Impact of COVID-19 pandemic on surgical neuro-oncology multi-disciplinary team decision making: a national survey (COVID-CNSMDT Study).

OBJECTIVES: Pressures on healthcare systems due to COVID-19 has impacted patients without COVID-19 with surgery disproportionally affected. This study aims to understand the impact on the initial management of patients with brain tumours by measuring changes to normal multidisciplinary team (MDT) decision making. DESIGN: A prospective survey performed in UK neurosurgical units performed from 23 March 2020 until 24 April 2020. SETTING: Regional neurosurgical units outside London (as the pandemic was more advanced at time of study). PARTICIPANTS: Representatives from all units were invited to collect data on new patients discussed at their MDT meetings during the study period. Each unit decided if management decision for each patient had changed due to COVID-19. PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES: Primary outcome measures included number of patients where the decision to undergo surgery changed compared with standard management usually offered by that MDT. Secondary outcome measures included changes in surgical extent, numbers referred to MDT, number of patients denied surgery not receiving any treatment and reasons for any variation across the UK. RESULTS: 18 units (75%) provided information from 80 MDT meetings that discussed 1221 patients. 10.7% of patients had their management changed-the majority (68%) did not undergo surgery and more than half of this group not undergoing surgery had no active treatment. There was marked variation across the UK (0%-28% change in management). Units that did not change management could maintain capacity with dedicated oncology lists. Low volume units were less affected. CONCLUSION: COVID-19 has had an impact on patients requiring surgery for malignant brain tumours, with patients receiving different treatments-most commonly not receiving surgery or any treatment at all. The variations show dedicated cancer operating lists may mitigate these pressures. STUDY REGISTRATION: This study was registered with the Royal College of Surgeons of England's COVID-19 Research Group (https://www.rcseng.ac.uk/coronavirus/rcs-covid-research-group/)

Randomized trial of intermittent intraputamenal glial cell line-derived neurotrophic factor in Parkinson's disease

We investigated the effects of glial cell line-derived neurotrophic factor (GDNF) in Parkinson’s disease, using intermittent intraputamenal convection-enhanced delivery via a skull-mounted transcutaneous port as a novel administration paradigm to potentially afford putamen-wide therapeutic delivery. This was a single-centre, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial. Patients were 35–75 years old, had motor symptoms for 5 or more years, and presented with moderate disease severity in the OFF state [Hoehn and Yahr stage 2–3 and Unified Parkinson’s Disease Rating Scale motor score (part III) (UPDRS-III) between 25 and 45] and motor fluctuations. Drug delivery devices were implanted and putamenal volume coverage was required to exceed a predefined threshold at a test infusion prior to randomization. Six pilot stage patients (randomization 2:1) and 35 primary stage patients (randomization 1:1) received bilateral intraputamenal infusions of GDNF (120 mg per putamen) or placebo every 4 weeks for 40 weeks. Efficacy analyses were based on the intention-to-treat principle and included all patients randomized. The primary outcome was the percentage change from baseline to Week 40 in the OFF state (UPDRS-III). The primary analysis was limited to primary stage patients, while further analyses included all patients from both study stages. The mean OFF state UPDRS motor score decreased by 17.3 17.6% in the active group and 11.8 15.8% in the placebo group (least squares mean difference: 4.9%, 95% CI: 16.9, 7.1, P = 0.41). Secondary endpoints did not show significant differences between the groups either. A post hoc analysis found nine (43%) patients in the active group but no placebo patients with a large clinically important motor improvement (510 points) in the OFF state (P = 0.0008). 18F-DOPA PET imaging demonstrated a significantly increased uptake throughout the putamen only in the active group, ranging from 25% (left anterior putamen; P = 0.0009) to 100% (both posterior putamina; P50.0001). GDNF appeared to be well tolerated and safe, and no drug-related serious adverse events were reported. The study did not meet its primary endpoint. 18F-DOPA imaging, however, suggested that intermittent convection-enhanced delivery of GDNF produced a putamen-wide tissue engagement effect, overcoming prior delivery limitations. Potential reasons for not proving clinical benefit at 40 weeks are discussed

Extended Treatment with Glial Cell Line-Derived Neurotrophic Factor in Parkinson's Disease

