERT alterations were more common in younger children (median age of 2.3 years and 3.8 years, respectively), while ATRX alterations were more frequently seen in older patients (median age of 5.6 years).
“These findings suggest that the sympathetic nervous system, the tissue from which neuroblastoma arises, is susceptible to different oncogenic insults at different times during development, which could be explored in future investigations using animal models,” the researchers wrote.
Furthermore, they found evidence to suggest the COSMIC mutational signature 18 is the most common cause of driver SNVs in neuroblastoma, including most Ras-activating and ALK variants.
Signature 18 was enriched in neuroblastomas with increased expression of mitochondrial ribosome and electron transport–associated genes, 17q gain, and MYCN amplification.
“[T]his mutagenic process, which is caused by ROS [reactive oxygen species] in other settings (though not proven in neuroblastoma), may promote evolution and heterogeneity, as many driver SNVs, such as ALK mutations, are later events in neuroblastoma,” the researchers explained.
Based on these findings, the authors concluded that neuroblastomas with 17q gain may be amenable to precision medicines, possibly through targeting altered mitochondrial function.
“[Our] findings will identify patients who might be eligible for targeted therapy and those that may be at higher risk based on a combination of genetic alterations detected by these genome-wide sequencing methods,” commented study author Jinghui Zhang, PhD, of St. Jude Children’s Research Hospital.
The study was supported by grants from the National Cancer Institute and by the American Lebanese Syrian Associated Charities of St. Jude Children’s Research Hospital. One author disclosed financial affiliations with Y-mabs Therapeutics, Abpro-Labs, Eureka Therapeutics, and Biotec Pharmacon.
SOURCE: Brady SW et al. Nat Commun. 2020 Oct 14. doi: 10.1038/s41467-020-18987-4.
FROM NATURE COMMUNICATIONS
Early results ‘encouraging’ for CAR NKT cells in neuroblastoma
, according to results of an ongoing phase 1 trial.
In one of three patients treated thus far, the CAR NKT cells induced an objective response with regression of a metastatic bone lesion.
Andras Heczey, MD, of Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, and colleagues reported outcomes for the first three patients in Nature Medicine.
The three boys – two 12-year-olds and one 6-year-old – had relapsed/refractory neuroblastoma.
NKT cells were collected from the patients, then genetically engineered to express a CAR to recognize the GD2-ganglioside expressed in neuroblastomas and also to express interleukin-15, which supports NKT cell survival. The cells were expanded and reinfused back into the patients.
The initial results suggest that CAR NKT cells can be used safely to treat neuroblastomas and perhaps other solid tumors, investigators said.
‘A significant advance’ if confirmed
Treating solid tumors with CAR T cells has been a challenge, in part because of inefficient trafficking into tumors.
However, NKT cells naturally migrate to tumors in response to tumor-derived chemokines, Dr. Heczey and colleagues noted. NKT cells kill macrophages associated with tumor growth and promote NK- and T-cell–mediated antitumor responses.
“We decided to leverage this intrinsic property of NKTs and to arm them with an additional bullet – the so-called CAR – to further potentiate their capacity to destroy the tumor,” investigator Gianpietro Dotti, MD, of the University of North Carolina Lindberger Comprehensive Cancer Center in Chapel Hill, said in a press release.
Overall, the “results are very encouraging and, if confirmed in a larger cohort of patients, present a significant advance in the cell therapy field for solid tumors,” said CAR-T researcher Stephen Gottschalk, MD, of St. Jude Children’s Research Hospital in Memphis, Tenn., when asked for comment.
Treatment, safety, and efficacy details
NKT cells are infrequent in human peripheral blood, so the investigators stimulated the NKT cells collected from patients with alpha-galactosylceramide–pulsed irradiated peripheral blood mononuclear cells.
The final products reached a mean NKT cell purity of 95%. The proportion of cells positive for the GD2-CAR ranged from 20% to 70% across the three patients.
After lymphodepletion with cyclophosphamide/fludarabine, the patients were infused with 3 × 106 CAR NKT cells/m2.
The cells were well tolerated, with no dose-limiting toxicities. There were grade 3/4 adverse events, but they occurred before CAR NKT-cell infusion and were thought to be related to lymphodepletion.
NKT-cell frequency and absolute numbers increased in the peripheral blood over baseline and remained elevated at the week 4 assessment.
Two patients had stable disease at 4 weeks, but one had a partial response and a change in Curie score from 2 to 1. The patient’s SPECT- and MIBG-merged scans “revealed a dramatic reduction in the size and MIBG uptake of a bone metastasis. The patient consequently received salvage therapy and achieved a complete response that lasted approximately 6 months,” the investigators noted.
The team found higher percentages of CAR NKT cells in primary tumor and metastatic bone marrow biopsies than in peripheral blood. A high percentage of CAR NKT cells from the tumor specimen, but only a small fraction from the bone metastasis, expressed the GD2-CAR.
This research was funded by Kuur Therapeutics, Alex’s Lemonade Stand Foundation for Childhood Cancer, the American Cancer Society, Cookies for Kids’ Cancer Foundation, and the Cancer Prevention and Research Institute of Texas. Dr. Heczey, Dr. Dotti, and two other researchers are coinventors on pending patent applications for NKT cells in cancer immunotherapy that have been licensed to Kuur Therapeutics for commercial development. Dr. Gottschalk has patent applications in the fields of T-cell and/or gene therapy for cancer. He has relationships with TESSA Therapeutics, Immatics, and Tidal.
SOURCE: Heczey A et al. Nat Med. 2020 Oct 12. doi: 10.1038/s41591-020-1074-2.
, according to results of an ongoing phase 1 trial.
In one of three patients treated thus far, the CAR NKT cells induced an objective response with regression of a metastatic bone lesion.
Andras Heczey, MD, of Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, and colleagues reported outcomes for the first three patients in Nature Medicine.
The three boys – two 12-year-olds and one 6-year-old – had relapsed/refractory neuroblastoma.
NKT cells were collected from the patients, then genetically engineered to express a CAR to recognize the GD2-ganglioside expressed in neuroblastomas and also to express interleukin-15, which supports NKT cell survival. The cells were expanded and reinfused back into the patients.
The initial results suggest that CAR NKT cells can be used safely to treat neuroblastomas and perhaps other solid tumors, investigators said.
‘A significant advance’ if confirmed
Treating solid tumors with CAR T cells has been a challenge, in part because of inefficient trafficking into tumors.
However, NKT cells naturally migrate to tumors in response to tumor-derived chemokines, Dr. Heczey and colleagues noted. NKT cells kill macrophages associated with tumor growth and promote NK- and T-cell–mediated antitumor responses.
“We decided to leverage this intrinsic property of NKTs and to arm them with an additional bullet – the so-called CAR – to further potentiate their capacity to destroy the tumor,” investigator Gianpietro Dotti, MD, of the University of North Carolina Lindberger Comprehensive Cancer Center in Chapel Hill, said in a press release.
Overall, the “results are very encouraging and, if confirmed in a larger cohort of patients, present a significant advance in the cell therapy field for solid tumors,” said CAR-T researcher Stephen Gottschalk, MD, of St. Jude Children’s Research Hospital in Memphis, Tenn., when asked for comment.
Treatment, safety, and efficacy details
NKT cells are infrequent in human peripheral blood, so the investigators stimulated the NKT cells collected from patients with alpha-galactosylceramide–pulsed irradiated peripheral blood mononuclear cells.
The final products reached a mean NKT cell purity of 95%. The proportion of cells positive for the GD2-CAR ranged from 20% to 70% across the three patients.
After lymphodepletion with cyclophosphamide/fludarabine, the patients were infused with 3 × 106 CAR NKT cells/m2.
The cells were well tolerated, with no dose-limiting toxicities. There were grade 3/4 adverse events, but they occurred before CAR NKT-cell infusion and were thought to be related to lymphodepletion.
NKT-cell frequency and absolute numbers increased in the peripheral blood over baseline and remained elevated at the week 4 assessment.
Two patients had stable disease at 4 weeks, but one had a partial response and a change in Curie score from 2 to 1. The patient’s SPECT- and MIBG-merged scans “revealed a dramatic reduction in the size and MIBG uptake of a bone metastasis. The patient consequently received salvage therapy and achieved a complete response that lasted approximately 6 months,” the investigators noted.
The team found higher percentages of CAR NKT cells in primary tumor and metastatic bone marrow biopsies than in peripheral blood. A high percentage of CAR NKT cells from the tumor specimen, but only a small fraction from the bone metastasis, expressed the GD2-CAR.
This research was funded by Kuur Therapeutics, Alex’s Lemonade Stand Foundation for Childhood Cancer, the American Cancer Society, Cookies for Kids’ Cancer Foundation, and the Cancer Prevention and Research Institute of Texas. Dr. Heczey, Dr. Dotti, and two other researchers are coinventors on pending patent applications for NKT cells in cancer immunotherapy that have been licensed to Kuur Therapeutics for commercial development. Dr. Gottschalk has patent applications in the fields of T-cell and/or gene therapy for cancer. He has relationships with TESSA Therapeutics, Immatics, and Tidal.
SOURCE: Heczey A et al. Nat Med. 2020 Oct 12. doi: 10.1038/s41591-020-1074-2.
, according to results of an ongoing phase 1 trial.
In one of three patients treated thus far, the CAR NKT cells induced an objective response with regression of a metastatic bone lesion.
Andras Heczey, MD, of Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, and colleagues reported outcomes for the first three patients in Nature Medicine.
The three boys – two 12-year-olds and one 6-year-old – had relapsed/refractory neuroblastoma.
NKT cells were collected from the patients, then genetically engineered to express a CAR to recognize the GD2-ganglioside expressed in neuroblastomas and also to express interleukin-15, which supports NKT cell survival. The cells were expanded and reinfused back into the patients.
The initial results suggest that CAR NKT cells can be used safely to treat neuroblastomas and perhaps other solid tumors, investigators said.
‘A significant advance’ if confirmed
Treating solid tumors with CAR T cells has been a challenge, in part because of inefficient trafficking into tumors.
However, NKT cells naturally migrate to tumors in response to tumor-derived chemokines, Dr. Heczey and colleagues noted. NKT cells kill macrophages associated with tumor growth and promote NK- and T-cell–mediated antitumor responses.
“We decided to leverage this intrinsic property of NKTs and to arm them with an additional bullet – the so-called CAR – to further potentiate their capacity to destroy the tumor,” investigator Gianpietro Dotti, MD, of the University of North Carolina Lindberger Comprehensive Cancer Center in Chapel Hill, said in a press release.
Overall, the “results are very encouraging and, if confirmed in a larger cohort of patients, present a significant advance in the cell therapy field for solid tumors,” said CAR-T researcher Stephen Gottschalk, MD, of St. Jude Children’s Research Hospital in Memphis, Tenn., when asked for comment.
Treatment, safety, and efficacy details
NKT cells are infrequent in human peripheral blood, so the investigators stimulated the NKT cells collected from patients with alpha-galactosylceramide–pulsed irradiated peripheral blood mononuclear cells.
The final products reached a mean NKT cell purity of 95%. The proportion of cells positive for the GD2-CAR ranged from 20% to 70% across the three patients.
After lymphodepletion with cyclophosphamide/fludarabine, the patients were infused with 3 × 106 CAR NKT cells/m2.
The cells were well tolerated, with no dose-limiting toxicities. There were grade 3/4 adverse events, but they occurred before CAR NKT-cell infusion and were thought to be related to lymphodepletion.
NKT-cell frequency and absolute numbers increased in the peripheral blood over baseline and remained elevated at the week 4 assessment.
Two patients had stable disease at 4 weeks, but one had a partial response and a change in Curie score from 2 to 1. The patient’s SPECT- and MIBG-merged scans “revealed a dramatic reduction in the size and MIBG uptake of a bone metastasis. The patient consequently received salvage therapy and achieved a complete response that lasted approximately 6 months,” the investigators noted.
The team found higher percentages of CAR NKT cells in primary tumor and metastatic bone marrow biopsies than in peripheral blood. A high percentage of CAR NKT cells from the tumor specimen, but only a small fraction from the bone metastasis, expressed the GD2-CAR.
