Genetic variations in VEGF and VEGFR2 and glioblastoma outcome

Vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) and its receptors (VEGFR) are central components in the development and progression of glioblastoma. To investigate if genetic variation in VEGF and VEGFR2 is associated with glioblastoma prognosis, we examined blood samples from 154 glioblastoma cases collected in Sweden and Denmark between 2000 and 2004. Seventeen tagging single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) in VEGF and 27 in VEGFR2 were genotyped and analysed, covering 90% of the genetic variability within the genes. In VEGF, we found no SNPs associated with survival. In VEGFR2, we found two SNPs significantly associated to survival, namely rs2071559 and rs12502008. However, these results are likely to be false positives due to multiple testing and could not be confirmed in a separate dataset. Overall, this study provides little evidence that VEGF and VEGFR2 polymorphisms are important for glioblastoma survival

Memory in low-grade glioma patients treated with radiotherapy or temozolomide: a correlative analysis of EORTC study 22033-26033.

EORTC study 22033-26033 showed no difference in progression-free survival between high-risk low-grade glioma receiving either radiotherapy (RT) or temozolomide (TMZ) chemotherapy alone as primary treatment. Considering the potential long-term deleterious impact of RT on memory functioning, this study aims to determine whether TMZ is associated with less impaired memory functioning. Using the Visual Verbal Learning Test (VVLT), memory functioning was evaluated at baseline and subsequently every 6 months. Minimal compliance for statistical analyses was set at 60%. Conventional indices of memory performance (VVLT Immediate Recall, Total Recall, Learning Capacity, and Delayed Recall) were used as outcome measures. Using a mixed linear model, memory functioning was compared between treatment arms and over time. Neuropsychological assessment was performed in 98 patients (53 RT, 46 TMZ). At 12 months, compliance had dropped to 66%, restricting analyses to baseline, 6 months, and 12 months. At baseline, patients in either treatment arm did not differ in memory functioning, sex, age, or educational level. Over time, patients in both arms showed improvement in Immediate Recall (P = 0.017) and total number of words recalled (Total Recall; P < 0.001, albeit with delayed improvement in RT patients (group by time; P = 0.011). Memory functioning was not associated with RT gross, clinical, or planned target volumes. In patients with high-risk low-grade glioma there is no indication that in the first year after treatment, RT has a deleterious effect on memory function compared with TMZ chemotherapy

Radiotherapy combined with nivolumab or temozolomide for newly diagnosed glioblastoma with unmethylated MGMT promoter: An international randomized phase III trial

BACKGROUND: Addition of temozolomide (TMZ) to radiotherapy (RT) improves overall survival (OS) in patients with glioblastoma (GBM), but previous studies suggest that patients with tumors harboring an unmethylated MGMT promoter derive minimal benefit. The aim of this open-label, phase III CheckMate 498 study was to evaluate the efficacy of nivolumab (NIVO) + RT compared with TMZ + RT in newly diagnosed GBM with unmethylated MGMT promoter. METHODS: Patients were randomized 1:1 to standard RT (60 Gy) + NIVO (240 mg every 2 weeks for eight cycles, then 480 mg every 4 weeks) or RT + TMZ (75 mg/m2 daily during RT and 150-200 mg/m2/day 5/28 days during maintenance). The primary endpoint was OS. RESULTS: A total of 560 patients were randomized, 280 to each arm. Median OS (mOS) was 13.4 months (95% CI, 12.6 to 14.3) with NIVO + RT and 14.9 months (95% CI, 13.3 to 16.1) with TMZ + RT (hazard ratio [HR], 1.31; 95% CI, 1.09 to 1.58; P = .0037). Median progression-free survival was 6.0 months (95% CI, 5.7 to 6.2) with NIVO + RT and 6.2 months (95% CI, 5.9 to 6.7) with TMZ + RT (HR, 1.38; 95% CI, 1.15 to 1.65). Response rates were 7.8% (9/116) with NIVO + RT and 7.2% (8/111) with TMZ + RT; grade 3/4 treatment-related adverse event (TRAE) rates were 21.9% and 25.1%, and any-grade serious TRAE rates were 17.3% and 7.6%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: The study did not meet the primary endpoint of improved OS; TMZ + RT demonstrated a longer mOS than NIVO + RT. No new safety signals were detected with NIVO in this study. The difference between the study treatment arms is consistent with the use of TMZ + RT as the standard of care for GBM.ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02617589

Common genetic variability in ESR1 and EGF in relation to endometrial cancer risk and survival

We investigated common genetic variation in the entire ESR1 and EGF genes in relation to endometrial cancer risk, myometrial invasion and endometrial cancer survival. We genotyped a dense set of single-nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) in both genes and selected haplotype tagging SNPs (tagSNPs). The tagSNPs were genotyped in 713 Swedish endometrial cancer cases and 1567 population controls and the results incorporated into logistic regression and Cox proportional hazards models. We found five adjacent tagSNPs covering a region of 15 kb at the 5′ end of ESR1 that decreased the endometrial cancer risk. The ESR1 variants did not, however, seem to affect myometrial invasion or endometrial cancer survival. For the EGF gene, no association emerged between common genetic variants and endometrial cancer risk or myometrial invasion, but we found a five-tagSNP region that covered 51 kb at the 5′ end of the gene where all five tagSNPs seemed to decrease the risk of dying from endometrial cancer. One of the five tagSNPs in this region was in strong linkage disequilibrium (LD) with the untranslated A61G (rs4444903) EGF variant, earlier shown to be associated with risk for other forms of cancer