Background: Intraputamenal glial cell line-derived neurotrophic factor (GDNF), administered every 4 weeks to patients with moderately advanced Parkinson’s disease, did not show significant clinical improvements against placebo at 40 weeks, although it significantly increased [18F]DOPA uptake throughout the entire putamen. Objective: This open-label extension study explored the effects of continued (prior GDNF patients) or new (prior placebo patients) exposure to GDNF for another 40 weeks. Methods: Using the infusion protocol of the parent study, all patients received GDNF without disclosing prior treatment allocations (GDNF or placebo). The primary outcome was the percentage change from baseline to Week 80 in the OFF state Unified Parkinson’s Disease Rating Scale (UPDRS) motor score. Results: All 41 parent study participants were enrolled. The primary outcome decreased by 26.7±20.7% in patients on GDNF for 80 weeks (GDNF/GDNF; N = 21) and 27.6±23.6% in patients on placebo for 40 weeks followed by GDNF for 40 weeks (placebo/GDNF, N = 20; least squares mean difference: 0.4%, 95% CI: –13.9, 14.6, p = 0.96). Secondary endpoints did not show significant differences between the groups at Week 80 either. Prespecified comparisons between GDNF/GDNF at Week 80 and placebo/GDNF at Week 40 showed significant differences for mean OFF state UPDRS motor (–9.6±6.7 vs. –3.8±4.2 points, p = 0.0108) and activities of daily living score (–6.9±5.5 vs. –1.0±3.7 points, p = 0.0003). No treatment-emergent safety concerns were identified. Conclusions: The aggregate study results, from the parent and open-label extension suggest that future testing with GDNF will likely require an 80- rather than a 40-week randomized treatment period and/or a higher dose

Intrastriatal convection-enhanced delivery results in widespread perivascular distribution in a pre-clinical model

Abstract Background Convection-enhanced delivery (CED), a direct method for drug delivery to the brain through intraparenchymal microcatheters, is a promising strategy for intracerebral pharmacological therapy. By establishing a pressure gradient at the tip of the catheter, drugs can be delivered in uniform concentration throughout a large volume of interstitial fluid. However, the variables affecting perivascular distribution of drugs delivered by CED are not fully understood. The aim of this study was to determine whether the perivascular distribution of solutes delivered by CED into the striatum of rats is affected by the molecular weight of the infused agent, by co-infusion of vasodilator, alteration of infusion rates or use of a ramping regime. We also wanted to make a preliminary comparison of the distribution of solutes with that of nanoparticles. Methods We analysed the perivascular distribution of 4, 10, 20, 70, 150 kDa fluorescein-labelled dextran and fluorescent nanoparticles at 10 min and 3 h following CED into rat striatum. We investigated the effect of local vasodilatation, slow infusion rates and ramping on the perivascular distribution of solutes. Co-localisation with perivascular basement membranes and vascular endothelial cells was identified by immunohistochemistry. The uptake of infusates by perivascular macrophages was quantified using stereological methods. Results Widespread perivascular distribution and macrophage uptake of fluorescein-labelled dextran was visible 10 min after cessation of CED irrespective of molecular weight. However, a significantly higher proportion of perivascular macrophages had taken up 4, 10 and 20 kDa fluorescein-labelled dextran than 150 kDa dextran (p Conclusions This study suggests that widespread perivascular distribution and interaction with perivascular macrophages is likely to be an inevitable consequence of CED of solutes. The potential consequences of perivascular distribution of therapeutic agents, and in particular cytotoxic chemotherapies, delivered by CED must be carefully considered to ensure safe and effective translation to clinical trials.</p

Chronic, intermittent convection-enhanced delivery devices

Background Intraparenchymal convection-enhanced delivery (CED) of therapeutics directly into the brain has long been endorsed as a medium through which meaningful concentrations of drug can be administered to patients, bypassing the blood brain barrier. The translation of the technology to clinic has been hindered by poor distribution not previously observed in smaller pre-clinical models. In part this was due to the larger volumes of target structures found in humans but principally the poor outcome was linked to reflux (backflow) of infusate proximally along the catheter track. Over the past 10 years, improvements have been made to the technology in the field which has led to a small number of commercially available devices containing reflux inhibiting features. New method While these devices are currently suitable for acute or short term use, several indications would benefit from longer term repeated, intermittent administration of therapeutics (Parkinson's, Alzheimer's, Amyotrophic lateral sclerosis, Brain tumours such as Glioblastoma Multiforme (GBM) and Diffuse intrinsic Pontine Glioma (DIPG), etc.). Results Despite the need for a chronically accessible platform for such indications, limited experience exists in this part of the field. Comparison with existing method(s) At the time of writing no commercially available clinical platform, indicated for chronic, intermittent or continuous delivery to the brain exists. Conclusions Here we review the improvements that have been made to CED devices over recent years and current state of the art for chronic infusion systems