This research was funded by Kuur Therapeutics, Alex’s Lemonade Stand Foundation for Childhood Cancer, the American Cancer Society, Cookies for Kids’ Cancer Foundation, and the Cancer Prevention and Research Institute of Texas. Dr. Heczey, Dr. Dotti, and two other researchers are coinventors on pending patent applications for NKT cells in cancer immunotherapy that have been licensed to Kuur Therapeutics for commercial development. Dr. Gottschalk has patent applications in the fields of T-cell and/or gene therapy for cancer. He has relationships with TESSA Therapeutics, Immatics, and Tidal.
SOURCE: Heczey A et al. Nat Med. 2020 Oct 12. doi: 10.1038/s41591-020-1074-2.
FROM NATURE MEDICINE
Evaluating the impact of new pediatric brain tumor classifications
and that will have far-reaching implications for how clinicians diagnose and manage these rare and often debilitating malignancies, a leading European researcher reported at the 2020 CNS-ICNA Conjoint Meeting, held virtually this year.
“These pediatric neuronal/glioneuronal tumors are quite heterogeneous in terms of the number of different tumors and subclasses of tumors going into these groups, but they have some molecular features in common,” said David T.W. Jones, PhD, of Hopp Children’s Cancer Center in Heidelberg, Germany. “Together they represent quite a sizable portion of all childhood brain tumors, so it’s important to recognize and understand them.”
Dr. Jones noted that updated WHO classifications would add six new descriptions to the category of mixed glioneuronal tumors and one to the list of neuronal tumors. A working group of the Consortium to Inform Molecular and Practical Approaches to CNS Tumor Taxonomy, known as cIMPACT-NOW, has recommended the expanded classifications for central nervous system tumors.
“The molecular understandings of pediatric neuro-glial tumors are critical in their management,” Roger Packer, MD, senior vice president of the Center for Neuroscience and Behavioral Health at Children’s National in Washington, said in an interview, especially as treatments targeting specific molecular structures emerge. “For those with tumors not amenable to safe, total resections, there’s little evidence that radiation or chemotherapy are effective, and molecular-targeted therapy, guided by the molecular genetic composition, increases the safe use of these new agents.”
Dr. Jones noted that “as a minimum” molecular diagnostics of pediatric low-grade glioneuronal and neuronal tumors should include a BRAF gene mutation and fusion status, as well as FGFR1 mutation plus fusion or rearrangement status.
“Ideally,” he added, “it should also have a broader copy number profile, whether that’s based on sequencing or SNP arrays or DNA methylation rate, a global DNA methylation profile to get those global molecular patterns, and also wider gene and RNA sequence to pick up some of those rarer alterations that may not be covered by targeted BRAF and FGFR1 mutations.”
The updated tumor classification will evolve to include novel tumor classes, as well as links or overlaps between the tumor classes and their characteristic underlying kinetic alterations, he noted. “Some of these profiling measures will actually be required to generate a fully WHO-compatible pathological diagnosis,” Dr. Jones said.
“This group of tumors are now just better molecularly characterized than it was 5 years ago, so in the last few years we’ve really made tremendous progress in understanding what alterations are driving some of these tumors,” he said. “That knowledge is now providing a basis for improved diagnosis and also for starting to plan more targeted treatment strategies.”
But, he added, there’s still a lot to learn about how these oncogenic mechanisms drive tumor pathogenesis. “What is the clinical costs when we really start getting down into defining these distinct molecular groups?” he said. “What are their different responses to treatment depending on different levels, where the MEKi [mitogen-activated protein kinase inhibitor] pathway might be activated and, for example, response to treatment of different subclasses of one tumor?”
Large, collaborative clinical studies will be needed to get those answers, he said.
“There are certainly some therapeutic opportunities arising in this group of tumors now, but in order to really translate those into a clinical benefit, we’re really going to need some careful planning of international studies because of the relative rarity of some of these groups,” he said.
Dr. Jones has no relevant financial relationships to disclose.
and that will have far-reaching implications for how clinicians diagnose and manage these rare and often debilitating malignancies, a leading European researcher reported at the 2020 CNS-ICNA Conjoint Meeting, held virtually this year.
“These pediatric neuronal/glioneuronal tumors are quite heterogeneous in terms of the number of different tumors and subclasses of tumors going into these groups, but they have some molecular features in common,” said David T.W. Jones, PhD, of Hopp Children’s Cancer Center in Heidelberg, Germany. “Together they represent quite a sizable portion of all childhood brain tumors, so it’s important to recognize and understand them.”
Dr. Jones noted that updated WHO classifications would add six new descriptions to the category of mixed glioneuronal tumors and one to the list of neuronal tumors. A working group of the Consortium to Inform Molecular and Practical Approaches to CNS Tumor Taxonomy, known as cIMPACT-NOW, has recommended the expanded classifications for central nervous system tumors.
“The molecular understandings of pediatric neuro-glial tumors are critical in their management,” Roger Packer, MD, senior vice president of the Center for Neuroscience and Behavioral Health at Children’s National in Washington, said in an interview, especially as treatments targeting specific molecular structures emerge. “For those with tumors not amenable to safe, total resections, there’s little evidence that radiation or chemotherapy are effective, and molecular-targeted therapy, guided by the molecular genetic composition, increases the safe use of these new agents.”
Dr. Jones noted that “as a minimum” molecular diagnostics of pediatric low-grade glioneuronal and neuronal tumors should include a BRAF gene mutation and fusion status, as well as FGFR1 mutation plus fusion or rearrangement status.
“Ideally,” he added, “it should also have a broader copy number profile, whether that’s based on sequencing or SNP arrays or DNA methylation rate, a global DNA methylation profile to get those global molecular patterns, and also wider gene and RNA sequence to pick up some of those rarer alterations that may not be covered by targeted BRAF and FGFR1 mutations.”
The updated tumor classification will evolve to include novel tumor classes, as well as links or overlaps between the tumor classes and their characteristic underlying kinetic alterations, he noted. “Some of these profiling measures will actually be required to generate a fully WHO-compatible pathological diagnosis,” Dr. Jones said.
“This group of tumors are now just better molecularly characterized than it was 5 years ago, so in the last few years we’ve really made tremendous progress in understanding what alterations are driving some of these tumors,” he said. “That knowledge is now providing a basis for improved diagnosis and also for starting to plan more targeted treatment strategies.”
But, he added, there’s still a lot to learn about how these oncogenic mechanisms drive tumor pathogenesis. “What is the clinical costs when we really start getting down into defining these distinct molecular groups?” he said. “What are their different responses to treatment depending on different levels, where the MEKi [mitogen-activated protein kinase inhibitor] pathway might be activated and, for example, response to treatment of different subclasses of one tumor?”
Large, collaborative clinical studies will be needed to get those answers, he said.
“There are certainly some therapeutic opportunities arising in this group of tumors now, but in order to really translate those into a clinical benefit, we’re really going to need some careful planning of international studies because of the relative rarity of some of these groups,” he said.
Dr. Jones has no relevant financial relationships to disclose.
and that will have far-reaching implications for how clinicians diagnose and manage these rare and often debilitating malignancies, a leading European researcher reported at the 2020 CNS-ICNA Conjoint Meeting, held virtually this year.
“These pediatric neuronal/glioneuronal tumors are quite heterogeneous in terms of the number of different tumors and subclasses of tumors going into these groups, but they have some molecular features in common,” said David T.W. Jones, PhD, of Hopp Children’s Cancer Center in Heidelberg, Germany. “Together they represent quite a sizable portion of all childhood brain tumors, so it’s important to recognize and understand them.”
Dr. Jones noted that updated WHO classifications would add six new descriptions to the category of mixed glioneuronal tumors and one to the list of neuronal tumors. A working group of the Consortium to Inform Molecular and Practical Approaches to CNS Tumor Taxonomy, known as cIMPACT-NOW, has recommended the expanded classifications for central nervous system tumors.
“The molecular understandings of pediatric neuro-glial tumors are critical in their management,” Roger Packer, MD, senior vice president of the Center for Neuroscience and Behavioral Health at Children’s National in Washington, said in an interview, especially as treatments targeting specific molecular structures emerge. “For those with tumors not amenable to safe, total resections, there’s little evidence that radiation or chemotherapy are effective, and molecular-targeted therapy, guided by the molecular genetic composition, increases the safe use of these new agents.”
Dr. Jones noted that “as a minimum” molecular diagnostics of pediatric low-grade glioneuronal and neuronal tumors should include a BRAF gene mutation and fusion status, as well as FGFR1 mutation plus fusion or rearrangement status.
“Ideally,” he added, “it should also have a broader copy number profile, whether that’s based on sequencing or SNP arrays or DNA methylation rate, a global DNA methylation profile to get those global molecular patterns, and also wider gene and RNA sequence to pick up some of those rarer alterations that may not be covered by targeted BRAF and FGFR1 mutations.”
The updated tumor classification will evolve to include novel tumor classes, as well as links or overlaps between the tumor classes and their characteristic underlying kinetic alterations, he noted. “Some of these profiling measures will actually be required to generate a fully WHO-compatible pathological diagnosis,” Dr. Jones said.
“This group of tumors are now just better molecularly characterized than it was 5 years ago, so in the last few years we’ve really made tremendous progress in understanding what alterations are driving some of these tumors,” he said. “That knowledge is now providing a basis for improved diagnosis and also for starting to plan more targeted treatment strategies.”
But, he added, there’s still a lot to learn about how these oncogenic mechanisms drive tumor pathogenesis. “What is the clinical costs when we really start getting down into defining these distinct molecular groups?” he said. “What are their different responses to treatment depending on different levels, where the MEKi [mitogen-activated protein kinase inhibitor] pathway might be activated and, for example, response to treatment of different subclasses of one tumor?”
Large, collaborative clinical studies will be needed to get those answers, he said.
“There are certainly some therapeutic opportunities arising in this group of tumors now, but in order to really translate those into a clinical benefit, we’re really going to need some careful planning of international studies because of the relative rarity of some of these groups,” he said.
Dr. Jones has no relevant financial relationships to disclose.
FROM CNS-ICNA 2020
Subgroups predict adjuvant chemoradiotherapy benefits in low-grade glioma
Adjuvant chemoradiotherapy beat radiotherapy alone for treatment of certain patients with World Health Organization (WHO)–defined low-grade glioma (LGG), according to researchers.
Prior results from this trial, NRG Oncology/RTOG 9802 (NCT00003375), demonstrated an increase in progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) when procarbazine, lomustine, and vincristine (PCV) chemotherapy was added to radiation in patients with high-risk LGG.
The current results, published in the Journal of Clinical Oncology, displayed highly variable survival outcomes depending on molecular subgroup.
The initial report included only IDH1 R132H immunohistochemistry data because of limited tissue availability. However, retrospective retrieval of additional tissues subsequently enabled rigorous examination of the prognostic and predictive significance of these genetic biomarkers.
Prognostic and predictive
The trial included 251 patients with LGG (grade 2). Among the 106 eligible patients with WHO-defined molecular groups successfully profiled, 26 (24%) were IDH wild-type, 43 (41%) were IDH-mutant/non-codeleted, and 37 (35%) were IDH-mutant/codeleted.
After adjustment for clinical variables and treatment, multivariate analysis confirmed WHO-defined subgroup was a significant predictor of survival. All predictive analyses, however, were considered exploratory because of small sample sizes for patients with specific biomarker features in most cases.
In prognostic multivariable analyses, significantly favorable molecular subgroup associations were observed for OS in the IDH-mutant subgroups versus that in the wild type group (IDH-mutant/codeleted group HR, 0.18; P < .0001; IDH mutant/non-codeleleted group HR, 0.56; P = .048). Individually, the statistical significance was maintained for favorable OS for IDH1/2 mutations and 1p/19q codeletions.
In the predictive analyses, OS was longer for patients harboring IDH mutant/codeleted tumors receiving radiotherapy plus PCV than for those receiving radiotherapy alone (HR, 0.21; P = .029). The median OS was 13.9 years for radiotherapy and was not reached for PCV and radiotherapy.
PFS in the IDH-mutant/codeleted subgroup also was longer for patients receiving PCV (HR, 0.13; P < .001). The median PFS was 5.8 years for radiotherapy alone and was not reached for added PCV.
In the IDH-mutant/non-codeleted subgroup, OS was longer with PCV (HR, 0.38; P = .013). The median OS was 4.3 years for radiotherapy alone and 11.4 years when PCV was added.
PFS was also longer in the IDH-mutant/non-codeleted subgroup (HR, 0.32; P = .003). The median PFS was 3.3 years for radiotherapy and 10.4 years with PCV added.