DNA methylation in glioblastoma: impact on gene expression and clinical outcome

International audienceBACKGROUND: Changes in promoter DNA methylation pattern of genes involved in key biological pathways have been reported in glioblastoma. Genome-wide assessments of DNA methylation levels are now required to decipher the epigenetic events involved in the aggressive phenotype of glioblastoma, and to guide new treatment strategies. RESULTS: We performed a whole-genome integrative analysis of methylation and gene expression profiles in 40 newly diagnosed glioblastoma patients. We also screened for associations between the level of methylation of CpG sites and overall survival in a cohort of 50 patients uniformly treated by surgery, radiotherapy and chemotherapy with concomitant and adjuvant temozolomide (STUPP protocol). The methylation analysis identified 616 CpG sites differentially methylated between glioblastoma and control brain, a quarter of which was differentially expressed in a concordant way. Thirteen of the genes with concordant CpG sites displayed an inverse correlation between promoter methylation and expression level in glioblastomas: B3GNT5, FABP7, ZNF217, BST2, OAS1, SLC13A5, GSTM5, ME1, UBXD3, TSPYL5, FAAH, C7orf13, and C3orf14. Survival analysis identified six CpG sites associated with overall survival. SOX10 promoter methylation status (two CpG sites) stratified patients similarly to MGMT status, but with a higher Area Under the Curve (0.78 vs. 0.71, p-value < 5e-04). The methylation status of the FNDC3B, TBX3, DGKI, and FSD1 promoters identified patients with MGMT-methylated tumors that did not respond to STUPP treatment (p-value < 1e-04). CONCLUSIONS: This study provides the first genome-wide integrative analysis of DNA methylation and gene expression profiles obtained from the same GBM cohort. We also present a methylome-based survival analysis for one of the largest uniformly treated GBM cohort ever studied, for more than 27,000 CpG sites. We have identified genes whose expression may be tightly regulated by epigenetic mechanisms and markers that may guide treatment decisions

Metastatic chromophobe renal cell carcinoma treated with targeted therapies: A Renal Cross Channel Group study

Background: Treatment of non–clear cell renal cell carcinoma (RCC) remains controversial despite several recent prospective studies of targeted therapies (TT). Often Vascular Endothelial growth Factor (VEGF) and Mammalian Target of Rapamycin (mTOR) inhibitors are used, extrapolating the data from use of these agents in clear cell RCC. Methods: We performed a retrospective data analysis within the Renal Cross Channel Group to determine metastatic chromophobe RCC (mChRCC) outcomes in the TT era. The end-points were overall response, overall survival (OS) and time to treatment failure (TTF). The two latter were estimated using the Kaplan–Meier method. Results: 91 mChRCC patients from 26 centres were included. Median follow-up from the date of first metastasis was 6.1 years (range: 0–13.9). Median OS was 37.9 months (95% confidence interval [CI]: 21.4–46.8) from the diagnosis of metastatic disease. Among the 61 patients who received TT, 50 (82%) were treated with anti-angiogenic (AA) and 11 with mTOR inhibitors. Median TTF and OS in patients receiving a first line of AA was 8.7 months (95% CI: 5.2–10.9) and 22.9 months (95% CI: 17.8–49.2) versus 1.9 months (95% CI: 1.0–6.0) and 3.2 months (95% CI: 2.3–not evaluable) with mTOR inhibitors, respectively. A stratified log-rank test was used to compare AA and mTOR inhibitors TT, while controlling the effect of the International Metastatic RCC Database Consortium risk group and no significant difference between AA and mTOR inhibitors was observed for TTF (p = 0.26) or for OS (p = 0.55). Conclusion: We report the largest retrospective cohort of patients with mChRCC treated with TT and no significant difference between AA and mTOR inhibitors was observed for TTF and OS

Metastatic chromophobe renal cell carcinoma treated with targeted therapies: A Renal Cross Channel Group study

$\textbf{Background}$ Treatment of non–clear cell renal cell carcinoma (RCC) remains controversial despite several recent prospective studies of targeted therapies (TT). Often Vascular Endothelial growth Factor (VEGF) and Mammalian Target of Rapamycin (mTOR) inhibitors are used, extrapolating the data from use of these agents in clear cell RCC. $\textbf{Methods}$ We performed a retrospective data analysis within the Renal Cross Channel Group to determine metastatic chromophobe RCC (mChRCC) outcomes in the TT era. The end-points were overall response, overall survival (OS) and time to treatment failure (TTF). The two latter were estimated using the Kaplan–Meier method. $\textbf{Results}$ 91 mChRCC patients from 26 centres were included. Median follow-up from the date of first metastasis was 6.1 years (range: 0–13.9). Median OS was 37.9 months (95% confidence interval [CI]: 21.4–46.8) from the diagnosis of metastatic disease. Among the 61 patients who received TT, 50 (82%) were treated with anti-angiogenic (AA) and 11 with mTOR inhibitors. Median TTF and OS in patients receiving a first line of AA was 8.7 months (95% CI: 5.2–10.9) and 22.9 months (95% CI: 17.8–49.2) versus 1.9 months (95% CI: 1.0–6.0) and 3.2 months (95% CI: 2.3–not evaluable) with mTOR inhibitors, respectively. A stratified log-rank test was used to compare AA and mTOR inhibitors TT, while controlling the effect of the International Metastatic RCC Database Consortium risk group and no significant difference between AA and mTOR inhibitors was observed for TTF (p = 0.26) or for OS (p = 0.55). $\textbf{Conclusion}$ We report the largest retrospective cohort of patients with mChRCC treated with TT and no significant difference between AA and mTOR inhibitors was observed for TTF and OS