IDH–wild type patients displayed no significant clinical benefit from the addition of PCV.
“Historically, many have thought that primarily patients with codeletions received benefit from PCV,” study author Erica H. Bell, PhD, of The Ohio State University in Columbus, said in an interview. “But we showed here that there is benefit in both IDH-mutant groups.”
Primary predictor
“Our evidence suggests that IDH mutation status could serve as the primary predictor of response to PCV in addition to radiotherapy in high-risk, low-grade gliomas and is a more accurate predictor of response than historical histopathological classifications,” Dr. Bell and colleagues wrote. “Consideration should be given for adjuvant PCV in the setting of high-risk, low-grade glioma patients harboring IDH mutations.”
High-risk was defined as being 40 years or older or having a subtotal resection biopsy.
“While both IDH mutant subgroups received benefit from the addition of PCV for both overall survival and PFS, the patients in the wild-type subgroup did not do well," Dr. Bell said. "We need to treat them more aggressively. We need to determine exactly what therapy modality they should receive. This is an active question in our field.”
“Another conclusion from the study,” she added, “is that upfront tissue collection and molecular subtyping are absolutely necessary for moving our field forward.”
Finding novel biomarkers and novel therapeutic targets remain as a further goal.
Dr. Bell commented that results of the CODEL trial of temozolomide in newly diagnosed 1p/19q-codeleted anaplastic glioma are widely anticipated.
“PCV is a very toxic treatment," she said. "If another agent that is less toxic, but just as efficacious, becomes available, we would rather use that. At this point, though, there are no head-to-head trials comparing temozolomide with PCV in codeleted populations.”
The current study was sponsored by the National Cancer Institute and The Ohio State University. The authors disclosed patents, royalties, and other intellectual property.
SOURCE: Bell EH et al. J Clin Oncol. 2020. doi: 10.1200/JCO.19.02983.
Adjuvant chemoradiotherapy beat radiotherapy alone for treatment of certain patients with World Health Organization (WHO)–defined low-grade glioma (LGG), according to researchers.
Prior results from this trial, NRG Oncology/RTOG 9802 (NCT00003375), demonstrated an increase in progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) when procarbazine, lomustine, and vincristine (PCV) chemotherapy was added to radiation in patients with high-risk LGG.
The current results, published in the Journal of Clinical Oncology, displayed highly variable survival outcomes depending on molecular subgroup.
The initial report included only IDH1 R132H immunohistochemistry data because of limited tissue availability. However, retrospective retrieval of additional tissues subsequently enabled rigorous examination of the prognostic and predictive significance of these genetic biomarkers.
Prognostic and predictive
The trial included 251 patients with LGG (grade 2). Among the 106 eligible patients with WHO-defined molecular groups successfully profiled, 26 (24%) were IDH wild-type, 43 (41%) were IDH-mutant/non-codeleted, and 37 (35%) were IDH-mutant/codeleted.
After adjustment for clinical variables and treatment, multivariate analysis confirmed WHO-defined subgroup was a significant predictor of survival. All predictive analyses, however, were considered exploratory because of small sample sizes for patients with specific biomarker features in most cases.
In prognostic multivariable analyses, significantly favorable molecular subgroup associations were observed for OS in the IDH-mutant subgroups versus that in the wild type group (IDH-mutant/codeleted group HR, 0.18; P < .0001; IDH mutant/non-codeleleted group HR, 0.56; P = .048). Individually, the statistical significance was maintained for favorable OS for IDH1/2 mutations and 1p/19q codeletions.
In the predictive analyses, OS was longer for patients harboring IDH mutant/codeleted tumors receiving radiotherapy plus PCV than for those receiving radiotherapy alone (HR, 0.21; P = .029). The median OS was 13.9 years for radiotherapy and was not reached for PCV and radiotherapy.
PFS in the IDH-mutant/codeleted subgroup also was longer for patients receiving PCV (HR, 0.13; P < .001). The median PFS was 5.8 years for radiotherapy alone and was not reached for added PCV.
In the IDH-mutant/non-codeleted subgroup, OS was longer with PCV (HR, 0.38; P = .013). The median OS was 4.3 years for radiotherapy alone and 11.4 years when PCV was added.
PFS was also longer in the IDH-mutant/non-codeleted subgroup (HR, 0.32; P = .003). The median PFS was 3.3 years for radiotherapy and 10.4 years with PCV added.
IDH–wild type patients displayed no significant clinical benefit from the addition of PCV.
“Historically, many have thought that primarily patients with codeletions received benefit from PCV,” study author Erica H. Bell, PhD, of The Ohio State University in Columbus, said in an interview. “But we showed here that there is benefit in both IDH-mutant groups.”
Primary predictor
“Our evidence suggests that IDH mutation status could serve as the primary predictor of response to PCV in addition to radiotherapy in high-risk, low-grade gliomas and is a more accurate predictor of response than historical histopathological classifications,” Dr. Bell and colleagues wrote. “Consideration should be given for adjuvant PCV in the setting of high-risk, low-grade glioma patients harboring IDH mutations.”
High-risk was defined as being 40 years or older or having a subtotal resection biopsy.
“While both IDH mutant subgroups received benefit from the addition of PCV for both overall survival and PFS, the patients in the wild-type subgroup did not do well," Dr. Bell said. "We need to treat them more aggressively. We need to determine exactly what therapy modality they should receive. This is an active question in our field.”
“Another conclusion from the study,” she added, “is that upfront tissue collection and molecular subtyping are absolutely necessary for moving our field forward.”
Finding novel biomarkers and novel therapeutic targets remain as a further goal.
Dr. Bell commented that results of the CODEL trial of temozolomide in newly diagnosed 1p/19q-codeleted anaplastic glioma are widely anticipated.
“PCV is a very toxic treatment," she said. "If another agent that is less toxic, but just as efficacious, becomes available, we would rather use that. At this point, though, there are no head-to-head trials comparing temozolomide with PCV in codeleted populations.”
The current study was sponsored by the National Cancer Institute and The Ohio State University. The authors disclosed patents, royalties, and other intellectual property.
SOURCE: Bell EH et al. J Clin Oncol. 2020. doi: 10.1200/JCO.19.02983.
Adjuvant chemoradiotherapy beat radiotherapy alone for treatment of certain patients with World Health Organization (WHO)–defined low-grade glioma (LGG), according to researchers.
Prior results from this trial, NRG Oncology/RTOG 9802 (NCT00003375), demonstrated an increase in progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) when procarbazine, lomustine, and vincristine (PCV) chemotherapy was added to radiation in patients with high-risk LGG.
The current results, published in the Journal of Clinical Oncology, displayed highly variable survival outcomes depending on molecular subgroup.
The initial report included only IDH1 R132H immunohistochemistry data because of limited tissue availability. However, retrospective retrieval of additional tissues subsequently enabled rigorous examination of the prognostic and predictive significance of these genetic biomarkers.
Prognostic and predictive
The trial included 251 patients with LGG (grade 2). Among the 106 eligible patients with WHO-defined molecular groups successfully profiled, 26 (24%) were IDH wild-type, 43 (41%) were IDH-mutant/non-codeleted, and 37 (35%) were IDH-mutant/codeleted.
After adjustment for clinical variables and treatment, multivariate analysis confirmed WHO-defined subgroup was a significant predictor of survival. All predictive analyses, however, were considered exploratory because of small sample sizes for patients with specific biomarker features in most cases.
In prognostic multivariable analyses, significantly favorable molecular subgroup associations were observed for OS in the IDH-mutant subgroups versus that in the wild type group (IDH-mutant/codeleted group HR, 0.18; P < .0001; IDH mutant/non-codeleleted group HR, 0.56; P = .048). Individually, the statistical significance was maintained for favorable OS for IDH1/2 mutations and 1p/19q codeletions.
In the predictive analyses, OS was longer for patients harboring IDH mutant/codeleted tumors receiving radiotherapy plus PCV than for those receiving radiotherapy alone (HR, 0.21; P = .029). The median OS was 13.9 years for radiotherapy and was not reached for PCV and radiotherapy.
PFS in the IDH-mutant/codeleted subgroup also was longer for patients receiving PCV (HR, 0.13; P < .001). The median PFS was 5.8 years for radiotherapy alone and was not reached for added PCV.
In the IDH-mutant/non-codeleted subgroup, OS was longer with PCV (HR, 0.38; P = .013). The median OS was 4.3 years for radiotherapy alone and 11.4 years when PCV was added.
PFS was also longer in the IDH-mutant/non-codeleted subgroup (HR, 0.32; P = .003). The median PFS was 3.3 years for radiotherapy and 10.4 years with PCV added.
IDH–wild type patients displayed no significant clinical benefit from the addition of PCV.
“Historically, many have thought that primarily patients with codeletions received benefit from PCV,” study author Erica H. Bell, PhD, of The Ohio State University in Columbus, said in an interview. “But we showed here that there is benefit in both IDH-mutant groups.”
Primary predictor
“Our evidence suggests that IDH mutation status could serve as the primary predictor of response to PCV in addition to radiotherapy in high-risk, low-grade gliomas and is a more accurate predictor of response than historical histopathological classifications,” Dr. Bell and colleagues wrote. “Consideration should be given for adjuvant PCV in the setting of high-risk, low-grade glioma patients harboring IDH mutations.”
High-risk was defined as being 40 years or older or having a subtotal resection biopsy.
“While both IDH mutant subgroups received benefit from the addition of PCV for both overall survival and PFS, the patients in the wild-type subgroup did not do well," Dr. Bell said. "We need to treat them more aggressively. We need to determine exactly what therapy modality they should receive. This is an active question in our field.”
“Another conclusion from the study,” she added, “is that upfront tissue collection and molecular subtyping are absolutely necessary for moving our field forward.”
Finding novel biomarkers and novel therapeutic targets remain as a further goal.
Dr. Bell commented that results of the CODEL trial of temozolomide in newly diagnosed 1p/19q-codeleted anaplastic glioma are widely anticipated.
“PCV is a very toxic treatment," she said. "If another agent that is less toxic, but just as efficacious, becomes available, we would rather use that. At this point, though, there are no head-to-head trials comparing temozolomide with PCV in codeleted populations.”
The current study was sponsored by the National Cancer Institute and The Ohio State University. The authors disclosed patents, royalties, and other intellectual property.
SOURCE: Bell EH et al. J Clin Oncol. 2020. doi: 10.1200/JCO.19.02983.
FROM THE JOURNAL OF CLINICAL ONCOLOGY
Glioma trials should track living well, not just longer
Neuro-oncology working group backs focus on how patients feel, function
Glioma treatment goals traditionally have focused on tumor shrinkage or prolonging survival, but it’s time for those endpoints to be supplemented by clinical outcomes that are meaningful to the patient, according to a recently published report from a neuro-oncology working group.
The group, which includes representatives of previous oncology working groups, the Food and Drug Administration, and observers from the European Medicines Agency, has established a core set of symptoms and functional points that they say could be used in clinical trials and clinical care for patients with high-grade gliomas.
“Patients want to live longer, but they also want to continue to function as well as possible for as long as possible,” said Terri S. Armstrong, PhD, of the National Cancer Institute (NCI), and coauthors in a report that sums up the work to date of the Fast Track COA Group.
That work, while specific to gliomas, echoes results from broader initiatives that seek to standardize patient-reported outcomes in oncology trials, Dr. Armstrong and coauthors wrote. The report was published in the Lancet Oncology.
The core set of symptom constructs and functional issues identified by the work group are represented already in patient-reported outcome measures, according to the authors.
The symptoms worth measuring fall into five categories, including pain, difficulty communicating, perceived cognition, seizures, and symptomatic adverse events. The functional issues were divided into two categories, physical functioning, including weakness or walking, and role functioning, which they defined as the ability to work or participate in social or leisure activities.
Some of those outcomes can be challenging or cumbersome to track, Dr. Armstrong and coauthors said.
Pain has “many dimensions“ and is important to track, the group wrote. Likewise, patients’ concerns related to language function also are important, but are very “noisy“ as a variable and can be specific to tumor location.
Collecting data on seizure frequency and severity is important yet complicated, because of the variability in seizures and considerable difference between focal and generalized seizures. Assessment of cognitive functioning can be lengthy and burdensome to patients.
Adverse events of relevance will vary, depending on the drug used, its mechanism of action, and available data, though some allowance needs to be made for the possibility of “overlap“ with disease-related symptoms, the report said.
Physical functioning, including walking and weakness, should be evaluated. It also would be useful to distinguish the duration of time that patients have deficits in physical functioning in the later stages of their disease progression, authors said.
Role and social functioning should be assessed in most patients with high-grade gliomas, who will have symptoms and deficits that prevent returning to a job. “Patients might spend a substantial portion of their lives feeling ill, unable to do usual activities, or meet occupational, social, financial, and family obligations,” said Dr. Armstrong and coauthors in the report.
The scales and tools used to measure symptoms and functional concerns need to be those that best fit a particular clinical trial or clinical practice scenario. Several instruments that would be appropriate are discussed in the report, including the NCI Patient-Reported Outcome of the Common Toxicity Criteria Adverse Events (NCI PRO-CTCAE) and symptom and function scales or items in the Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement System (PROMIS).
, such as time to recurrence or survival.
“Strategies for introducing these constructs to clinical trial cooperative groups and sponsors will be necessary,” they concluded.
Dr. Armstrong reported employment as a senior investigator and deputy chief of the neuro-oncology branch of the Center for Cancer Research at the NCI. His coauthors reported disclosures related to several companies and interests, including AbbVie, AstraZeneca, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Genentech, Merck, Taiho, and Tocagen.
SOURCE: Armstrong TS et al. Lancet Oncol. 2020;21(2):e97-103.
Neuro-oncology working group backs focus on how patients feel, function
Neuro-oncology working group backs focus on how patients feel, function
Glioma treatment goals traditionally have focused on tumor shrinkage or prolonging survival, but it’s time for those endpoints to be supplemented by clinical outcomes that are meaningful to the patient, according to a recently published report from a neuro-oncology working group.
The group, which includes representatives of previous oncology working groups, the Food and Drug Administration, and observers from the European Medicines Agency, has established a core set of symptoms and functional points that they say could be used in clinical trials and clinical care for patients with high-grade gliomas.
“Patients want to live longer, but they also want to continue to function as well as possible for as long as possible,” said Terri S. Armstrong, PhD, of the National Cancer Institute (NCI), and coauthors in a report that sums up the work to date of the Fast Track COA Group.
That work, while specific to gliomas, echoes results from broader initiatives that seek to standardize patient-reported outcomes in oncology trials, Dr. Armstrong and coauthors wrote. The report was published in the Lancet Oncology.
The core set of symptom constructs and functional issues identified by the work group are represented already in patient-reported outcome measures, according to the authors.
The symptoms worth measuring fall into five categories, including pain, difficulty communicating, perceived cognition, seizures, and symptomatic adverse events. The functional issues were divided into two categories, physical functioning, including weakness or walking, and role functioning, which they defined as the ability to work or participate in social or leisure activities.
Some of those outcomes can be challenging or cumbersome to track, Dr. Armstrong and coauthors said.
Pain has “many dimensions“ and is important to track, the group wrote. Likewise, patients’ concerns related to language function also are important, but are very “noisy“ as a variable and can be specific to tumor location.
Collecting data on seizure frequency and severity is important yet complicated, because of the variability in seizures and considerable difference between focal and generalized seizures. Assessment of cognitive functioning can be lengthy and burdensome to patients.
Adverse events of relevance will vary, depending on the drug used, its mechanism of action, and available data, though some allowance needs to be made for the possibility of “overlap“ with disease-related symptoms, the report said.
Physical functioning, including walking and weakness, should be evaluated. It also would be useful to distinguish the duration of time that patients have deficits in physical functioning in the later stages of their disease progression, authors said.
Role and social functioning should be assessed in most patients with high-grade gliomas, who will have symptoms and deficits that prevent returning to a job. “Patients might spend a substantial portion of their lives feeling ill, unable to do usual activities, or meet occupational, social, financial, and family obligations,” said Dr. Armstrong and coauthors in the report.
The scales and tools used to measure symptoms and functional concerns need to be those that best fit a particular clinical trial or clinical practice scenario. Several instruments that would be appropriate are discussed in the report, including the NCI Patient-Reported Outcome of the Common Toxicity Criteria Adverse Events (NCI PRO-CTCAE) and symptom and function scales or items in the Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement System (PROMIS).
, such as time to recurrence or survival.
“Strategies for introducing these constructs to clinical trial cooperative groups and sponsors will be necessary,” they concluded.
Dr. Armstrong reported employment as a senior investigator and deputy chief of the neuro-oncology branch of the Center for Cancer Research at the NCI. His coauthors reported disclosures related to several companies and interests, including AbbVie, AstraZeneca, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Genentech, Merck, Taiho, and Tocagen.
SOURCE: Armstrong TS et al. Lancet Oncol. 2020;21(2):e97-103.
Glioma treatment goals traditionally have focused on tumor shrinkage or prolonging survival, but it’s time for those endpoints to be supplemented by clinical outcomes that are meaningful to the patient, according to a recently published report from a neuro-oncology working group.
The group, which includes representatives of previous oncology working groups, the Food and Drug Administration, and observers from the European Medicines Agency, has established a core set of symptoms and functional points that they say could be used in clinical trials and clinical care for patients with high-grade gliomas.
“Patients want to live longer, but they also want to continue to function as well as possible for as long as possible,” said Terri S. Armstrong, PhD, of the National Cancer Institute (NCI), and coauthors in a report that sums up the work to date of the Fast Track COA Group.
That work, while specific to gliomas, echoes results from broader initiatives that seek to standardize patient-reported outcomes in oncology trials, Dr. Armstrong and coauthors wrote. The report was published in the Lancet Oncology.
The core set of symptom constructs and functional issues identified by the work group are represented already in patient-reported outcome measures, according to the authors.
The symptoms worth measuring fall into five categories, including pain, difficulty communicating, perceived cognition, seizures, and symptomatic adverse events. The functional issues were divided into two categories, physical functioning, including weakness or walking, and role functioning, which they defined as the ability to work or participate in social or leisure activities.
Some of those outcomes can be challenging or cumbersome to track, Dr. Armstrong and coauthors said.
Pain has “many dimensions“ and is important to track, the group wrote. Likewise, patients’ concerns related to language function also are important, but are very “noisy“ as a variable and can be specific to tumor location.
Collecting data on seizure frequency and severity is important yet complicated, because of the variability in seizures and considerable difference between focal and generalized seizures. Assessment of cognitive functioning can be lengthy and burdensome to patients.
Adverse events of relevance will vary, depending on the drug used, its mechanism of action, and available data, though some allowance needs to be made for the possibility of “overlap“ with disease-related symptoms, the report said.
Physical functioning, including walking and weakness, should be evaluated. It also would be useful to distinguish the duration of time that patients have deficits in physical functioning in the later stages of their disease progression, authors said.
Role and social functioning should be assessed in most patients with high-grade gliomas, who will have symptoms and deficits that prevent returning to a job. “Patients might spend a substantial portion of their lives feeling ill, unable to do usual activities, or meet occupational, social, financial, and family obligations,” said Dr. Armstrong and coauthors in the report.
The scales and tools used to measure symptoms and functional concerns need to be those that best fit a particular clinical trial or clinical practice scenario. Several instruments that would be appropriate are discussed in the report, including the NCI Patient-Reported Outcome of the Common Toxicity Criteria Adverse Events (NCI PRO-CTCAE) and symptom and function scales or items in the Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement System (PROMIS).
, such as time to recurrence or survival.
“Strategies for introducing these constructs to clinical trial cooperative groups and sponsors will be necessary,” they concluded.
Dr. Armstrong reported employment as a senior investigator and deputy chief of the neuro-oncology branch of the Center for Cancer Research at the NCI. His coauthors reported disclosures related to several companies and interests, including AbbVie, AstraZeneca, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Genentech, Merck, Taiho, and Tocagen.
SOURCE: Armstrong TS et al. Lancet Oncol. 2020;21(2):e97-103.
FROM THE LANCET ONCOLOGY
QoL good for MGMT-methylated glioblastoma patients with lomustine-temozolide
In addition to offering an overall survival benefit for patients with MGMT-methylated glioblastoma, the combination of lomustine and temozolomide did not impair health-related quality of life (HRQOL) compared with temozolomide alone, investigators report.
Among 129 patients with newly-diagnosed glioblastoma with methylation of the MGMT promoter, there were no significant differences in any items on the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) quality of life questionnaire core-30 and the EORTC brain cancer module (BN20) between patients who received oral combined lomustine and temozolomide or temozolomide alone, reported Johannes Weller, MD, of University Hospital Bonn, Germany, and colleagues.
Although the combination was associated with slightly lower scores on the Mini-Mental State Exam (MMSE), the differences were not clinically significant, the investigators asserted.
“The absence of systematic and clinically relevant changes in HRQOL and neurocognitive function combined with the survival benefit of lomustine-temozolomide versus temozolomide alone suggests that a long-term net clinical benefit exists for patients with newly diagnosed glioblastoma with methylation of the MGMT promoter and supports the use of lomustine-temozolomide as a treatment option for these patients,” they wrote. The report is in The Lancet Oncology.
The investigators previously reported that median overall survival was improved from 31.4 months with temozolomide to 48.1 months with lomustine-temozolomide, translating into a hazard ratio (HR) for death with the combination of 0.60 (P = .0492).
In the current report, Dr. Weller and associates looked at the secondary endpoints of HRQOL as measured by the EORTC scales, and at neurocognitive function as assessed by the MMSE and a neurocognitive test battery (NOA-07) that include Trail Making Test A and B (TMT-A and B), working memory tests, and tests for word and semantic verbal fluency.
The modified intention-to-treat analysis included all patients who received at least one dose of study chemotherapy. The analysis included data on 63 patients randomly assigned to receive standard oral temozolomide, consisting of 75 mg/m² daily during radiotherapy plus six 4-week courses of temozolomide at doses ranging from 150 to 200 mg/m² on days 1-5, every 4 weeks; and 66 patients assigned to receive oral combined lomustine consisting of a 100 mg/m² dose on day 1, plus temozolomide 100 to 200 mg/m² on days 2-6 for six cycles of 6 weeks each.
After a median follow-up of 19.4 months for the HRQOL endpoint, there were no significant differences between the groups in decline from baselines in Karnofsky Performance Score, global health, physical functioning, cognitive functioning, social functioning, or communication deficit.
As noted before, however, there were small but significant differences between the groups favoring temozolomide on the MMSE, after a median follow-up for this measure of 15.3 months. The authors noted that the differences “were not significant when adjusted for multiple testing and were also not clinically relevant, because even over the time course of 4 years the differences between the groups would only add up to 1.76/30 points and clinically significant results would require a difference of more than 3/30 points.”
There were also no significant differences between the groups in any item of the neurocognitive test, they added.
The investigators acknowledged that the trial was limited by its relatively small size, and that after 3.5 years of follow-up about half of all the expected HRQOL forms were missing, which might lead to reporting bias.
“Overall, we conclude that the addition of lomustine to temozolomide in patients with newly diagnosed MGMT-methylated glioblastoma is associated with a clear long-term net clinical benefit and our data provide a good rationale for the trial regimen as a treatment option for these patients. Nevertheless, changes in HRQOL during the first year after beginning treatment needs further exploration in future studies,” Dr. Weller and colleagues wrote.
The German Federal Ministry of Education and Research funded the study. Dr. Weller reported having no conflict of interest. Several coauthors reported relationships with industry outside the submitted work.
SOURCE: Weller J et al. Lancet Oncol. Sept 2. doi: 10.1016/S1470-2045(19)30502-9.
In addition to offering an overall survival benefit for patients with MGMT-methylated glioblastoma, the combination of lomustine and temozolomide did not impair health-related quality of life (HRQOL) compared with temozolomide alone, investigators report.
Among 129 patients with newly-diagnosed glioblastoma with methylation of the MGMT promoter, there were no significant differences in any items on the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) quality of life questionnaire core-30 and the EORTC brain cancer module (BN20) between patients who received oral combined lomustine and temozolomide or temozolomide alone, reported Johannes Weller, MD, of University Hospital Bonn, Germany, and colleagues.
Although the combination was associated with slightly lower scores on the Mini-Mental State Exam (MMSE), the differences were not clinically significant, the investigators asserted.
“The absence of systematic and clinically relevant changes in HRQOL and neurocognitive function combined with the survival benefit of lomustine-temozolomide versus temozolomide alone suggests that a long-term net clinical benefit exists for patients with newly diagnosed glioblastoma with methylation of the MGMT promoter and supports the use of lomustine-temozolomide as a treatment option for these patients,” they wrote. The report is in The Lancet Oncology.
The investigators previously reported that median overall survival was improved from 31.4 months with temozolomide to 48.1 months with lomustine-temozolomide, translating into a hazard ratio (HR) for death with the combination of 0.60 (P = .0492).
In the current report, Dr. Weller and associates looked at the secondary endpoints of HRQOL as measured by the EORTC scales, and at neurocognitive function as assessed by the MMSE and a neurocognitive test battery (NOA-07) that include Trail Making Test A and B (TMT-A and B), working memory tests, and tests for word and semantic verbal fluency.
The modified intention-to-treat analysis included all patients who received at least one dose of study chemotherapy. The analysis included data on 63 patients randomly assigned to receive standard oral temozolomide, consisting of 75 mg/m² daily during radiotherapy plus six 4-week courses of temozolomide at doses ranging from 150 to 200 mg/m² on days 1-5, every 4 weeks; and 66 patients assigned to receive oral combined lomustine consisting of a 100 mg/m² dose on day 1, plus temozolomide 100 to 200 mg/m² on days 2-6 for six cycles of 6 weeks each.
After a median follow-up of 19.4 months for the HRQOL endpoint, there were no significant differences between the groups in decline from baselines in Karnofsky Performance Score, global health, physical functioning, cognitive functioning, social functioning, or communication deficit.
As noted before, however, there were small but significant differences between the groups favoring temozolomide on the MMSE, after a median follow-up for this measure of 15.3 months. The authors noted that the differences “were not significant when adjusted for multiple testing and were also not clinically relevant, because even over the time course of 4 years the differences between the groups would only add up to 1.76/30 points and clinically significant results would require a difference of more than 3/30 points.”
There were also no significant differences between the groups in any item of the neurocognitive test, they added.
The investigators acknowledged that the trial was limited by its relatively small size, and that after 3.5 years of follow-up about half of all the expected HRQOL forms were missing, which might lead to reporting bias.
“Overall, we conclude that the addition of lomustine to temozolomide in patients with newly diagnosed MGMT-methylated glioblastoma is associated with a clear long-term net clinical benefit and our data provide a good rationale for the trial regimen as a treatment option for these patients. Nevertheless, changes in HRQOL during the first year after beginning treatment needs further exploration in future studies,” Dr. Weller and colleagues wrote.
The German Federal Ministry of Education and Research funded the study. Dr. Weller reported having no conflict of interest. Several coauthors reported relationships with industry outside the submitted work.
SOURCE: Weller J et al. Lancet Oncol. Sept 2. doi: 10.1016/S1470-2045(19)30502-9.
In addition to offering an overall survival benefit for patients with MGMT-methylated glioblastoma, the combination of lomustine and temozolomide did not impair health-related quality of life (HRQOL) compared with temozolomide alone, investigators report.
Among 129 patients with newly-diagnosed glioblastoma with methylation of the MGMT promoter, there were no significant differences in any items on the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) quality of life questionnaire core-30 and the EORTC brain cancer module (BN20) between patients who received oral combined lomustine and temozolomide or temozolomide alone, reported Johannes Weller, MD, of University Hospital Bonn, Germany, and colleagues.
Although the combination was associated with slightly lower scores on the Mini-Mental State Exam (MMSE), the differences were not clinically significant, the investigators asserted.
“The absence of systematic and clinically relevant changes in HRQOL and neurocognitive function combined with the survival benefit of lomustine-temozolomide versus temozolomide alone suggests that a long-term net clinical benefit exists for patients with newly diagnosed glioblastoma with methylation of the MGMT promoter and supports the use of lomustine-temozolomide as a treatment option for these patients,” they wrote. The report is in The Lancet Oncology.
The investigators previously reported that median overall survival was improved from 31.4 months with temozolomide to 48.1 months with lomustine-temozolomide, translating into a hazard ratio (HR) for death with the combination of 0.60 (P = .0492).
In the current report, Dr. Weller and associates looked at the secondary endpoints of HRQOL as measured by the EORTC scales, and at neurocognitive function as assessed by the MMSE and a neurocognitive test battery (NOA-07) that include Trail Making Test A and B (TMT-A and B), working memory tests, and tests for word and semantic verbal fluency.
The modified intention-to-treat analysis included all patients who received at least one dose of study chemotherapy. The analysis included data on 63 patients randomly assigned to receive standard oral temozolomide, consisting of 75 mg/m² daily during radiotherapy plus six 4-week courses of temozolomide at doses ranging from 150 to 200 mg/m² on days 1-5, every 4 weeks; and 66 patients assigned to receive oral combined lomustine consisting of a 100 mg/m² dose on day 1, plus temozolomide 100 to 200 mg/m² on days 2-6 for six cycles of 6 weeks each.
After a median follow-up of 19.4 months for the HRQOL endpoint, there were no significant differences between the groups in decline from baselines in Karnofsky Performance Score, global health, physical functioning, cognitive functioning, social functioning, or communication deficit.
As noted before, however, there were small but significant differences between the groups favoring temozolomide on the MMSE, after a median follow-up for this measure of 15.3 months. The authors noted that the differences “were not significant when adjusted for multiple testing and were also not clinically relevant, because even over the time course of 4 years the differences between the groups would only add up to 1.76/30 points and clinically significant results would require a difference of more than 3/30 points.”
There were also no significant differences between the groups in any item of the neurocognitive test, they added.
The investigators acknowledged that the trial was limited by its relatively small size, and that after 3.5 years of follow-up about half of all the expected HRQOL forms were missing, which might lead to reporting bias.
“Overall, we conclude that the addition of lomustine to temozolomide in patients with newly diagnosed MGMT-methylated glioblastoma is associated with a clear long-term net clinical benefit and our data provide a good rationale for the trial regimen as a treatment option for these patients. Nevertheless, changes in HRQOL during the first year after beginning treatment needs further exploration in future studies,” Dr. Weller and colleagues wrote.
The German Federal Ministry of Education and Research funded the study. Dr. Weller reported having no conflict of interest. Several coauthors reported relationships with industry outside the submitted work.
SOURCE: Weller J et al. Lancet Oncol. Sept 2. doi: 10.1016/S1470-2045(19)30502-9.
FROM THE LANCET ONCOLOGY
Researchers seek a way to predict cognitive deficits in children treated for ALL
Researchers are attempting to determine, early in the treatment process, which children with acute lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL) have an increased risk of neurocognitive deficits after chemotherapy.
The goal of the researchers’ project (5R01CA220568-02) is to determine if gene variants and biomarkers associated with oxidative stress, neuroinflammation, and folate physiology correlate with cognitive decline during and after chemotherapy. Ideally, certain variants and biomarkers will reveal patients who might benefit from interventions to prevent or even reverse cognitive deficits.
Peter D. Cole, MD, of Rutgers Cancer Institute, New Brunswick, N.J., and colleagues are conducting this research in patients from the DFCI-16-001 trial (NCT03020030). This multicenter, phase 3 study is enrolling patients (aged 1-21 years) with B- or T-cell ALL who then receive a multidrug chemotherapy regimen.
Dr. Cole and colleagues are analyzing a subset of patients from the trial, looking for relationships between chemotherapy-induced neurocognitive changes, gene variants, and changes in biomarkers detected in cerebrospinal fluid (CSF).
“We’re looking at a broad panel of target gene variants that are associated with either drug metabolism, defenses against oxidative stress, neuroinflammation, or folate physiology,” Dr. Cole said in an interview.
This includes variants Dr. Cole and colleagues identified in a previous, retrospective study of ALL survivors. The researchers found that survivors who were homozygous for NOS3 894T, had a variant SLCO2A1 G allele, or had at least one GSTP1 T allele were more likely to exhibit cognitive deficits (J Clin Oncol. 2015 Jul 1;33[19]:2205-11).
The researchers are also analyzing CSF samples, looking for changes in tau protein, homocysteine, homocysteic acid, the adenosylmethionine to adenosylhomocysteine ratio, and other biomarkers of oxidative stress, neuroinflammation, and folate physiology. The CSF is collected at five time points: the start of chemotherapy, day 18, the start of first consolidation, the end of first consolidation, and 7 weeks later in second consolidation.
Cognitive testing
While Dr. Cole is leading the genetic and biomarker analyses, Stephen A. Sands, PsyD, of Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center in New York, is leading the cognitive testing.
The researchers are evaluating patients for cognitive decline using computerized tests from a company called Cogstate. The tests are designed to assess functions such as processing speed, attention, visual learning, and working memory. The tests are administered on an iPad and involve tasks like identifying features of playing cards and finding the correct way through a maze.
The patients – aged 3 years and older – undergo cognitive testing at six time points: baseline, which is any time between days 8 and 32 of induction (except within 72 hours after sedation or anesthesia); at first consolidation; the end of central nervous system therapy; 1 year into chemotherapy; the end of chemotherapy; and 1 year after chemotherapy ends.
In a prior study, Cogstate testing proved reliable for detecting neurocognitive changes in patients undergoing treatment for ALL (Support Care Cancer. 2017;25[2]:449-57). In the current study, the researchers are supplementing Cogstate test results with Wechsler IQ tests administered 1 year after patients complete chemotherapy.
Dr. Sands noted that Cogstate tests provide benefits over the Wechsler “paper-and-pencil” tests. One benefit is that Cogstate tests can be given more often without inducing practice effects (J Clin Exp Neuropsychol. 2006 Oct;28[7]:1095-112). Another is that Cogstate tests can be administered by anyone with a bachelor’s degree who has undergone the appropriate training, while Wechsler IQ tests must be given by psychologists.
Preliminary results
This research is ongoing, so it’s too early to announce any discoveries, but the study is moving along as planned.
“The preliminary data we have so far are demonstrating the validity of the study,” Dr. Cole said. “Things are going well. We’re able to do the cognitive testing and collect the samples that we need and ship them without losing the integrity of the samples.”
Dr. Sands noted that enrollment has been encouraging. As this is a substudy of DFCI-16-001, the researchers must obtain consent separately from the main study. Dr. Sands said about 89% of parents involved in the main study have agreed to enroll their children in the substudy.
Dr. Sands also said that early results from Cogstate testing have revealed patients who are experiencing cognitive decline during treatment. The researchers still have to determine if these results correlate with any biomarkers or gene variants.
Potential interventions
If the researchers can pinpoint patients at risk for cognitive deficits, the next step will be to investigate pharmacologic and behavioral interventions.
Dr. Cole said he is particularly interested in treatments that reduce oxidative stress, such as dextromethorphan and memantine. Dextromethorphan has been shown to resolve symptoms of methotrexate-induced neurotoxicity in patients (Pediatr Hematol Oncol. 2002 Jul-Aug;19[5]:319-27), and memantine reduced memory deficits in animals treated with methotrexate (Clin Cancer Res. 2013 Aug 15;19[16]:4446-54).
“Memantine hasn’t been used in kids with leukemia yet, but it’s something that I’d like to see brought to a clinical trial,” Dr. Cole said.
Dr. Sands pointed to other potential pharmacologic interventions, including the stimulants methylphenidate and modafinil. Both drugs have been shown to improve cognitive deficits in cancer survivors (J Clin Oncol. 2001 Mar 15;19[6]:1802-8; Cancer. 2009 Jun 15; 115[12]: 2605-16).
Computer-based cognitive training tools may be another option. One such tool, Lumosity, improved executive functions in a study of breast cancer survivors (Clin Breast Cancer. 2013 Aug;13[4]:299-306). Another tool, CogMed, improved working memory in survivors of brain tumors and ALL (Psychooncology. 2013 Aug; 22[8]: 1856-65).
Other behavioral interventions might include sleep hygiene and exercise. Sleep hygiene has been shown to improve cognitive function in childhood cancer survivors (Cancer. 2011 Jun 1;117[11]:2559-68), and a recent study revealed an association between exercise intolerance and negative neurocognitive outcomes in ALL survivors (Cancer. 2019 Oct 21. doi: 10.1002/cncr.32510).
“What we need to figure out is which children will respond to which interventions,” Dr. Sands said, adding that interventions will likely need to be combined.
“It’s not going to be one thing that will work for everybody,” he said. “It’s going to be: What packages of things will work for different people?”
Dr. Sands and Dr. Cole reported having no relevant financial disclosures.
Researchers are attempting to determine, early in the treatment process, which children with acute lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL) have an increased risk of neurocognitive deficits after chemotherapy.
The goal of the researchers’ project (5R01CA220568-02) is to determine if gene variants and biomarkers associated with oxidative stress, neuroinflammation, and folate physiology correlate with cognitive decline during and after chemotherapy. Ideally, certain variants and biomarkers will reveal patients who might benefit from interventions to prevent or even reverse cognitive deficits.
Peter D. Cole, MD, of Rutgers Cancer Institute, New Brunswick, N.J., and colleagues are conducting this research in patients from the DFCI-16-001 trial (NCT03020030). This multicenter, phase 3 study is enrolling patients (aged 1-21 years) with B- or T-cell ALL who then receive a multidrug chemotherapy regimen.
Dr. Cole and colleagues are analyzing a subset of patients from the trial, looking for relationships between chemotherapy-induced neurocognitive changes, gene variants, and changes in biomarkers detected in cerebrospinal fluid (CSF).
“We’re looking at a broad panel of target gene variants that are associated with either drug metabolism, defenses against oxidative stress, neuroinflammation, or folate physiology,” Dr. Cole said in an interview.
This includes variants Dr. Cole and colleagues identified in a previous, retrospective study of ALL survivors. The researchers found that survivors who were homozygous for NOS3 894T, had a variant SLCO2A1 G allele, or had at least one GSTP1 T allele were more likely to exhibit cognitive deficits (J Clin Oncol. 2015 Jul 1;33[19]:2205-11).
The researchers are also analyzing CSF samples, looking for changes in tau protein, homocysteine, homocysteic acid, the adenosylmethionine to adenosylhomocysteine ratio, and other biomarkers of oxidative stress, neuroinflammation, and folate physiology. The CSF is collected at five time points: the start of chemotherapy, day 18, the start of first consolidation, the end of first consolidation, and 7 weeks later in second consolidation.
Cognitive testing
While Dr. Cole is leading the genetic and biomarker analyses, Stephen A. Sands, PsyD, of Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center in New York, is leading the cognitive testing.
The researchers are evaluating patients for cognitive decline using computerized tests from a company called Cogstate. The tests are designed to assess functions such as processing speed, attention, visual learning, and working memory. The tests are administered on an iPad and involve tasks like identifying features of playing cards and finding the correct way through a maze.
The patients – aged 3 years and older – undergo cognitive testing at six time points: baseline, which is any time between days 8 and 32 of induction (except within 72 hours after sedation or anesthesia); at first consolidation; the end of central nervous system therapy; 1 year into chemotherapy; the end of chemotherapy; and 1 year after chemotherapy ends.
In a prior study, Cogstate testing proved reliable for detecting neurocognitive changes in patients undergoing treatment for ALL (Support Care Cancer. 2017;25[2]:449-57). In the current study, the researchers are supplementing Cogstate test results with Wechsler IQ tests administered 1 year after patients complete chemotherapy.
Dr. Sands noted that Cogstate tests provide benefits over the Wechsler “paper-and-pencil” tests. One benefit is that Cogstate tests can be given more often without inducing practice effects (J Clin Exp Neuropsychol. 2006 Oct;28[7]:1095-112). Another is that Cogstate tests can be administered by anyone with a bachelor’s degree who has undergone the appropriate training, while Wechsler IQ tests must be given by psychologists.
Preliminary results
This research is ongoing, so it’s too early to announce any discoveries, but the study is moving along as planned.
“The preliminary data we have so far are demonstrating the validity of the study,” Dr. Cole said. “Things are going well. We’re able to do the cognitive testing and collect the samples that we need and ship them without losing the integrity of the samples.”
Dr. Sands noted that enrollment has been encouraging. As this is a substudy of DFCI-16-001, the researchers must obtain consent separately from the main study. Dr. Sands said about 89% of parents involved in the main study have agreed to enroll their children in the substudy.
Dr. Sands also said that early results from Cogstate testing have revealed patients who are experiencing cognitive decline during treatment. The researchers still have to determine if these results correlate with any biomarkers or gene variants.
Potential interventions
If the researchers can pinpoint patients at risk for cognitive deficits, the next step will be to investigate pharmacologic and behavioral interventions.
Dr. Cole said he is particularly interested in treatments that reduce oxidative stress, such as dextromethorphan and memantine. Dextromethorphan has been shown to resolve symptoms of methotrexate-induced neurotoxicity in patients (Pediatr Hematol Oncol. 2002 Jul-Aug;19[5]:319-27), and memantine reduced memory deficits in animals treated with methotrexate (Clin Cancer Res. 2013 Aug 15;19[16]:4446-54).
“Memantine hasn’t been used in kids with leukemia yet, but it’s something that I’d like to see brought to a clinical trial,” Dr. Cole said.
Dr. Sands pointed to other potential pharmacologic interventions, including the stimulants methylphenidate and modafinil. Both drugs have been shown to improve cognitive deficits in cancer survivors (J Clin Oncol. 2001 Mar 15;19[6]:1802-8; Cancer. 2009 Jun 15; 115[12]: 2605-16).
Computer-based cognitive training tools may be another option. One such tool, Lumosity, improved executive functions in a study of breast cancer survivors (Clin Breast Cancer. 2013 Aug;13[4]:299-306). Another tool, CogMed, improved working memory in survivors of brain tumors and ALL (Psychooncology. 2013 Aug; 22[8]: 1856-65).
Other behavioral interventions might include sleep hygiene and exercise. Sleep hygiene has been shown to improve cognitive function in childhood cancer survivors (Cancer. 2011 Jun 1;117[11]:2559-68), and a recent study revealed an association between exercise intolerance and negative neurocognitive outcomes in ALL survivors (Cancer. 2019 Oct 21. doi: 10.1002/cncr.32510).
“What we need to figure out is which children will respond to which interventions,” Dr. Sands said, adding that interventions will likely need to be combined.
“It’s not going to be one thing that will work for everybody,” he said. “It’s going to be: What packages of things will work for different people?”
Dr. Sands and Dr. Cole reported having no relevant financial disclosures.
Researchers are attempting to determine, early in the treatment process, which children with acute lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL) have an increased risk of neurocognitive deficits after chemotherapy.
The goal of the researchers’ project (5R01CA220568-02) is to determine if gene variants and biomarkers associated with oxidative stress, neuroinflammation, and folate physiology correlate with cognitive decline during and after chemotherapy. Ideally, certain variants and biomarkers will reveal patients who might benefit from interventions to prevent or even reverse cognitive deficits.
Peter D. Cole, MD, of Rutgers Cancer Institute, New Brunswick, N.J., and colleagues are conducting this research in patients from the DFCI-16-001 trial (NCT03020030). This multicenter, phase 3 study is enrolling patients (aged 1-21 years) with B- or T-cell ALL who then receive a multidrug chemotherapy regimen.
Dr. Cole and colleagues are analyzing a subset of patients from the trial, looking for relationships between chemotherapy-induced neurocognitive changes, gene variants, and changes in biomarkers detected in cerebrospinal fluid (CSF).
“We’re looking at a broad panel of target gene variants that are associated with either drug metabolism, defenses against oxidative stress, neuroinflammation, or folate physiology,” Dr. Cole said in an interview.
This includes variants Dr. Cole and colleagues identified in a previous, retrospective study of ALL survivors. The researchers found that survivors who were homozygous for NOS3 894T, had a variant SLCO2A1 G allele, or had at least one GSTP1 T allele were more likely to exhibit cognitive deficits (J Clin Oncol. 2015 Jul 1;33[19]:2205-11).
The researchers are also analyzing CSF samples, looking for changes in tau protein, homocysteine, homocysteic acid, the adenosylmethionine to adenosylhomocysteine ratio, and other biomarkers of oxidative stress, neuroinflammation, and folate physiology. The CSF is collected at five time points: the start of chemotherapy, day 18, the start of first consolidation, the end of first consolidation, and 7 weeks later in second consolidation.
Cognitive testing
While Dr. Cole is leading the genetic and biomarker analyses, Stephen A. Sands, PsyD, of Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center in New York, is leading the cognitive testing.
The researchers are evaluating patients for cognitive decline using computerized tests from a company called Cogstate. The tests are designed to assess functions such as processing speed, attention, visual learning, and working memory. The tests are administered on an iPad and involve tasks like identifying features of playing cards and finding the correct way through a maze.
The patients – aged 3 years and older – undergo cognitive testing at six time points: baseline, which is any time between days 8 and 32 of induction (except within 72 hours after sedation or anesthesia); at first consolidation; the end of central nervous system therapy; 1 year into chemotherapy; the end of chemotherapy; and 1 year after chemotherapy ends.
In a prior study, Cogstate testing proved reliable for detecting neurocognitive changes in patients undergoing treatment for ALL (Support Care Cancer. 2017;25[2]:449-57). In the current study, the researchers are supplementing Cogstate test results with Wechsler IQ tests administered 1 year after patients complete chemotherapy.
Dr. Sands noted that Cogstate tests provide benefits over the Wechsler “paper-and-pencil” tests. One benefit is that Cogstate tests can be given more often without inducing practice effects (J Clin Exp Neuropsychol. 2006 Oct;28[7]:1095-112). Another is that Cogstate tests can be administered by anyone with a bachelor’s degree who has undergone the appropriate training, while Wechsler IQ tests must be given by psychologists.
Preliminary results
This research is ongoing, so it’s too early to announce any discoveries, but the study is moving along as planned.
“The preliminary data we have so far are demonstrating the validity of the study,” Dr. Cole said. “Things are going well. We’re able to do the cognitive testing and collect the samples that we need and ship them without losing the integrity of the samples.”
Dr. Sands noted that enrollment has been encouraging. As this is a substudy of DFCI-16-001, the researchers must obtain consent separately from the main study. Dr. Sands said about 89% of parents involved in the main study have agreed to enroll their children in the substudy.
Dr. Sands also said that early results from Cogstate testing have revealed patients who are experiencing cognitive decline during treatment. The researchers still have to determine if these results correlate with any biomarkers or gene variants.
Potential interventions
If the researchers can pinpoint patients at risk for cognitive deficits, the next step will be to investigate pharmacologic and behavioral interventions.
Dr. Cole said he is particularly interested in treatments that reduce oxidative stress, such as dextromethorphan and memantine. Dextromethorphan has been shown to resolve symptoms of methotrexate-induced neurotoxicity in patients (Pediatr Hematol Oncol. 2002 Jul-Aug;19[5]:319-27), and memantine reduced memory deficits in animals treated with methotrexate (Clin Cancer Res. 2013 Aug 15;19[16]:4446-54).
“Memantine hasn’t been used in kids with leukemia yet, but it’s something that I’d like to see brought to a clinical trial,” Dr. Cole said.
Dr. Sands pointed to other potential pharmacologic interventions, including the stimulants methylphenidate and modafinil. Both drugs have been shown to improve cognitive deficits in cancer survivors (J Clin Oncol. 2001 Mar 15;19[6]:1802-8; Cancer. 2009 Jun 15; 115[12]: 2605-16).
Computer-based cognitive training tools may be another option. One such tool, Lumosity, improved executive functions in a study of breast cancer survivors (Clin Breast Cancer. 2013 Aug;13[4]:299-306). Another tool, CogMed, improved working memory in survivors of brain tumors and ALL (Psychooncology. 2013 Aug; 22[8]: 1856-65).
Other behavioral interventions might include sleep hygiene and exercise. Sleep hygiene has been shown to improve cognitive function in childhood cancer survivors (Cancer. 2011 Jun 1;117[11]:2559-68), and a recent study revealed an association between exercise intolerance and negative neurocognitive outcomes in ALL survivors (Cancer. 2019 Oct 21. doi: 10.1002/cncr.32510).
“What we need to figure out is which children will respond to which interventions,” Dr. Sands said, adding that interventions will likely need to be combined.
“It’s not going to be one thing that will work for everybody,” he said. “It’s going to be: What packages of things will work for different people?”
Dr. Sands and Dr. Cole reported having no relevant financial disclosures.
Tandem transplants provide EFS edge in pediatric neuroblastoma
For young patients with high-risk neuroblastoma, an intensive consolidation regimen with tandem autologous stem cell transplants was associated with significantly better event-free survival, compared with single-transplant consolidation, results of a randomized trial show.
Among 355 patients with high-risk neuroblastoma, the 3-year event-free survival (EFS) rate was 61.6% for patients randomized to tandem (sequential) autologous stem cell transplants, compared with 48.4% for patients randomized to a single transplant (P = .006), reported Julie R. Park, MD from Seattle Children’s Hospital in Washington, and coinvestigators in the Children’s Oncology Group’s ANBL0532 trial.
“Results of the current study are consistent with earlier trials demonstrating that induction chemotherapy followed by consolidation with autologous transplant improved EFS, compared with less intensive consolidation, and that further intensification of consolidation benefits some patients,” they wrote in JAMA.
But of the 652 patients enrolled in the study, only 355 were actually randomized. Although the randomization rate was slightly higher than anticipated, the authors acknowledged that the results may not apply to all patients with high-risk neuroblastoma.
Patients eligible for the trial included those with International Neuroblastoma Staging System (INSS) stage 4 neuroblastoma aged older than 18 months; INSS stage 3 neuroblastoma aged older than 18 months with International Neuroblastoma Pathology Classification of unfavorable histology; INSS stage 2, 3, 4, or 4S neuroblastoma with MYCN amplification; and INSS stage 4 neuroblastoma diagnosed from age 12-18 months whose tumors showed any unfavorable features. Patients initially diagnosed with non–high-risk neuroblastoma (including stage 1) who had not received chemotherapy and whose disease had progressed to high-risk neuroblastoma were also eligible.
Following induction with two cycles of topotecan and cyclophosphamide, patients underwent peripheral blood stem cell collection, followed by four alternating cycles of cisplatin and etoposide and doxorubicin and cyclophosphamide, and vincristine.
For those patients who did not have primary tumors resected at diagnosis, resection was performed after the fourth or fifth cycle.
Those patients who after induction had no disease progression, no uncontrolled infection, sufficient stem cell levels, and adequate organ function were then eligible for randomization. One patient did not receive any therapy, 27 were nonrandomly assigned to single transplant, 62 were not eligible for randomization, and 207 were not randomized because of physician or family preference.
Of the remaining patients (median age at diagnosis, 36.1 months) 176 were randomized to receive tandem transplant with thiotepa and cyclophosphamide followed by dose-reduced carboplatin, etoposide, and melphalan conditioning, and 179 were randomized to single transplant with standard-dose carboplatin, etoposide, and melphalan.
A total of 17 patients died on study from toxicity; 7 during induction and 10 during consolidation. Significant transplant-related toxicities included mucositis in 11.7% of tandem-transplant patients and 15.4% of single-transplant patients, and infections in 17.8% versus 18.3%, respectively.
As noted before, 3-year EFS from the time of randomization, the primary endpoint, was higher for patients in the tandem-transplant arm (61.6% vs. 48.4%, P = .006).
The median duration of follow-up after randomization for patients without relapse, disease progression, second malignancy, or death was 5.6 years.
A post hoc analysis of the randomized patients showed a 3-year overall survival rate of 71.6%, which did not differ significantly between the study arms (74.1% for the tandem-transplant group vs. 68.1% for the single-transplant group). The analysis also showed that 3-year EFS and overall survival was higher in the tandem- versus single-transplant groups among 250 patients who also received immunotherapy with isotretinoin plus an anti-GD2 chimeric antibody and cytokines.
The trial was supported by grants from the National Institutes of Health, National Cancer Institute, National Clinical Trials Network Operations Center, and St. Baldrick’s Foundation. Dr. Park reported no relevant disclosures. Multiple coauthors disclosed grants or personal feeds outside the submitted work.
SOURCE: Park JR et al. JAMA. 2019;322(8):746-55.
The ANBL0532 trial also does not address the important question as to whether tandem high-dose chemotherapy with autologous stem cell transplant results in benefit for all-comers with high-risk neuroblastoma, because just over half of the eligible patients underwent randomization. Although characteristics of the entire cohort and the randomized cohort were similar with respect to age, stage, tumor histology, and MYCN status, there may be differences unrelated to widely accepted neuroblastoma risk variables. A separate but important challenge in interpretation of these results, as with any clinical trial results, is to understand the generalizability of findings to patient populations who may not be enrolling in trials. Previous work in pediatric oncology showed that trial enrollment correlated with race, age, and zip code, and it is difficult to know whether the results of the ANBL0532 trial are applicable to patient groups who may not be well represented.
An additional challenge is that even though a difference in event-free survival was detected between groups assigned to receive single versus tandem transplant, and a difference in overall survival was detected in a post hoc analysis of patients who received immunotherapy, no difference in overall survival was detected in the overall randomized cohort. Overall survival was evaluated as a secondary outcome but the trial was not powered to detect a difference in overall survival. Moreover, as noted by the authors, overall survival can be influenced by therapies delivered after relapse. This is particularly relevant in an era in which relapse therapies have been shown to induce responses, including periods of remission.
Remarks from Rochelle Bagatell, MD, from the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, and Meredith S. Irwin, MD, from the Hospital for Sick Children in Toronto, are adapted and condensed from an editorial accompanying the study by Park et al. Dr. Bagatell is the vice chair of the Children’s Oncology Group Neuroblastoma Disease Committee. Dr. Irwin reported receiving personal fees from Bayer Canada outside the submitted work and is the vice chair of the Children’s Oncology Group Neuroblastoma Biology Committee. Neither Dr. Bagatell nor Dr. Irwin was involved in the design of the ANBL0532 trial or in the analysis of the results.
The ANBL0532 trial also does not address the important question as to whether tandem high-dose chemotherapy with autologous stem cell transplant results in benefit for all-comers with high-risk neuroblastoma, because just over half of the eligible patients underwent randomization. Although characteristics of the entire cohort and the randomized cohort were similar with respect to age, stage, tumor histology, and MYCN status, there may be differences unrelated to widely accepted neuroblastoma risk variables. A separate but important challenge in interpretation of these results, as with any clinical trial results, is to understand the generalizability of findings to patient populations who may not be enrolling in trials. Previous work in pediatric oncology showed that trial enrollment correlated with race, age, and zip code, and it is difficult to know whether the results of the ANBL0532 trial are applicable to patient groups who may not be well represented.
An additional challenge is that even though a difference in event-free survival was detected between groups assigned to receive single versus tandem transplant, and a difference in overall survival was detected in a post hoc analysis of patients who received immunotherapy, no difference in overall survival was detected in the overall randomized cohort. Overall survival was evaluated as a secondary outcome but the trial was not powered to detect a difference in overall survival. Moreover, as noted by the authors, overall survival can be influenced by therapies delivered after relapse. This is particularly relevant in an era in which relapse therapies have been shown to induce responses, including periods of remission.
Remarks from Rochelle Bagatell, MD, from the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, and Meredith S. Irwin, MD, from the Hospital for Sick Children in Toronto, are adapted and condensed from an editorial accompanying the study by Park et al. Dr. Bagatell is the vice chair of the Children’s Oncology Group Neuroblastoma Disease Committee. Dr. Irwin reported receiving personal fees from Bayer Canada outside the submitted work and is the vice chair of the Children’s Oncology Group Neuroblastoma Biology Committee. Neither Dr. Bagatell nor Dr. Irwin was involved in the design of the ANBL0532 trial or in the analysis of the results.
The ANBL0532 trial also does not address the important question as to whether tandem high-dose chemotherapy with autologous stem cell transplant results in benefit for all-comers with high-risk neuroblastoma, because just over half of the eligible patients underwent randomization. Although characteristics of the entire cohort and the randomized cohort were similar with respect to age, stage, tumor histology, and MYCN status, there may be differences unrelated to widely accepted neuroblastoma risk variables. A separate but important challenge in interpretation of these results, as with any clinical trial results, is to understand the generalizability of findings to patient populations who may not be enrolling in trials. Previous work in pediatric oncology showed that trial enrollment correlated with race, age, and zip code, and it is difficult to know whether the results of the ANBL0532 trial are applicable to patient groups who may not be well represented.
An additional challenge is that even though a difference in event-free survival was detected between groups assigned to receive single versus tandem transplant, and a difference in overall survival was detected in a post hoc analysis of patients who received immunotherapy, no difference in overall survival was detected in the overall randomized cohort. Overall survival was evaluated as a secondary outcome but the trial was not powered to detect a difference in overall survival. Moreover, as noted by the authors, overall survival can be influenced by therapies delivered after relapse. This is particularly relevant in an era in which relapse therapies have been shown to induce responses, including periods of remission.
Remarks from Rochelle Bagatell, MD, from the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, and Meredith S. Irwin, MD, from the Hospital for Sick Children in Toronto, are adapted and condensed from an editorial accompanying the study by Park et al. Dr. Bagatell is the vice chair of the Children’s Oncology Group Neuroblastoma Disease Committee. Dr. Irwin reported receiving personal fees from Bayer Canada outside the submitted work and is the vice chair of the Children’s Oncology Group Neuroblastoma Biology Committee. Neither Dr. Bagatell nor Dr. Irwin was involved in the design of the ANBL0532 trial or in the analysis of the results.
For young patients with high-risk neuroblastoma, an intensive consolidation regimen with tandem autologous stem cell transplants was associated with significantly better event-free survival, compared with single-transplant consolidation, results of a randomized trial show.
Among 355 patients with high-risk neuroblastoma, the 3-year event-free survival (EFS) rate was 61.6% for patients randomized to tandem (sequential) autologous stem cell transplants, compared with 48.4% for patients randomized to a single transplant (P = .006), reported Julie R. Park, MD from Seattle Children’s Hospital in Washington, and coinvestigators in the Children’s Oncology Group’s ANBL0532 trial.
“Results of the current study are consistent with earlier trials demonstrating that induction chemotherapy followed by consolidation with autologous transplant improved EFS, compared with less intensive consolidation, and that further intensification of consolidation benefits some patients,” they wrote in JAMA.
But of the 652 patients enrolled in the study, only 355 were actually randomized. Although the randomization rate was slightly higher than anticipated, the authors acknowledged that the results may not apply to all patients with high-risk neuroblastoma.
Patients eligible for the trial included those with International Neuroblastoma Staging System (INSS) stage 4 neuroblastoma aged older than 18 months; INSS stage 3 neuroblastoma aged older than 18 months with International Neuroblastoma Pathology Classification of unfavorable histology; INSS stage 2, 3, 4, or 4S neuroblastoma with MYCN amplification; and INSS stage 4 neuroblastoma diagnosed from age 12-18 months whose tumors showed any unfavorable features. Patients initially diagnosed with non–high-risk neuroblastoma (including stage 1) who had not received chemotherapy and whose disease had progressed to high-risk neuroblastoma were also eligible.
Following induction with two cycles of topotecan and cyclophosphamide, patients underwent peripheral blood stem cell collection, followed by four alternating cycles of cisplatin and etoposide and doxorubicin and cyclophosphamide, and vincristine.
For those patients who did not have primary tumors resected at diagnosis, resection was performed after the fourth or fifth cycle.
Those patients who after induction had no disease progression, no uncontrolled infection, sufficient stem cell levels, and adequate organ function were then eligible for randomization. One patient did not receive any therapy, 27 were nonrandomly assigned to single transplant, 62 were not eligible for randomization, and 207 were not randomized because of physician or family preference.
Of the remaining patients (median age at diagnosis, 36.1 months) 176 were randomized to receive tandem transplant with thiotepa and cyclophosphamide followed by dose-reduced carboplatin, etoposide, and melphalan conditioning, and 179 were randomized to single transplant with standard-dose carboplatin, etoposide, and melphalan.
A total of 17 patients died on study from toxicity; 7 during induction and 10 during consolidation. Significant transplant-related toxicities included mucositis in 11.7% of tandem-transplant patients and 15.4% of single-transplant patients, and infections in 17.8% versus 18.3%, respectively.
As noted before, 3-year EFS from the time of randomization, the primary endpoint, was higher for patients in the tandem-transplant arm (61.6% vs. 48.4%, P = .006).
The median duration of follow-up after randomization for patients without relapse, disease progression, second malignancy, or death was 5.6 years.
A post hoc analysis of the randomized patients showed a 3-year overall survival rate of 71.6%, which did not differ significantly between the study arms (74.1% for the tandem-transplant group vs. 68.1% for the single-transplant group). The analysis also showed that 3-year EFS and overall survival was higher in the tandem- versus single-transplant groups among 250 patients who also received immunotherapy with isotretinoin plus an anti-GD2 chimeric antibody and cytokines.
The trial was supported by grants from the National Institutes of Health, National Cancer Institute, National Clinical Trials Network Operations Center, and St. Baldrick’s Foundation. Dr. Park reported no relevant disclosures. Multiple coauthors disclosed grants or personal feeds outside the submitted work.
SOURCE: Park JR et al. JAMA. 2019;322(8):746-55.
For young patients with high-risk neuroblastoma, an intensive consolidation regimen with tandem autologous stem cell transplants was associated with significantly better event-free survival, compared with single-transplant consolidation, results of a randomized trial show.
Among 355 patients with high-risk neuroblastoma, the 3-year event-free survival (EFS) rate was 61.6% for patients randomized to tandem (sequential) autologous stem cell transplants, compared with 48.4% for patients randomized to a single transplant (P = .006), reported Julie R. Park, MD from Seattle Children’s Hospital in Washington, and coinvestigators in the Children’s Oncology Group’s ANBL0532 trial.
“Results of the current study are consistent with earlier trials demonstrating that induction chemotherapy followed by consolidation with autologous transplant improved EFS, compared with less intensive consolidation, and that further intensification of consolidation benefits some patients,” they wrote in JAMA.
But of the 652 patients enrolled in the study, only 355 were actually randomized. Although the randomization rate was slightly higher than anticipated, the authors acknowledged that the results may not apply to all patients with high-risk neuroblastoma.
Patients eligible for the trial included those with International Neuroblastoma Staging System (INSS) stage 4 neuroblastoma aged older than 18 months; INSS stage 3 neuroblastoma aged older than 18 months with International Neuroblastoma Pathology Classification of unfavorable histology; INSS stage 2, 3, 4, or 4S neuroblastoma with MYCN amplification; and INSS stage 4 neuroblastoma diagnosed from age 12-18 months whose tumors showed any unfavorable features. Patients initially diagnosed with non–high-risk neuroblastoma (including stage 1) who had not received chemotherapy and whose disease had progressed to high-risk neuroblastoma were also eligible.
Following induction with two cycles of topotecan and cyclophosphamide, patients underwent peripheral blood stem cell collection, followed by four alternating cycles of cisplatin and etoposide and doxorubicin and cyclophosphamide, and vincristine.
For those patients who did not have primary tumors resected at diagnosis, resection was performed after the fourth or fifth cycle.
Those patients who after induction had no disease progression, no uncontrolled infection, sufficient stem cell levels, and adequate organ function were then eligible for randomization. One patient did not receive any therapy, 27 were nonrandomly assigned to single transplant, 62 were not eligible for randomization, and 207 were not randomized because of physician or family preference.
Of the remaining patients (median age at diagnosis, 36.1 months) 176 were randomized to receive tandem transplant with thiotepa and cyclophosphamide followed by dose-reduced carboplatin, etoposide, and melphalan conditioning, and 179 were randomized to single transplant with standard-dose carboplatin, etoposide, and melphalan.
A total of 17 patients died on study from toxicity; 7 during induction and 10 during consolidation. Significant transplant-related toxicities included mucositis in 11.7% of tandem-transplant patients and 15.4% of single-transplant patients, and infections in 17.8% versus 18.3%, respectively.
As noted before, 3-year EFS from the time of randomization, the primary endpoint, was higher for patients in the tandem-transplant arm (61.6% vs. 48.4%, P = .006).
The median duration of follow-up after randomization for patients without relapse, disease progression, second malignancy, or death was 5.6 years.
A post hoc analysis of the randomized patients showed a 3-year overall survival rate of 71.6%, which did not differ significantly between the study arms (74.1% for the tandem-transplant group vs. 68.1% for the single-transplant group). The analysis also showed that 3-year EFS and overall survival was higher in the tandem- versus single-transplant groups among 250 patients who also received immunotherapy with isotretinoin plus an anti-GD2 chimeric antibody and cytokines.
The trial was supported by grants from the National Institutes of Health, National Cancer Institute, National Clinical Trials Network Operations Center, and St. Baldrick’s Foundation. Dr. Park reported no relevant disclosures. Multiple coauthors disclosed grants or personal feeds outside the submitted work.
SOURCE: Park JR et al. JAMA. 2019;322(8):746-55.
FROM JAMA
Treatment for pediatric low-grade glioma is associated with poor cognitive and socioeconomic outcomes
“Late effects in adulthood are evident even for children with the least malignant types of brain tumors who were treated with the least toxic therapies available at the time,” said M. Douglas Ris, PhD, professor of pediatrics and psychology at Baylor College of Medicine in Houston, in a press release. “As pediatric brain tumors become more survivable with continued advances in treatments, we need to improve surveillance of these populations so that survivors continue to receive the best interventions during their transition to adulthood and well beyond.”
Clinicians generally have assumed that children with low-grade CNS tumors who receive less toxic treatment will have fewer long-term effects than survivors of more malignant tumors who undergo neurotoxic therapies. Yet research has indicated that the former patients can have lasting neurobehavioral or functional morbidity.
Dr. Ris and colleagues invited survivors of pediatric low-grade gliomas participating in the Childhood Cancer Survivor Study (CCSS) and a sibling comparison group to undergo a direct, comprehensive neurocognitive assessment. Of 495 eligible survivors, 257 participated. Seventy-six patients did not travel to a study site, but completed a questionnaire, and the researchers did not include data for this group in their analysis. Dr. Ris and colleagues obtained information about surgery and radiotherapy from participants’ medical records. Patients underwent standardized, age-normed neuropsychologic tests. The primary neuropsychologic outcomes were the Composite Neuropsychological Index (CNI) and estimated IQ. To evaluate socioeconomic outcomes, Dr. Ris and colleagues measured participants’ educational attainment, income, and occupational prestige.
After the researchers adjusted the data for age and sex, they found that siblings had higher mean scores than survivors treated with surgery plus radiotherapy or surgery alone on all neuropsychologic outcomes, including the CNI (siblings, 106.8; surgery only, 95.6; surgery plus radiotherapy, 88.3) and estimated IQ. Survivors who had been diagnosed at younger ages had low scores for all outcomes except for attention/processing speed.
Furthermore, surgery plus radiotherapy was associated with a 7.7-fold higher risk of having an occupation in the lowest sibling quartile, compared with siblings. Survivors who underwent surgery alone had a 2.8-fold higher risk than siblings of having an occupation in the lowest quartile. Surgery plus radiotherapy was associated with a 2.6-fold increased risk of a low occupation score, compared with survivors who underwent surgery alone.
Compared with siblings, surgery plus radiotherapy was associated with a 4.5-fold risk of an annual income of less than $20,000, while the risk for survivors who underwent surgery alone did not differ significantly from that for siblings. Surgery plus radiotherapy was associated with a 2.6-fold higher risk than surgery alone. Surgery plus radiotherapy was also associated with a significantly increased risk for an education level lower than a bachelor’s degree, compared with siblings, but surgery alone was not.
The National Cancer Institute supported the study. The authors had no disclosures.
SOURCE: Ris MD et al. Cancer. 2019 Jun 24. doi: 10.1002/cncr.32186.
“Late effects in adulthood are evident even for children with the least malignant types of brain tumors who were treated with the least toxic therapies available at the time,” said M. Douglas Ris, PhD, professor of pediatrics and psychology at Baylor College of Medicine in Houston, in a press release. “As pediatric brain tumors become more survivable with continued advances in treatments, we need to improve surveillance of these populations so that survivors continue to receive the best interventions during their transition to adulthood and well beyond.”
Clinicians generally have assumed that children with low-grade CNS tumors who receive less toxic treatment will have fewer long-term effects than survivors of more malignant tumors who undergo neurotoxic therapies. Yet research has indicated that the former patients can have lasting neurobehavioral or functional morbidity.
Dr. Ris and colleagues invited survivors of pediatric low-grade gliomas participating in the Childhood Cancer Survivor Study (CCSS) and a sibling comparison group to undergo a direct, comprehensive neurocognitive assessment. Of 495 eligible survivors, 257 participated. Seventy-six patients did not travel to a study site, but completed a questionnaire, and the researchers did not include data for this group in their analysis. Dr. Ris and colleagues obtained information about surgery and radiotherapy from participants’ medical records. Patients underwent standardized, age-normed neuropsychologic tests. The primary neuropsychologic outcomes were the Composite Neuropsychological Index (CNI) and estimated IQ. To evaluate socioeconomic outcomes, Dr. Ris and colleagues measured participants’ educational attainment, income, and occupational prestige.
After the researchers adjusted the data for age and sex, they found that siblings had higher mean scores than survivors treated with surgery plus radiotherapy or surgery alone on all neuropsychologic outcomes, including the CNI (siblings, 106.8; surgery only, 95.6; surgery plus radiotherapy, 88.3) and estimated IQ. Survivors who had been diagnosed at younger ages had low scores for all outcomes except for attention/processing speed.
Furthermore, surgery plus radiotherapy was associated with a 7.7-fold higher risk of having an occupation in the lowest sibling quartile, compared with siblings. Survivors who underwent surgery alone had a 2.8-fold higher risk than siblings of having an occupation in the lowest quartile. Surgery plus radiotherapy was associated with a 2.6-fold increased risk of a low occupation score, compared with survivors who underwent surgery alone.
Compared with siblings, surgery plus radiotherapy was associated with a 4.5-fold risk of an annual income of less than $20,000, while the risk for survivors who underwent surgery alone did not differ significantly from that for siblings. Surgery plus radiotherapy was associated with a 2.6-fold higher risk than surgery alone. Surgery plus radiotherapy was also associated with a significantly increased risk for an education level lower than a bachelor’s degree, compared with siblings, but surgery alone was not.
The National Cancer Institute supported the study. The authors had no disclosures.
SOURCE: Ris MD et al. Cancer. 2019 Jun 24. doi: 10.1002/cncr.32186.
“Late effects in adulthood are evident even for children with the least malignant types of brain tumors who were treated with the least toxic therapies available at the time,” said M. Douglas Ris, PhD, professor of pediatrics and psychology at Baylor College of Medicine in Houston, in a press release. “As pediatric brain tumors become more survivable with continued advances in treatments, we need to improve surveillance of these populations so that survivors continue to receive the best interventions during their transition to adulthood and well beyond.”
Clinicians generally have assumed that children with low-grade CNS tumors who receive less toxic treatment will have fewer long-term effects than survivors of more malignant tumors who undergo neurotoxic therapies. Yet research has indicated that the former patients can have lasting neurobehavioral or functional morbidity.
Dr. Ris and colleagues invited survivors of pediatric low-grade gliomas participating in the Childhood Cancer Survivor Study (CCSS) and a sibling comparison group to undergo a direct, comprehensive neurocognitive assessment. Of 495 eligible survivors, 257 participated. Seventy-six patients did not travel to a study site, but completed a questionnaire, and the researchers did not include data for this group in their analysis. Dr. Ris and colleagues obtained information about surgery and radiotherapy from participants’ medical records. Patients underwent standardized, age-normed neuropsychologic tests. The primary neuropsychologic outcomes were the Composite Neuropsychological Index (CNI) and estimated IQ. To evaluate socioeconomic outcomes, Dr. Ris and colleagues measured participants’ educational attainment, income, and occupational prestige.
After the researchers adjusted the data for age and sex, they found that siblings had higher mean scores than survivors treated with surgery plus radiotherapy or surgery alone on all neuropsychologic outcomes, including the CNI (siblings, 106.8; surgery only, 95.6; surgery plus radiotherapy, 88.3) and estimated IQ. Survivors who had been diagnosed at younger ages had low scores for all outcomes except for attention/processing speed.
Furthermore, surgery plus radiotherapy was associated with a 7.7-fold higher risk of having an occupation in the lowest sibling quartile, compared with siblings. Survivors who underwent surgery alone had a 2.8-fold higher risk than siblings of having an occupation in the lowest quartile. Surgery plus radiotherapy was associated with a 2.6-fold increased risk of a low occupation score, compared with survivors who underwent surgery alone.
Compared with siblings, surgery plus radiotherapy was associated with a 4.5-fold risk of an annual income of less than $20,000, while the risk for survivors who underwent surgery alone did not differ significantly from that for siblings. Surgery plus radiotherapy was associated with a 2.6-fold higher risk than surgery alone. Surgery plus radiotherapy was also associated with a significantly increased risk for an education level lower than a bachelor’s degree, compared with siblings, but surgery alone was not.
The National Cancer Institute supported the study. The authors had no disclosures.
SOURCE: Ris MD et al. Cancer. 2019 Jun 24. doi: 10.1002/cncr.32186.
FROM CANCER